Ask Lemmy

"I'm just following orders".
Except nothing bad would happen to you if you didn't.

"Sometimes I think the world would be better off without me. That's why I have to keep living."

No.

I can't. I'm almost 50, and back then I deliberately picked a major that would lead to a career with a neutral or good impact. I make half the money I could have made, I enjoy my job, and I'm not part of the problem (well, or only as much as we have to, living under capitalism.)

People will literally do anything for money.

I work in IT. Some days are better than others. Framing seems to be key to keeping my psyche intact.

I constantly wrestle with the environmental impact of this field. More so now than ever. Everything that goes into consumer and professional electronics generates a lot of waste, and as a professional, I've had my hands on more systems than the average home user.

I also do not work at any FANG company, nor for anyone in surveillance like Palantir or Flock. Besides, I don't get invited to those parties.

Everyone in IT has contributed to both negative social and environmental impacts in some way. Some, much more than others. AI has thrown gasoline on the fire, but we still have the same problems as before: pointless commutes, e-waste, planned obsolescence, power-hungry software, enriching the rich, and so on.

Meanwhile, (without doxxing myself) I work at a company that helps their customers do good things.

I think that's where I keep my conscience clear for the most part: I've made decisions that place me in a relatively better place, with some sense of karmic balance that tips towards better than it is bad. Telling oneself "it could be worse" certainly seems fragile - and it is - but it is what it is.

I'll add that, in a capitalist system, even the concept of employment is coercive and not 100% voluntary. Also, the way companies proceed in this environment exploits the built-in demand for employment, while exploiting and extracting all kinds of things, both real and virtual. IMO, this puts the most (if not all) of economy on trial for ethical concerns, so we're only left "how (non)ethical is your workplace?"

I have a friend who worked relatively high in big tobacco. He rationalized that his job is going to exist no matter what, and that if he takes it, he will be able to benefit and do something about it. I don't know what he meant by doing something, but it didn't seem to eat at him. But either way he only worked there for about 2 years before getting recruited somewhere else

Great question the answer is pretty much no.

Either you live with the guilt or you change your moral framework to make it not bad.

I left my industry because it made me question my morals daily. It's not worth the money

"There is no ethical consumption under Capitalism" is a useful parallel concept. One can consume at least more ethically by buying in solidarity with, eg, Fairtrade sellers, local sellers, co-ops, or maybe living a vegan lifestyle.

Not to be confused with finding an ethical form of capitalism. It doesn't exist. Any system designed to maximize profit will put any other goals (like human rights) secondary.

I think working in this society is similar. I can choose the more ethical option from the limited options available to me and work to make my life and the lives of people around me better. But I can't find or create a system that is ethical. Even that co-op referenced above probably has suppliers who are less ethical, or they may have to rent from a profit-driven landlord.

I try to focus on small improvements over my baseline rather than thinking anything short of immediate perfection is a failure.

Not me at least. After looking for a job for 9 months I saw one at Palantir that fit me exactly. Just considering applying made me feel dirty af.

I can't. One of my job requirements is that I need to work someplace I think is at least neutral, or is good. So far it's only been neutral and I am ok with that.

I do think some people can be a force for good in a bad place but I am not strong enough to do that.

Edit to add an example - I heard a story about a guy working in corrections - a prison warden - who was working to change the system from punitive to remedial, and had reduced recidivism by a huge amount, like it's 5%, compared to 50% in most of the nation. I think he is a good person in an evil industry (the American prison industry). Randy Liberty. Not kidding, that is his real name.

Thr unsavory businesses are paying a premium for being unsavory. There are SOME people who will not work there, which reduces the size of the labor pool and drives prices up. There are others who can be bought, for a price, and that also drives prices up.

Industries with neutral or beneficial impacts on society do have this pressure, so the wages are lower. Simple supply and demand.

If murderers can feel no remorse for violently ending people's lives, corporate employees can certainly feel clean. Given the old 'there is no ethical consumption' there's arguably no one who should feel clean but most people think they are, on a basic level, good.

You should read up on how the nazi's operated the most succesful industrial size operation for genocide while most of the people tried hard not to notice.

This is where I believe Karl Marx’s concept of alienation becomes more of a blessing than anything else. Marx argued, broadly speaking, that under capitalism, workers are doomed to feel disconnected (alienated) from the work they do. I think this disconnection works wonders in the kinds of jobs where what you do has negative consequences. Employees can pull a Nuremberg: “I’m just following orders,” and that way, even though they’re technically helping to create more harm in the world, from their point of view, they were just doing their job. Surviving, like all of us.

It is a clear conscience achieved through self-emptying.

(There’s also the case of people who honestly enjoy causing harm in the world, but that’s a separate issue.)

yes, with the right conscience a person can feel good about anything they do. Maybe not with your conscience or my conscience, but this falls under the "everybody's different" category.

they don't have one to begin with.

i taught business ethics for two years as a grad student. 60% of the class would write papers how ethics are stupid because the only thing that matters is maximizing company and personal profit for themselves.

ethics is a nice thing people gesture and worry about, but when push come to shove, they will shove you in front of the bus to save themselves.

I think so. If you have no other choice and have to provide for your family. I can't think of a scenario where you don't have another choice, though.

I find it noble to go against your own best interest for the greater good, but I don't expect it and don't blame anyone for not doing it when it would seriously impact their ability to live life if they did.

I still expect morality though. There's balance and proportion for everything.

You can't solve systems by focusing on individuals.

None of us a free moral agents. We're surrounded by systems of family, culture, and law that compel and coerce us. And all of that is built in to the signifiers "employment" and "labor". It's incoherent to slice off a traunch of all these interconnected systems, strip it of all context, and pretend it's a free moral choice.

Changing systems requires collective action. Individuals are weak and the Western obsession with individualism is no coincidence.

There is rarely a complete agreement on what is "negative impact".

In good faith? No, I don’t think so. But I have a friend who worked at Facebook with the specific intent of dealing damage by delaying or stopping projects and generally slowing things down. It was a drop in the bucket, but she lasted 4 or 5 years before they realized she was adding literally nothing of value.