In the context of the current topic, follow the orders means meeting deadlines and maintaining cost. Big retail weld massive power over manufacturers, consumers over big retail, the desire for faster and cheaper goods over consumers. It’s a loop where the blame shifts as per the convenience.
As a manufacturer, I have also seen some factories passing on the opportunity to contract for some really big retailers, since taking on their orders meant squeezing their workers.
At the end of the day, it’s all about efficiency.But running efficiently shouldn’t come at the cost of low paid workers.
> As a manufacturer, I have also seen some factories passing on the opportunity to contract for some really big retailers, since taking on their orders meant squeezing their workers.
you understood EXACTLY what I meant when quoting this. You can always say no. always.
You can say no unless someone holds a gun at your head. Hence my objection to your comparison of the poor downtrodden factory workers to victims of a violent totalitarian regime.
That's kind of outrageous, like the common trope of comparing workers to "slaves." Lot of privilege on display here.
There are still a few Holocaust survivors left. Go ask some of them how their experience compares to that of factory workers who can, ultimately, walk out the door anytime they want.
my bobe had to run away from Poland circa 1933 to Argentina and I come from a smack in the middle class family. I know my family history, thanks. I see the meaning of what I quoted flew past over your head.
You do get that The Nuremberg Defense has meaning outside the holocaust right? It's the name for when someone does something unethical/immoral with the justification that they were just following orders or just responding to the incentives they were given.
There are a number of solutions to this problem that exist various places, militaries typically empower officers to disobey orders, professionals use licensure to uphold moral and ethical standards, whistleblower laws provide financial incentives the other way, unions can flex on immoral behavior.
I don't believe anyone is arguing the two situations are comparable outside of the fact the defense of the behavior follows the same line of reasoning, a line that was very famously rejected.
I seem to remember some person using this argument. I think it's called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders