Results 1 to 10 of 146
Threaded View
-
12-05-2008, 03:50 PM #13
Senior Member
Why is socialism so bad?
Were you refering to this Frederick Winslow Taylor?
"It is only through enforced standardization of methods, enforced adoption of the best implements and working conditions, and enforced cooperation that this faster work can be assured. And the duty of enforcing the adoption of standards and enforcing this cooperation rests with management alone."
That's either fascistic or communistic. Take your pick.
"I can say, without the slightest hesitation,'' Taylor told a congressional committee, ''that the science of handling pig-iron is so great that the man who is ... physically able to handle pig-iron and is sufficiently phlegmatic and stupid to choose this for his occupation is rarely able to comprehend the science of handling pig-iron."
The delusion that only the dregs of society sink to the bottom in a free market. Oh, and workers are stupid. These are some amazing theories.
"With the triumph of scientific management, unions would have nothing left to do, and they would have been cleansed of their most evil feature: the restriction of output. To underscore this idea, Taylor fashioned the myth that 'there has never been a strike of men working under scientific management', trying to give it credibility by constant repetition. In similar fashion he incessantly linked his proposals to shorter hours of work, without bothering to produce evidence of "Taylorized" firms that reduced working hours, and he revised his famous tale of Schmidt carrying pig iron at Bethlehem Steel at least three times, obscuring some aspects of his study and stressing others, so that each successive version made Schmidt's exertions more impressive, more voluntary and more rewarding to him than the last. Unlike [Harrington] Emerson, Taylor was not a charlatan, but his ideological message required the suppression of all evidence of worker's dissent, of coercion, or of any human motives or aspirations other than those his vision of progress could encompass."
The man sounds like a Nazi to me.
Oh, and by the way, the USSR took a look at Taylor's findings before his disciples forced it down manufacturers' throats.
"The easy availability of replacement labor, which allowed Taylor to choose only 'first-class men,' was an important condition for his system's success."[22] The situation in the Soviet Union was very different. "Because work is so unrythmic, the rational manager will hire more workers than he would need if supplies were even in order to have enough for storming. Because of the continuing labor shortage, managers are happy to pay needed workers more than the norm, either by issuing false job orders, assigning them to higher skill grades than they deserve on merit criteria, giving them 'loose' piece rates, or making what is supposed to be 'incentive' pay, premia for good work, effectively part of the normal wage. As Mary Mc Auley has suggested under these circumstances piece rates are not an incentive wage, but a way of justifying giving workers whatever they 'should' be getting, no matter what their pay is supposed to be according to the official norms."[23]
The man came up with his theories during the first kicks and sputters of the industrial revolution. If you remember history class, workers weren't motivated by pay. Men like Taylor inflicted cruel and unusual practices on workers, which led them to forming unions.
Similar Threads
-
The politics of the word "socialism"
By GoldenBoy812 in forum PoliticsReplies: 2Last Post: 12-14-2010, 01:56 AM -
Smoke weed in socialism?
By KoffieKommie in forum ActivismReplies: 1Last Post: 10-13-2010, 02:28 AM -
Welcome to socialism, boys and girls...
By Rusty Trichome in forum PoliticsReplies: 52Last Post: 11-03-2008, 10:53 PM -
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
By pisshead in forum PoliticsReplies: 2Last Post: 11-22-2005, 09:49 PM -
compassionate sonservatism or socialism?
By pisshead in forum PoliticsReplies: 17Last Post: 11-28-2004, 11:52 PM










Register To Reply
Staff Online