Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

Police state oppression is not social shame.

[RedKing]

No, but if government has to be the one to drive and increase social shame, then what term do use for that?

[Baffler]

Police state oppression

I think this one works.

[Loud Whispers]

No, but if government has to be the one to drive and increase social shame, then what term do use for that?

Big Brother who's learned how to use your facebook

[mainiac]

No, but if government has to be the one to drive and increase social shame, then what term do use for that?

I feel like you are talking about something that is nearly the same as something that is nearly the same as what I was advocating.

[RedKing]

No, but if government has to be the one to drive and increase social shame, then what term do use for that?

I feel like you are talking about something that is nearly the same as something that is nearly the same as what I was advocating.

Johnson: It's time someone had the courage to stand up and say: "I'm against those things that everybody hates".
Jackson: Now I respect my opponent. I think he's a good man but, quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said!

BTW, I wasn't saying that government SHOULD be the one doing this, in case that wasn't clear. Because to me, that's a terrible precedent. If Jim Crow was wrong (and it was), then using the government to drive shaming and suppression of racists is equally wrong. Outlawing discrimination is different, because that's upholding the 14th amendment. Outlawing racist speech/symbols is a violation of the 1st amendment. They can outlaw it in the public sphere (government officials, government property, etc.) but they can't outlaw it among private individuals. Which is why I'm fine with taking it down from state capitols, governor's mansions, etc. I'm ambiguous about removing it from Confederate war memorials because the context is drastically different there. I'm absolutely opposed to attempts to outlaw it in the private sphere.

Businesses have every right to pull it from their shelves though, if they think that public opinion is that strong against it.

[mainiac]

then using the government to drive shaming and suppression of racists is equally wrong. Outlawing discrimination is different,

I am no more advocating the government shaming and suppressing racism then I am advocating the government shame and suppress religion by maintaining separation of church and state.  Failing to make an environment that breed racism isn't oppressing racists.

[nenjin]

Businesses have every right to pull it from their shelves though, if they think that public opinion is that strong against it.

It's still so weird to me that some businesses during the last month are willing to risk the PR backlash on principle. It's totally undermining my "fuck the corps and the man" attitude I've spent so many years building. There's the argument that having morals and expressing them as a large corporation can have a positive effect on your PR and profits (just ask the Evangelical and other faith-based businesses that have done so), even to the cynical degree of just doing it for PR and sales.

But I don't think anyone who wasn't already buying on Ebay or whoever stopped selling w/e, is suddenly now doing so because "they don't sell the Confederate Battle Flag."

Which means this is at best, I suppose, an actual statement of principle from billion dollar corporations with shareholders (i.e., not just a statement condemning what is obviously bad) or at worst a political act. I guess I've just gotten so used to corporations staying neutral (the obligatory press statement of policy and funneling dump trucks of money into the political system aside) that the fact they're forming opinions about this stuff and are acting on them (like people) is a little weird. Taking a handful of dramatic sensational political events and reactions as a sign of a trend isn't wise. (The reaction to the Church shooting and the ongoing noise with Trump and people dropping him.) But it does seem like a growing phenomena. There's plenty of prior precedence for corporations acting morally, forming opinions and taking actions based on their morals. But I dunno, this seems like they're getting swept up in the same momentum the public is, and openly getting politicized instead of just operating from the shadows with money.

Then again, maybe this has just been a fast month of what is now becoming regular American insanity and the inevitable reaction to the insanity.

[Loud Whispers]

I remember a day when corporations weren't flying rainbow or battle colours because no one saw them as people who could hold opinions

[nenjin]

They also didn't have Twitter accounts back then either. Or at least, they didn't use them. I still can't decide if this would be a positive emerging trend or a bad one. I guess it can go both ways depending on who is doing what. Freedom Fries were dumb and funny in an embarrassing way, and I won't lie to say it's nice to have the presence of big corporations backing a cause you believe in. But it's also kind of a scary scenario to have them reacting to politics kind of how people do. Sort of like if Godzilla is walking around town. Even if he's your friend, he leaves a big foot print on the landscape.

[mainiac]

Corporations aren't people.  Their preferences are much more rational from a selfish economic perspective.  They are ubermensch.  If we can just ditch the humans and keep the corporations around, economics will finally come into it's own.

[nenjin]

Their preferences are much more rational from a selfish economic perspective.

Can you frame the announcements we've been seeing in terms of their rational, selfish economic perspective? Like I said, I don't think anyone is going to start buying from them now vs. before, or buy more from them than they did previously. (Especially in two months when the public moves on.) I said you could argue for cynical PR presence and capitalizing on events by having something to say about them, and taking an actual stance...but that doesn't really seem to be the tenor of this.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

They are most definitely doing it for the dosh. This sort of thing, alongside all the pride gradient profile images, is part of a fairly well ran courting campaign aimed at young middle-class progressives, or as I like to call them, the Tumblr demographic. It's working fantastically.

[nenjin]

I guess I hadn't considered them. Damn kids! But still. At best you're just getting brand loyalty. I'm pretty sure the Tumblr generation is already buying at these places. You might get an uptick in sales as some equate spending with supporting their cause (or riding the buzz.) But with how fickle everyone's attention is, and there's especially...in the balance to me, it seems like a gamble with no real clear cut pay off pissing off a potentially sizable demographic, young and old, in the South.

Or maybe it is just a giant middle finger to what his historically been the de-facto acceptance and inclusion of the flag whether we like it or not. After all, vendors are what ultimately get them out there and help propagate them.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Here's the thing: The Tumblr demographic are a double-edged sword. They're totally willing to go all in on either abandoning or backing certain things, usually based on flashpoint issues that may or may not really matter (as mentioned, I'm putting this one in the "not matter" column). If they walk into a store or browse a website and see a Confederate flag, they go and spread the word about how Company X are anti-black killers. Meanwhile, if Buzzfeed tells them that Company Y has taken the historic sign of banning the Confederate flag, they'll go tell all their fellows about shopping at this progressive company.

And they are way more conscious about these things than good ol' boys, who are used to people ragging on Ol' Dixie and mostly don't shop at the urban brand names or shopping sites anyway. It's a net gain for the corporation to keep their eye more on the pulse of the people who do more shopping with them and are more easily turned off.