- cross-posted to:
- videos@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- videos@sopuli.xyz
Alleged context: Polish CEO Piotr Szczerek’s company review bombed after taking child’s hat at usopen.
You must log in or # to comment.
This attitude is probably what made him a CEO in the first place.
He doubled down when called out. Claimed ‘anyone else would do the same’ and threatened to sue anyone criticizing his actions. Zero remorse or reflection.
Lol you can’t sue for defamation if your actions are on film 🤣
deleted by creator
I wish he’d double over instead from being hit in the balls hard.
Also like he got it before it reached the kid’s hand. So technically it was fair game and legal, but holyshit psyociopathically and shamefully immoral.
I bet he underpays his employees as immorally yet legaly possible thus increasing
slaveowners’shareholders’ returns as the successful CEO he is
Continuing to prove CEOs are leeches with no morals.
The CEO wants you to know he won it fair and square
Here’s a contact form for his company if you’d like to give him feedback.
Thank you, submitted:
Powinieneś się wstydzić. Jakiż jesteś małym, małostkowym człowiekiem.
I hope my sentiment made it through my translator.
Yup, as native Polish speaker i can tell you it does contain quite some disdain.
Lmao they took the site down
Cowards.
I bested a small child. Why won’t you worship me? Lol.
Thanks for that. It’s so much worse. Whether fake or not, it’s hilarious. e: it’s fake, and hilarious.
With that attitude, if you kill him it’s perfectly fine. You won fairly, so it’s legitimate.
deleted by creator
It’s because he was rational with empathy- he should’ve doubled down on how weak the opposition was. CEOs love a good psycho, right?
You don’t see them agreeing with this, but it isn’t because of logic. They’re selfish. That’s their defining trait they have in common. They think they should be allowed to do anything they want because they have the power to do so. It follows that if you have the power to kill them that it’s legitimate. They won’t agree because it isn’t in their favor, but the logic is consistent.
deleted by creator
So like… is he taking challengers for the hat or what?
It’s always “winning” for these people against people (here a kid) that can’t defend themselves. It’s almost like a trait with these fucks.
And it’s comically sad this has a huge draw for some statistically significant number of people.
deleted by creator
It’s why they are CEOs and it’s also why they get their company’s to make so much money.
Multiply the behavior of stealing things from children a million fold and that’s how CEOs make money for the company. They don’t get to that position by being nice and adhering to morals.
deleted by creator
They see me rollin’
Fun fact: The guy’s company produces paving stones, pretty handy to throw.
Fun fact two: Kid ultimately got another hat from the tennis player after the case got blown up and the player contacted him.
“Drogbruk” means drug use in Swedish. Company name checks out.
What an absolute cunt. What could you possibly need so badly that you rip it from the grasp of a child, when you are a CEO.
Greed is not about need.
Yeah look at the grin on his face, he enjoys knowing that he has it and others don’t, he enjoyed grabbing it from that kid, and he’ll smile anytime he looks at it or tells the story about how he took it. This is the mentality of the vast majority of CEOs
This is the mentality of the vast majority of CEOs
Is that truly knowable?
Experimentally, yes.
https://www.npr.org/2014/04/04/295360962/does-money-make-you-mean
Paul Piff is a social psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley. He studies how wealth — or the lack of wealth — can affect behavior.
His studies include running rigged games of Monopoly, tracking how those who drive expensive cars behave behind the wheel, and even determining that rich people are more likely to take candy from children than the less well-off. He writes, “I have been finding that increased wealth and status in society lead to increased self-focus and, in turn, decreased compassion, altruism, and ethical behavior.”
Did they also do any research into some kind of local proportion to their surroundings where the ratio of wealth had a cutoff point where people became less “human”, as I will call it? Like for instance, I’m doing quite well financially, a lot better than my friends. But I’m not any different towards them since this started. Maybe I’d become less caring and compassionate once I reach a certain point? Once I get enough money?
Also curious about the correlation vs causation in that quote:
finding that increased wealth and status in society lead to increased self-focus and, in turn, decreased compassion, altruism, and ethical behavior
The Monopoly test seems to cover the causation question pretty well. Select one player at random and give them extra money or property at the start of the game, with all players being aware. The advantaged players become more anti-social in their play, and after the game will self-rate their “skill” level much higher than the disadvantaged players, downplaying the impact of their advantage.
Does that make them a piece of shit though?
Power and wealth are associated with the dark triad (narcissism, machiavellianism, psychopathy). This has been known since the time of monarchies and before.
Right, but when we say “the vast majority of CEOs”, were talking about a lot of CEOs. Remember, there are a lot of people who run small businesses who aren’t extremely wealthy who are still CEO of their company. I doubt the “vast majority” of them are pieces of shit like this guy.
I would argue that aspiring to power and wealth, making it your sole purpose in life, creates the necessary conditions for the dark triad to take root. So essentially every CEO has a little of this inside them, mainly because they’re more beholden to capital than to treating people / animals / the earth well or fairly.
Your comment is making a lot of assumptions here, I barely know where to start.
aspiring to power and wealth
Bundling them together might not be necessary. I myself aspire to have (enough) wealth, like we all do. That doesn’t mean I’m interested in power as well.
Aspiring to have wealth doesn’t really mean you have to make it your sole purpose in life either.
Then you assume every CEO aspires to have wealth and power. Both. Not necessarily true. Just because you have your own business doesn’t mean you aspire to have wealth, even. You could be running a laundromat or something making ends meet month by month, but you’re happy with that, and you’re the CEO. All possible and plausible. And you care for your employees.
Plenty of businesses/CEOs want to treat their employees well as well. Especially the small ones. They are still CEOs though.
You see where I’m getting at? Having the stamp of “CEO” I think is irrelevant. I think it’s more about acquiring enough power through wealth that is the real danger. Now, mostly CEOs get to do that, but #notallCEOs. Definitely not the “vast majority”.
You don’t become a CEO by being caring and considerate.
In Polish it’s portmanteau of droga (road) + bruk (paving stones), since his company produce paving stones.
Interesting that CEO’s are idiots globally. It’s almost like you have to steal from people in order to accumulate big money.
The lack of morals, ethics, and shame also help.
And then you get photographic evidence of them being just the worst, and somehow they’re the victim and you’re the bad guy for documenting how shitty they are. Fuck I hate these people.
This is TERRIBLE! That his Company is being DOXXED! Let the CEO LIVE in PEACE while he Steals from Children!
-Conservatives!
That is pretty much exactly what the guy’s public statement about this incident said.
A CEO has to do what a CEO has to do.
It is for the good of the stock owners.
Doesn’t matter, they’ll delete all the 1 star reviews afterwards.
Given the current state of things, they’re being more entitled assholes. They’re throwing their weight around harder because the powers-that-be and techbros are throwing away what they call DEI policies, and dusting off traditional hierarchies and stereotypes for restoration.
Please mind some instances have rules against doxxing. Somehow we seem to have forgot about that one rule, and sure hope no one would use our research/factcheck community !dociekliwosc@szmer.info for such posts.
// Your friendly anarchistic Polish lemmy instance hosted outside of EU/US jurisdictions.
EDIT: i completely missed the point 🤦♂️, sorry. keeping the original comment for context…
Won’t someone please think of the bougies…
Who fucking cares? They make life miserable for everybody else because they won the birthplace lottery and it’d be in their FULL interest to continue running their businesses that only they and their family line get to reap most of the profits from.
You Western opportunists calling yourselves “anarchists” are only tolerated because you’re too meek to actually dare standing up against your bougie rulers and will fold like this in mere seconds to “play by the rules” and “maintain calm in the midst of chaos”.
deleted by creator
i’m dumb, thanks for the clarification.
Read their post again.
To be faaaaiiiiiiiir
deleted by creator
Put him on blast!
Luigi get the gat!
This vacuum cleaner goes ratta-tat-tat!
ummm
I think that’s how guns sound
What’s up with the dude handing the kid a pen right after without even looking, like they know each other and this action was expected? Is that CEO the kid’s dad or something?
Because that changes the situation a lot from “gross capitalists do anything for personal gain and must be stopped” to “dad snags hat from his kid but it doesn’t matter because they’re all going home on the same plane, probably a private one because gross capitalists do anything for personal gain and must be stopped“.
Look at the kid’s face when he takes it. He’s heartbroken, says ‘no!’ and nearly starts crying. He spends the rest of the video trying to get the player to sign his ball instead. The pass-off of the pen appeared to be because pens for signing were being passed down – it wasn’t his pen. The boy not only didn’t get the hat, but his ball wasn’t signed (which appears to have been what he was waiting for, and the hat was meant to take the place of his ball being signed).
And even if it was his son (which it doesn’t seem to be), this is still arsehole behaviour – lean in and share the moment, don’t take it from him like this.
e: and if it truly was his son, that’s even more sad, because that means dad is acting like I’d expect a rude stranger to act.
Worthless prick
