this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
2574 points (94.1% liked)

Malicious Compliance

19593 readers
1 users here now

People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.

======

======

Also check out the following communities:

[email protected] [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think this is ok. It’s how the market works. If you have enough people who agree with your stance, then you’ll survive, if not, you fail. Transversely, if you are trying to make a profitable business, you remove all roadblocks from a consumer who wants to do business with you.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

No, given the preponderance of white owned businesses, the way that turns out is Jim crow. You think that some store in rural bumfuck will hurt with a sign saying "no blacks, jews or gays"?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you saying that minorities should not be protected?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Let them protect themselves. Don't come in with a white saviour complex and think that you're better than them

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How are they supposed to pretext themselves? They are a minority. This means the other party is way bigger and therefore more powerfull

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That's a very shallow way to look at it. First wrong: This isn't a numbers game. A party with more people won't necessarily win. Second wrong: Not all people who are not the minority are against the minority