this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
791 points (95.5% liked)

World News

32288 readers
720 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Amazon.com’s Whole Foods Market doesn’t want to be forced to let workers wear “Black Lives Matter” masks and is pointing to the recent US Supreme Court ruling permitting a business owner to refuse services to same-sex couples to get federal regulators to back off.

National Labor Relations Board prosecutors have accused the grocer of stifling worker rights by banning staff from wearing BLM masks or pins on the job. The company countered in a filing that its own rights are being violated if it’s forced to allow BLM slogans to be worn with Whole Foods uniforms.

Amazon is the most prominent company to use the high court’s June ruling that a Christian web designer was free to refuse to design sites for gay weddings, saying the case “provides a clear roadmap” to throw out the NLRB’s complaint.

The dispute is one of several in which labor board officials are considering what counts as legally-protected, work-related communication and activism on the job.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Holy shit. So Amazon and Whole Foods are just openly racist now. Not even trying to hide it anymore.

Conservatives will be celebrating as soon as they have someone read this article to them.

[–] ironeagl@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Amazon bought Whole Foods, they're the same company now.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Jesus y'all. Let me spell this out plainly.

  • BLM is a political organization.

  • Wearing BLM gear is a political statement.

  • Whole Foods doesn't want employee uniforms to make a political statement.

Bet every single person here would be pleased if this was about banning Trump masks. I'll give you a crisp $20 bill if those are allowed. Or any other sort of political speech.

[–] CoderKat@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

The fact that there is an organization of the same name does not mean they own the slogan. People using the slogan almost never do so in reference to this organization nor are necessarily even aware that such an organization exists.

BLM is more of a human rights statement. Anything is "political" if the right choses to whine about it. An example is putting pronouns on name tags. It's a great idea to ensure employees are addressed correctly and frankly shouldn't be any more political than a name tag containing your name, but the right choses to view them as political because they need a constant culture war.

[–] ThePac@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This might mean something if "BLM" was owned by an organization.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So Black Lives Matter is not a political slogan, let alone an organization? Saying Black Lives Matter means nothing to anyone except by taking it literally? Nothing to do with politics whatsoever?

[–] ThePac@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

By that metric any opinion is political.

[–] Rambi@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago

You only think it's political because conservatives don't like it.

[–] Grayox@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

The statement Black Lives Matter is not political, you absolute ham sandwich..

[–] BigNote@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

On its own it's not, but it definitely is in the current political and cultural context. There's no getting away from that. It's going to provoke a political reaction in any conservative and there's no point in pretending otherwise.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WorldWideLem@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The statement itself shouldn't be political in its sentiment, but obviously the organization exists and it has its own policy positions, events, advocacy, and I can go to their website to donate. I think it's fairly obvious which one Whole Foods would be concerned with.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ah, so if I wear a hat at work that says "save babies" and then an organization pops up called "Save babies" and they start donating to politicians, should I no longer be allowed to wear my "Save Babies" hat?

[–] WorldWideLem@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the company you're representing would prefer you didn't, then sure.

Let's use another example, if someone was a big supporter of fascism and was wearing a hat or mask that said, "save fascists", would you prefer the store couldn't prevent them from wearing that?

How bad would the phrase have to get to change your mind?

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I'd say the difference comes down to choice. You choose to be a fascist. You choose to be a trump supporter. You don't choose to be black. You don't chose to be an infant.

Examples. If you wore a SPLC clothing article, I think the employer would be allowed to object, but if you wore clothing showing support for women, or indigenous people, then they should abide it.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So you deny that BLM is a political org?

They sure seem to be calling for political action.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/

Having a just cause does not make a movement apolitical. Agreeing with that cause does not make the statement apolitical.

You seem to have your emotions mixed up with facts. And here I thought that was a conservative trait.

[–] phar@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I would agree that it is political, it's because it is a movement and has become political. The organization was created after the movement and does not necessarily reflect the will or intentions of the actual movement. It's like if back in the day there was an org called Women's Suffrage. It doesn't mean the focus of all people who want women's suffrage are part of an organization named that after the movement started.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Women's suffrage is probably the worst example you could have chosen -- in what way is fighting for the right to vote not inherently political?

[–] phar@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I was saying that BLM is a political movement. It's not necessarily an organization.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://youtu.be/mcaUer4fuU8?si=b8g5NIuCk3-1w2AT

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Then neither is "Make America Great Again"

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (9 children)

That's multiple candidates campaign slogans. It's was a Republican presidential slogan in 64 and 80, very famously part of Reagan's campaign.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_America_Great_Again

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

BLM is a political organization.

This is like saying "Trump has Little Hands" is a political organization because some guy wants to copyright "Trump has Little Hands" to sell on merch. Absolutely ridiculous take and it clearly show where you stand on these sorts of issues.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Let me spell it out plainly:

  • BLM is a movement concerned with police brutality against minorities
  • There is a political organization called BLM, but nobody but right wing whack jobs gives a shit about that organization
  • There is also the Bureau of Land Management that is also refereed to with the acronym BLM,
  • Somehow you know BLM on a mask doesn't refer to the Bureau of Land Management but you're being deliberately stupid it referring to a political organization and not the movement.
  • Jeff Bezos isn't going to give you any money no matter how wide you spread your asshole for him.
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You are really jumping through some hoops to prove that the saying, "Black Lives Matter" has nothing to do with politics. Say it out loud for us. Say it's not a slogan and has no ties to political views.

Not accepting facts contrary to your position? How very conservative of you.

No matter how far left I am, there's always assholes like you pushing people back to the right. I'm not going right because a bunch a angry teenagers are... angry. But you're not doing the liberal cause any justice here. In fact, you're actively hurting it.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you saying black lives don't matter?

Where is the debate on the statement "black lives matter"? Please argue against that statement.

No what you're saying is that the statement has been politicized by bad actors. But those are the politics of the bad actors, not politics around the statement itself.

Should the depiction of the Earth as being round be banned as well? There is controversy around that, by idiots and grifters of course, but how is it different about the controversy around BLM?

[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Surely you share the same opinion about those who wear gear that says "All lives matter"? They're just good people preaching a message of love?

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe I would if I bash my head into a wall enough to cause enough brain damage that I don't understand that "all lives matter" is part of the politicization effort by bad actors.

See there is an actual real world where people did things with motives that are very well understood. If your "logical" arguments are completely dependent on ignoring specific realities, it's not really a logical argument at all. Demanding someone ignore reality so you can have a big "aha! I proved you to be a hypocrite!" kind of moment is rather silly isn't it?

[–] null@slrpnk.net -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So you only bashed your head enough to not understand that the phrase "Black Lives Matter" is borne out of a social/political movement?

Are you saying all lives don't matter?

Where is the debate on the statement "all lives matter"? Please argue against that statement.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are arguing in bad faith. BLM came out of police brutality targeting predominantly black communities. Period. End of story. If you don't understand that, that's because you're willfully ignorant of the world happening around you.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago

Are you lost? That's exactly what I'm saying...

[–] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All lives literally can’t matter if you’re already excluding some in that, that’s the whole point of Black Lives Matter you doofus.

Remember, Black people count as people too, and as long as their lives don’t matter as much then the saying, “All lives matter” is false. Because if you cared about all lives, then you’d be caring about the black lives that are disproportionately harmed and murdered.

And one only needs to take a look at society here in America to see the black lives are treated way worse than white lives. Nearly all facets of our society have some built-in racism whether you’re just going to the hospital with chest pains or trying to buy or sell your house. You’re gonna get worse quality of everything just because of your skin color and that’s verifiable fact.

And yet all they want you to do is recognize that they’re being killed at a much higher rate than other people, and want you to care about that. And for some reason that triggers you so.

Saying all lives matter, and believing that is like having a life raft on a boat, and seeing some people drowning, but you decided to throw the life raft to the people at a table, eating shrimp. You know, because all lives matter. Black Lives Matter is just recognizing the drowning people and trying to help them.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're lost -- I'm not defending the All Lives Matter mantra.

I'm pointing out that Black Lives Matter isn't merely a benign statement of fact, it's a statement borne out of a social/political movement. Which you obviously agree with, based on what you wrote out.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

No. Because they are in bad faith inverting the wording of the phrase to sound like "muh common sense" but in reality are just reactionary contrarians that are communicating their social conservative opinions.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Saying Black Lives Matter is only political to right wing racists who believe that the status quo, that Black Lives Don't Matter, is fine.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So it's political then? Just because one side of the spectrum has heinous beliefs does not make a thing non-political.

[–] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s both because one side wants it to be to diminish its power. But at its core it’s a human rights issue. It’s the words Black Lives Matter, strange if you get upset hearing that and think it’s purely political and should be snuffed out where you don’t like facing it. 🤔

load more comments (3 replies)