Some analysis of compulsive corporate talk

(Adds to: Lineage comparisons as aristocratic trust-building exercise)

This is going to be partially a rant about how the upper-middle class refuse to make explicit distinctions between things when they’re talking.
It’s the opposite of straight talk. Literally everything is communicated by connotations.

The trouble with rich professionals (i.e. technocrats) is that they’re all used car salesmen on the inside but they’re smart too, so they learned some systemizing in college.
But even though they’re putting everything into stereotype boxes inside their heads (“nice old lady”, “criminal underclass thug”, “idealistic Aryan boy”) they are always speaking in the language of a car salesman.

The example that really ticked me off was in a podcast where they were discussing something completely innocuous that snowballed. One of them said “Of the multiple avenues available to students, the one you’re offering is special.”
The other guy corrected him to say it was “different, not special”.
The guy who’d made the “mistake” was horrified at himself and insisted I edit out that entire line of conversation.
Keep in mind, it’s the guy who’s on the podcast trying to boost his thing making sure it isn’t described as “special”. Because that might offend that one in a million person from one of the other avenues (who might be the source of his next job).
Because he’s always working every possible angle.

God forbid he’d said something is better than something else, for any reason or purpose.
So every conversation with people like this goes: “This is a really great product, and there are a lot of other really great products out there, and I’m not saying this is the one a person should take, but for some people, sometimes, it might be the right choice, but even then maybe not, and who knows, and you just have to feel what’s the right answer for your situation…”
And the other professional is sitting there thinking “What a great sales pitch” while I’m going “AAAAAAAAAAA”.

I’ve ranted to you before about how corporate people answer every question by saying “it depends” and then waffling for half an hour without yielding any information. It’s like an entire demographic that speaks entirely in corporate platitudes even in their personal lives.
I can appreciate it by imagining a sort of Machiavellian glee from talking this way, because it’s basically a flex.

“Sir, do you know how fast you were going?”

“We believe following the law is of the utmost importance for upstanding citizens and we’re very excited to explore these synergies with you.”

In fact, I think I’d describe it as information-withholding rhetorical speech. The only purpose is to communicate a mood in a fog of cultural associations and connotations, like a banner ad made of meaningless jabber.

And what’s so freaking annoying is they rarely turn it off, and they get frustrated when they have to.
At least a proper psychopath can answer a simple question like “should the website be blue” without expecting you to read his mind.
It’s no wonder our ruling elite hate tradespeople.

“Which toilet do you want?”

We’re trying to create a place that’s comfortable for guests and blah blah blah…

“The best one is the expensive one.”

(Recoils)

How indiscreet!

Owl:

i’ve always found this style of communication equal parts fascinating and incredibly frustrating
it was only in the past few years that i grasped that it’s an extreme risk-aversion strategy
never say anything off-kilter, never say anything that could ever be construed as possibly offensive to one person anywhere, or else you get hounded out of your job and polite society

It’s like refusing to name your number in a negotiation, turned up to 11, and raised on an information diet of Game of Thrones.

The level of competitiveness is unnerving, frankly.
My brother brought up an interesting study in conversation lately, because he’s starting to read about employee turnover.
References don’t necessarily predict high performers, but they’re a superpredictor if you’re trying to avoid lemons.
If employees are ranked 1-5, then hiring only based on references will exclude the ones.
From that, I realized that the yakuza-like ritual of going through your lineage (work history with these C-level types) and finding common references is a great process for weeding out these lemons.

Oh, you worked at X in 2017? Did you know A? I worked with A at Y in 2013.

Oh how wonderful! Did you know B at Y? I worked with B at Z for five years.

Again, this can be frustrating because these conversations can go on for 20 minutes. And I think that’s because it’s more instinctual than anything.

well these people have been programmed to act like this AND they literally cannot think of any other means of interaction
there’s an interesting diversio between “i do this because i have to” and those who do it refelxively and unrefledtedly
*unreflectedly

I think it’s something they absorb as a class marker from growing up around similar people. Also it’s going to be heavily genetic, like in those twin separation stories.
Middle class people don’t have to be told to go to Granite City.

likely
figuring out this behavior and convincingly aping it has increasingly seemed like an imperative for me
my temperment inclines me towards the opposite and i’ve lwys recoiled from it

We shall invent nu-Game, the seduction system for metrosexuals.

but now i feel like the spergs dissecting normie behavior and getting a more fleshed-out pciture than the normals
and the melon ambition basically inclines me toward “i will get better at this than you and achieve monumental feats because of it”

That is precisely what we’re doing, so lean into that feeling :-P

“i know what I’m doing and why, and you don’t even know we’re playing a game”

The normie fears the melonhead’s autism.

basically he thought process behind anyone working towards somethign
“fears”
“craves, worships. obeys”
semantics

Lol, my thinking exactly.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Some analysis of compulsive corporate talk

  1. Obadiah says:

    >The trouble with rich professionals (i.e. technocrats) is that they’re all used car salesmen on the inside but they’re smart too

    ^Perfect description.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s