Received this image today, which I've mercifully coded as a popup window (as opposed to an embedded image you'd have to look at whenever you come to the blog).
Clearly saccharine kitsch survives in any medium.
Received this image today, which I've mercifully coded as a popup window (as opposed to an embedded image you'd have to look at whenever you come to the blog).
Clearly saccharine kitsch survives in any medium.
The jargon used by businesses today tends to refer to employees as "resources", hence "human resources" and talk of putting "three resources on this project" and "four resources on that project". I've always objected to this as dehumanizing, but I saw something today that positively sent chills up my spine in comparison.
It was a Christmas card from another company, and it identified them as "Consultants in the management of human capital".
Maybe I'm overreacting but to me this conjured up images of cattle cars. So impersonal, so clinical, so dehumanizing.
What I think is weird is that for the most part you could easily replace "human capital" with "employees" or "employees and contractors" and it would sound far warmer and less ominous. "Capital" lumps us in the same category as money and equipment. It reduces us to a means to produce an end (profit). It objectifies the employee (or contractor); rather than being treated as persons, they are treated -- well, like money and equipment.
I wonder if anyone's written a novel along these lines ... not quite "1984" but something like it.