The Future of Work in a Remote World

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the shift towards remote work, fundamentally changing how we approach our jobs. Many companies have embraced flexible work arrangements, allowing employees to work from home. This shift has led to increased productivity for some, while others struggle with the lack of in-person interaction.

As we look to the future, it is essential to consider the long-term implications of remote work. Balancing flexibility with collaboration will be key to fostering a positive work environment. By adapting to these changes, organizations can create a more resilient workforce.

Random texts

Meyer's fusionism should actually be considered New Right 2.0, but it arose in reaction to what the mainstream media of the late 1940s heralded as the "New Right" of the time, or what we can now retroactively date as New Right 1.0. This was the "conservatism" (the scare quotes are deliberate here) of Peter Viereck, Clinton Rossiter, Walter Lippmann, and others whose moderate prescriptions for conservatives, Meyer said, "present nothing in its essential principles and programs with which Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., or Adlai Stevenson would seriously disagree." Indeed, Rossiter and Viereck thought the most essential thing for post-war conservatism was to accept the New Deal, government economic planning, and co-existence with Communism. Aside from the last proposal (coexistence with Communism), there is a rough symmetry with some proposals of today's national conservatives.  Meyer thought there was nothing new at all about this "new right"; he called it "collectivism rebaptized."

Suddenly, a specific line in William F. Buckley, Jr's famous mission statement for National Review in 1955 comes into sharper relief:

"Conservatives in this country — at least those who have not made their peace with the New Deal, and there is serious question whether there are others — are non-licensed nonconformists; and this is dangerous business in a Liberal world. . . We consider 'coexistence' with communism neither desirable nor possible, nor honorable; we find ourselves irrevocably at war with communism and shall oppose any substitute for victory." [Emphasis added.]

Pretty clear Buckley had soi-disant "conservatives" like Viereck and Rossiter in mind, and wanted to read them out of the conservative movement. Certainly Meyer did. There was one relevant point of convergence, however, between Buckley and Meyer versus Viereck and Rossiter: both camps regarded Russell Kirk's "donnish speculations" (Meyer's words) in The Conservative Mind to be insufficiently robust to meet the political moment. One thinks of Whittaker Chambers's comment that

We must give Russell Kirk an A for effort in The Conservative Mind. But looked at coldly. . . if you were a marine in a landing boat, would you wade up the sea-beach at Tarawa for that conservative position? And neither would I!

And Willmoore Kendall, Buckley's principal mentor at Yale and a major figure in the early years of National Review, also dismissed Kirk as "an improbable spokesman for the emergent conservative movement, because he simply does not 'identify' with those who are fighting the battles on which the outcome of the war must ultimately turn."

Meyer's fusionism should actually be considered New Right 2.0, but it arose in reaction to what the mainstream media of the late 1940s heralded as the "New Right" of the time, or what we can now retroactively date as New Right 1.0. This was the "conservatism" (the scare quotes are deliberate here) of Peter Viereck, Clinton Rossiter, Walter Lippmann, and others whose moderate prescriptions for conservatives, Meyer said, "present nothing in its essential principles and programs with which Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., or Adlai Stevenson would seriously disagree." Indeed, Rossiter and Viereck thought the most essential thing for post-war conservatism was to accept the New Deal, government economic planning, and co-existence with Communism. Aside from the last proposal (coexistence with Communism), there is a rough symmetry with some proposals of today's national conservatives.  Meyer thought there was nothing new at all about this "new right"; he called it "collectivism rebaptized."

• Dorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam eu turpis molestie, dictum est a, mattis tellus.
• Sed dignissim, metus nec fringilla accumsan, risus sem sollicitudin lacus, ut interdum tellus elit sed risus. Maecenas eget condimentum velit, sit amet feugiat lectus. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Praesent auctor purus luctus enim egestas, ac scelerisque ante pulvinar.
• Donec ut rhoncus ex. Suspendisse ac rhoncus nisl, eu tempor urna. Curabitur vel bibendum lorem. Morbi convallis convallis diam sit amet lacinia. Aliquam in elementum tellus.