On Wednesday 23 November 2005 14:35, marc wrote: >Katipo said... > >> Clive Menzies wrote: >> >On (20/11/05 22:08), Katipo wrote: >> >>Clive Menzies wrote: >> >>>I suspect Intel is in no way unique in this respect; my own >> >>> limited experience of large corporations has been similar. As in >> >>> many other bureaucratic organisations (public and commercial), it >> >>> is the 'system' rather than the individuals which is flawed. >> >> >> >>Well, yes, but it is also the organisation that supplies both the >> >>anonymity to indulge, and the sociological acceptance factor that >> >> comes from the definition of 'success' provided by that >> >> organisation environment. >> >> >> >>The individual and the environment are reflections of each other. >> >>Deny the individual the right to be responsible for his >> >> environment, and you deprive him of any means to improve upon it. >> > >> >I couldn't agree more. But in such flawed organisations, to attain >> >power to change the way things operate, requires compromising one's >> >principles to at least a limited degree. Once the individual >> > becomes a beneficiary of the system, the motivation to address the >> > inherent flaws becomes diminished. >> > >> >Catch22..... >> >> The evolutionary path of the corporate politician. >> And nobody permitted to climb to any 'higher level', within the >> organisation, until the ethical base of the individual has been >> appropriately compromised. >> >> History is full of examples of nations attempting to change nations, >> families attempting to change families, and individuals attempting to >> bring about change in individuals, when the only way change can be >> brought about in the external environment, is by way of change within >> the individual. >> >> What happens when the individual no longer exists? >> >> Because, in the future, existence without the organisation is going >> to become increasingly difficult. >> The 'organisation' is extending its boundaries to match nationalistic >> ones, and the new ethic will be taught from birth. > >It's a brave new world ;-)
Isn't this the scenario George Orwell tried to warn us about 21 years ago? Sure bears an amazing resemblance. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.36% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]