Skip to content

The Dissonance Of The Left: An Example

15 January 2015 @ 20:50

I happened upon a lovely example of the dissonance of Leftist Thinking today while perusing The Atlantic’s website.

In an article entitled Not Everyone’s Internal Clock Is Set for the 9-to-5 by one Ilana Strauss, she considers the unfavorable situation people with abnormal circadian rhythms [ie: internal clocks] face. [I was interested in reading this because I have always been most creative when my primary sleep time is in the afternoon, the early morning, evening, and late nights being the times I am most productive, imaginative, and inspired.]

As Mz. Strauss remarks:

[Delayed Sleep Phase Syndrome] sufferers have internal clocks that run at least two hours slower than normal, giving them “social jet lag” which is pretty much what it sounds like: They’re out of sync with the rest of society. They struggle to keep their eyes open during morning business meetings because their bodies are convinced it’s the middle of the night. DSPS can wreak havoc on their health and careers, causing depression, anxiety, brain damage, heart disease, drug addiction, and a myriad of other afflictions due to sleep deprivation.

Later in the article she writes [emphasis mine]:

Of course, humans didn’t always work 9-to-5 or sleep eight recommended hours at night. Anthropologist Carol Worthman describes the sleep patterns of hunter-gather societies as having huge variations across different tribes and cultures. While for some tribes, sleeping at the same time was a social activity, other tribes slept whenever they could or felt like it. A good deal of research suggests humans aren’t made to sleep eight-hour stretches. The 9-to-5 workday started as a movement in the 1830s. Laws were passed over the next few decades, with Congress passing the eight-hour workday for federal employees in 1876. The 40-hour workweek became part of the New Deal, which is when it became more or less standardized.

The 9-to-5 workday came as a result of unions and Progressives (1) seeking to restrict the power of business owners to set the number of hours employees worked and (2) demanding that the vast majority of workers work during the daylight hours.  They achieved #2 by forcing businesses to pay extra monies for those employees who worked ‘off-hour’ shifts.

Mz. Strauss goes on to advocate for flexible work hours so people with DSPS can be happier in their work, as surveys seem to show  Nothing wrong with that, as far as I’m concerned.  It makes sense as a business owner to want to create conditions where your employees are performing as their most efficient and economic levels.

However, near the end of her piece, Mz. Strauss engages in some Dissonance [emphasis mine]:

Flexible work schedules are already very common in Europe. A 2009 study by the European Commission found that flexible working hours is “relatively widespread.” Workers with access to flexible schedules in the EU ranged from about 62 percent in Denmark to about 7-to-10 percent in Bulgaria—with most EU countries in the range of 20-to-40 percent. According to Cooper, most U.K. employees will be working half from home in five years.

Traditionally, managers tend to think more people in the office equals more output, but new research shows that people who work flexible hours are more productive and more likely to stay with their company because they are happier and healthier. Thanks to these findings, the U.K. passed a law in June giving every worker the right to apply for a flexible work arrangement.

This is great news; not just for DSPS sufferers, but for their companies. Employers willing to let their employees work flexible hours would enjoy access to a greater number of quality employees, higher productivity, and lower office space costs….

But there’s no willingness is what she sees as a really great positive: the government of the United Kingdom forcing businessmen to allow flexible work hours.

The problem afflicting employable people with DSPS was created by governments and their union allies creating the problem in the first place, and now she implies that the solution is more government regulation [ie: force] to correct the problem.

The word ‘dissonance’ is defined by the OED as: ‘A tension or clash resulting from the combination of two disharmonious or unsuitable elements’.

This little example of the discordance of this Leftist’s way of thinking should make a non-Leftist understand — if they don’t already — why the Left, after such overwhelming evidence to the contrary, can still say that Socialism or Communism or Progressivism are viable because they’ve never really been tried.

Man…I would be scared to mind-meld with one of these people.  I fear I would lose my mind.

One Comment
  1. Adobe_Walls permalink
    15 January 2015 @ 21:19 21:19

    It would double the available space for your mind, the problem is we have no idea what actually serves the purpose of a ”mind” in leftists. I’d not recommend the procedure.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: