It's fascinating to watch google becoming a propaganda tool of International Progressivism. How many Amerikans are even aware of the intense global propaganda war that is now raging, by and against the usual suspects? For example, there's this:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jDJdkpsOdHc/UvRL6Pwyc6I/AAAAAAAACU8/iwHMs7jhAu8/s1600/Google+Homos.png)
Government and corporations united in improving the world! Conquer all nations in the name of Progress! Progressive fascism, uber alles!
Daily reminder: Google quoting the Olympic Charter's nondiscrimination clause is proof the international progressive mafia secretly masturbates in your face while you sleep.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 01:44:03 AM
The first rule of any conspiracy is that you must always deny the conspiracy -- if that fails, mock or fight anyone who persists.
But thank you for the correction comrade. Of course there's no conspiracy; quoting this charter below a rainbow colored flag on the eve of the Russian Olympics has no political agenda behind it whatsoever. Silly old me for being so cynical!
It's the same conspiracy that had t.a.T.u as the musical act of the Olympic opening event thing. The Homosexual Agenda rears its ugly head once more, in proud Heteronormative Russia.
this thread made me lose a couple thousands of neurons :evilmad:
Brother Nihil is from Wisconsin. Calling it now!
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 02:43:04 AM
That's the funny thing about it; I lived in Moscow for a year, and homosexuality is under no threat there at all. In fact, if you swing that way, I'm sure you could have a much wilder time there than anything available in the West today (assuming you have the power and the money). The difference is that in Russia, like most sane traditional societies, people believe that the majority has the right not to be constantly exposed to every form of human deviance under the sun. As long as the queers are discreet, there's no problem. So why do moralistic Amerikan Judeo-Protestant-Progressive busybodies think they have the right to meddle in other cultures in this way, and disrupt norms that have existed for millennia? This, more than anything else, is the root of the world's hatred for modern Amerika, which shows so little respect for or knowledge of other cultures, or any refined culture of its own, yet can't resist trying to tear them down to its level.
Death to Amerika!
Quote from: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/derail-using-entitlement/
"It's A Conspiracy!"
Rather than deal with the actual issues on the table or stop and listen and take into consideration what the marginalized person is saying, just whip this out instead!Essentially, what you are doing is claiming that any endeavor by marginalized people to improve their standing within society and the treatment they experience is a "conspiracy" "against" the privileged and that the ultimate objective of this fearsome "conspiracy" is to ultimately oppress the Privileged. It is a common misconception of the Privileged to believe that any effort by the marginalized to gain equity undermines the privileged and their lives.
It is a very unique and special trait to personalize something like Black History Month, for example, as being an effort to make the history and accomplishments of white people invisible. Although this is obviously ridiculous when white history is so prominently covered in every aspect of culture from film, books, monuments and education, it is a great way to once again make the dialogue about the privileged and the privileged's perceived ill-treatment, imaginary though this may be. This way you manage to keep the focus off the topic at hand and on your own sense of wounded comfort – a lovely way to remind the marginalized their issues are thoroughly devalued. Naturally, it is of extreme frustration to marginalized person, when all they are attempting to do is draw attention to the extreme discrimination they are obliged to face, to have it characterized as a calculated attack on the rights of the privileged.You can further underscore and intensify this frustration by accusing them of a conspiracy, the ultimate objective of which is to make your life as a Privileged Person a living hell! Go so far as to suggest they intend to turn the tables – that if given an inch they will simply take a mile and if the Privileged budge or relent, in the blink of an eye the marginalized will overthrow and oppress the oppressors! After all, how dare they think they are entitled to the same human rights you enjoy automatically by virtue of your privilege!
Who Wins Gold in the Oppression Olympics?
Following on from this, if you are a member of another marginalized groups, you can also exploit it to indicate to the marginalized person how absolutely disdainful you are of their concerns and issues by making out that yours are far more important and imperative.You can even suggest that your issues are more valuable than theirs, implying a hierarchy of oppression in which you always win.You see, as a marginalized person yourself, it is all the more infuriating to another marginalized person that you're exercising the exact same prejudices and discrimination that privileged people exercise against you! The marginalized person will be tearing their hair out at your obliviousness and lack of perception and this will weaken their defenses
I don't understand. Why are you quoting our own playbook at us?
Like, this is basic stuff. I spend most of my free time oppressing the right of the people to stand up for Traditional Values.
"If someone makes fun of my retarded beliefs about a conspiracy, it proves the conspiracy is true!"
:lol:
Though Icke did this shtick way better. Consider incorporating reptilians into the act.
:boring:
Oh Joy, it's the idiot racist.
I'll probably hijack this thread for Sochi related bullshit later.
Logical arguments are part of the progressive conspiracy.
Maybe you should just call yourself a facist if that's what you want. :?
Like, the ENTIRE WORLD is 100% aware that everyone is giving Russia shit over the homosexuality issue. It's on the news. People think it's awesome and are having a grand old time giving Russia the middle finger.
Is it still a conspiracy when a plurality of the civilized world is on board and actively participating?
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 10:18:13 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 08, 2014, 10:07:01 PM
Oh Joy, it's the idiot racist.
Nice work, you didn't waste any time executing rule #1. I'm a little disappointed that no one has called me a Nazi yet though. Where's that dumb thug Roger?
Oh hey now, we wouldn't want to compare you with a group who are even marginally capable of acheiving their goals, let alone Nazis.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 10:18:13 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 08, 2014, 10:07:01 PM
Oh Joy, it's the idiot racist.
Nice work, you didn't waste any time executing rule #1. I'm a little disappointed that no one has called me a Nazi yet though. Where's that dumb thug Roger?
Last time you were here you came out with a ton of idiot racist shit. I've not bothered reading anything else because the chances for change were nil.
Help, help, he's being oppressed.
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on February 09, 2014, 12:33:57 AM
Like, the ENTIRE WORLD is 100% aware that everyone is giving Russia shit over the homosexuality issue. It's on the news. People think it's awesome and are having a grand old time giving Russia the middle finger.
Is it still a conspiracy when a plurality of the civilized world is on board and actively participating?
I forgot the definition of a conspiracy again. This is a interesting discourse though, and nihilists are the best at hard hitting arguments.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 01:44:21 AM
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on February 09, 2014, 12:33:57 AM
Is it still a conspiracy when a plurality of the civilized world is on board and actively participating?
Are you being serious here? In reality of course it's a tiny minority that give a flying fuck about Russia's policy toward homosexuals. Entire continents and civilizations have absolutely no sympathy for what radprogs are trying to do there (Africa, the Middle East, much of Asia, etc.). It's really only small cliques within the West and their fellow travellers that push this shit around the world. Do yourself a favor and travel the world, experience non-Western cultures, do some simple math and get a rudimentary grasp of how the vast majority of people outside the Western Progressive bubble actually think.
no
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 10:18:13 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 08, 2014, 10:07:01 PM
Oh Joy, it's the idiot racist.
Nice work, you didn't waste any time executing rule #1. I'm a little disappointed that no one has called me a Nazi yet though. Where's that dumb thug Roger?
(http://i.imgur.com/BuPQV6f.jpg)
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 01:44:21 AM
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on February 09, 2014, 12:33:57 AM
Is it still a conspiracy when a plurality of the civilized world is on board and actively participating?
Are you being serious here? In reality of course it's a tiny minority that give a flying fuck about Russia's policy toward homosexuals. Entire continents and civilizations have absolutely no sympathy for what radprogs are trying to do there (Africa, the Middle East, much of Asia, etc.). It's really only small cliques within the West and their fellow travellers that push this shit around the world. Do yourself a favor and travel the world, experience non-Western cultures, do some simple math and get a rudimentary grasp of how the vast majority of people outside the Western Progressive bubble actually think.
The point stands. You can't exactly call it a conspiracy when the media is openly reporting on it and the participants are doing absolutely nothing to cover their tracks. You could call it propaganda if you wanted. You could call it astroturfing. But unless your assertion is that the conspiracy is to create the illusion that many people support gay rights(and to what nefarious end?), it hardly seems the appropriate term. And if that illusion has to be created in the first place, I'd say the powers that be have already failed and you have nothing to worry about. The neo-reactionary revolution should be coming any day now, and then you'll have all the kings and traditional values you could ever want.
Posting in troll thread
Hey hey hey now.
Homosexuality is a perfectly valid traditional value. Western civilization is built on homosexuality.
Has anyone else seen the Channel 4 "Gay Mountain" ads that are apparently running? Gold. Solid gold.
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 09, 2014, 05:01:35 PM
Has anyone else seen the Channel 4 "Gay Mountain" ads that are apparently running? Gold. Solid gold.
Oh yes! I love them!
Quote from: Cain on February 09, 2014, 01:03:06 PM
Hey hey hey now.
Homosexuality is a perfectly valid traditional value. Western civilization is built on homosexuality.
This is true, from the ancient greeks who believed that true love could only be between two men(women were for procreation), to the catholic priests who just can't stop touching the little boys.
This gay conspiracy must be more than 2 millennia old!
promoting tolerance and diversity = fascism
kkkkkkkk
He seems to really think he sounds smart. It'd be cute if it wasn't dull.
and now that you mention it.... what does fascism mean to you?
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 10:58:56 PM
Right, this is a misunderstand many people have. They assume that fascism will involve supervillains twirling their mustaches and threatening to exterminate the enemies of the state. In fact, fascism has been progressive in the past, and can be in the future. There is nothing preventing "Rainbow Fascism" that uses exclusively progressive propaganda to control the masses at home and attack enemies abroad. This is why the current form of creeping fascism is so ingenious and successful; because so few people actually recognize it for what it is.
And this progressive propaganda is promoting a radically nationalistic, authoritarian, imperialistic ideology, focused on social conformity and the quasi-religious veneration of the state built on an appeal to romanticised national mythology?
Everything is crypto-fascist because reasons.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 10:34:12 PM
This thread has gotten somewhat off-topic. The main issue at hand is not homosexuality, but the spectacle of a giant corporation spreading global propaganda in coordination with its government. What would your reaction be if Ford Motor Company started placing anti-abortion stickers on every car it sold, simultaneous with a pro-life campaign by a right wing president? Is this one of those situations where fascism is excusable since it's progressive?
If anything, this is an interesting point, though expressed terribly.
Just because we like what google is doing in this instance, are there implications for global corporations making moral decisions and subjecting their users to their views? Isn't this Chik-Fil-A but with a liberal view?
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 10:58:56 PM
Right, this is a misunderstanding many people have. They assume that fascism will involve supervillains twirling their mustaches and violently imposing reactionary policies. In fact, fascism has been progressive in the past, and can be in the future. There is nothing preventing "Rainbow Fascism" that uses exclusively progressive propaganda to control the masses at home and attack enemies abroad. "Tolerance" and "diversity" are just words, like "Volk" and "Reich", that can be used to acquire power. This is why the current form of creeping fascism is so ingenious and successful; because so few people actually recognize it for what it is.
If anything, what i see is a very particular "human rights bashing" on a particular convenient target... i have to explain this.
I personally have done research in the areas of human rights laws regarding children and schizophrenics, and theres a lot of countries that sign and promise to adhere to the Conventions guidelines, but rarely do anything besides the basics of appearance and superficiality to do true systemic changes.
Why do countires promise to adhere to the Convention? 1.- Public representation points in the general political context that adhering to human rights is "humane" "progressive" and "1st worldish"... otherwise the country is perceived as cutthroat retrograde barbarians that deserve to be "democratized" (usually by force) 2.- It facilitates getting loans and economical stimulus.
Now, what im getting to, is that all this bashing of Russia over its homophobia is just opportunistic, because independently of their personal stances on homophobia and support of LGBT rights, they are going to give shit to Russia. "Let the person without sin throw the first stone" yadda yadda yadda
So pro-gay "propaganda" in this case is just ammunition against Russia, its in no way related to white knighting for gays.
Now, does this mean that this is a crypto-fascist attack with an agenda? No. Could it mean that Mr. Nihil needs to learn to express himself with more accurate terminology and with more diverse and flexible semantic systems and explicatory systems of world events? DEFINITELY.
(and take into account that im engaging a particular post in a vacuum, im not involving previous post history, ill let whomever wants to interpret from that scheme do it)
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 09, 2014, 11:46:59 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 10:34:12 PM
This thread has gotten somewhat off-topic. The main issue at hand is not homosexuality, but the spectacle of a giant corporation spreading global propaganda in coordination with its government. What would your reaction be if Ford Motor Company started placing anti-abortion stickers on every car it sold, simultaneous with a pro-life campaign by a right wing president? Is this one of those situations where fascism is excusable since it's progressive?
If anything, this is an interesting point, though expressed terribly.
Just because we like what google is doing in this instance, are there implications for global corporations making moral decisions and subjecting their users to their views? Isn't this Chik-Fil-A but with a liberal view?
I don't really like considering gay rights issues liberal. It might be something liberals are more for, but in general, I give a shit about right and wrong in some way, and anti-gay shit should never be condoned. It should be shit on repeatedly, until it drowns in shit.
Basic human rights and equal protection under the law is in no way comparable to attempts to remove human rights because of personal religious beliefs.
Furthermore, prolifers are fully capable and legally allowed to engage in the practice of not having abortions.
This thread is 169% dildoes.
If anything, google is doing what many companies that aren't run by total fucking retards are doing, which is reaching out to a previously untargeted market with large disposable income.
They are no saints.
But the rest of this argument stems tired, trolling bullshit.
EOS.
I mean, uh, don't mind me. Please carry on taking Brother Nihil seriously.
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 12:36:41 AM
I mean, uh, don't mind me. Please carry on taking Brother Nihil seriously.
Oh, clearly dude is trolling.
I dunno, I think it likely he believes this shit.
Which makes him even more of an idiot, and us all the more stupid for posting ITT. Myself included.
AT LEAST I HAD THE GOOD DECENCY TO BRING SOME WOMP ACTION TO THE TABLE.
Where did you do that? I'll womp off motherfucker. :fap:
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 12:18:26 AM
If anything, google is reaching out to a previously untargeted market with large disposable income.
Alty wins. Everyone can go home now.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 10, 2014, 05:39:11 AM
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 12:18:26 AM
If anything, google is reaching out to a previously untargeted market with large disposable income.
Alty wins. Everyone can go home now.
Also, reverse stupidity is not intelligence.
"Google does bad things, therefore everything they do is bad" does not follow. I mean, this is the classic "Hitler ate sugar" fallacy, right here. It's entirely likely that Google has employees, and friends and relatives of employees, who are gay and angry at the Russian government's clampdown on gay rights.
The actual mechanics of those laws, how they compare to similar laws in other countries, the fallacious association with pedophilia in which they are predicated on and whether said laws are being used as a stick to beat the Russian government with on the international stage in a hypocritical manner (let us recall the position of our close "ally" Saudi Arabia here) are another question entirely.
Would that be the same Saudi Arabia that claims to control numerous terrorist groups in and around Russia?
Just curious because everyone seems to have been shitting themselves about potential terror attacks in between the bouts of homophobia/LGBT activism.
Well, if you trust Putin's word on the matter, yes. It's more likely that wealthy Saudi donors close to the regime donate money to the Caucasus Emirate, who then spend it all on blow and hookers kalashnikovs and semtex, whatever the donors might ask for.
What is amusing is that American intelligence seem preoccupied with an international terrorist attack on Sochi, as illustrated with the recent nonsense about toothpaste on planes. You don't need a plane to get from Makhachkala to Sochi, 12 hours in a car should do the trick. Maybe a bit longer, if a bomb is weighing it down.
But the FSB have it in hand, most likely. Volgograd bomb network's leader had his head blown off 4 days ago in Makhachkala itself. Sochi's stadiums and venues were recent builds, no doubt with security considerations in mind. Various checkpoints, hidden scanners, cameras and infiltration of Vilayat Dagestan mean the games are mostly safe. Always room for error, but I suspect Islamists don't want a repeat of Munich - looked great on camera, but brought lots of negative attention, meant no-one cared when Israeli hitsquads took their revenge. One consequence of pissing off most of the world.
Quote from: Cain on February 10, 2014, 10:44:19 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 10, 2014, 05:39:11 AM
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 12:18:26 AM
If anything, google is reaching out to a previously untargeted market with large disposable income.
Alty wins. Everyone can go home now.
Also, reverse stupidity is not intelligence.
"Google does bad things, therefore everything they do is bad" does not follow. I mean, this is the classic "Hitler ate sugar" fallacy, right here. It's entirely likely that Google has employees, and friends and relatives of employees, who are gay and angry at the Russian government's clampdown on gay rights.
The actual mechanics of those laws, how they compare to similar laws in other countries, the fallacious association with pedophilia in which they are predicated on and whether said laws are being used as a stick to beat the Russian government with on the international stage in a hypocritical manner (let us recall the position of our close "ally" Saudi Arabia here) are another question entirely.
"Russia is getting beaten with the hypocrite stick" i like the sound of it
For more fun, compare Russia's law (minus the odious associations with pedophilia made by public officials) with "Section 28" in the UK.
Not much difference, is there? And note when it was repealed and who opposed it, for some real laughs.
edit
I will say this -- the gay google doodle (now THAT'S a mouthful) gave me pause. I don't want my search engines to participate in politics.
I am disturbed by the ongoing trend of bundling commercial products with unrelated political opinions.
I do not agree with the notion that fighting inequality that denies offers basic rights to one.group and denies it to another due to ideological differences can be written of as simple politics.
This is an issue that affects more than groups of politicians. It affects human beings individually, in deeply personal ways.
That politicians and organizations capitalize on it does not make it less of a personal issue.
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
I think I get what you're saying.
These companies though, they will and have had their own agendas beyond ensuring increased shareholer profits. Many people in charge of these large organizations already do play this game, have been using their resources, which we give them, to further their own pet agendas.
Take Dominoes Pizza. I do not, ever order from there. Not only because it's disgusting, but because their CEO donates heavily to prolife organizations. This was something they do not broadcast on every box of pizza.
But if they did...it would be a hell of a lot easier to pick choose which shitty pizza place I want to order from.
It may be that I just want some god damned cheap pizze without the message that abortion is right or wrong, but the money I spend will fund one of those options, if it is a certain size.
We don't get to have secular, non-involved products. We are at the mercy of those who have the supply, and those meatsack have feelings, and those feelings transform into action. The only difference between now and then is the internet broadcasts this fairly critical information so fast, and somewhat accurately.
You walk into a grocery, you are beset by visible signs of the consequnces of your choice. This choice alredy existed, there are now companies who choose to market with pin-point accuracy and those who choose not to do so.
This trend will continue as long as corporations exist, but it is only removing the curtain, not creating the wizard.
I know people who still order Dominoes Pizza, funding things they are against in a fundamental way, totally ignorant of that fact. Lord knows how many fucked up corporate and personal interest we fund when we turn to a specific station or use a certain soap orwhatever. I would rather know right away, because it is happening either way.
It's fucked up though, I will say that.
I don't want an abortion debate, I want pizza. I don't want a gay rights debate, I just want to find some cheap coconut oil with free shipping. I want to live in a world where our economy is fully dependent on a bunch of coked out, alcoholic gamblers and having unprotected anal sex won't give me the HIV virus.
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 07:41:38 PM
I think I get what you're saying.
These companies though, they will and have had their own agendas beyond ensuring increased shareholer profits. Many people in charge of these large organizations already do play this game, have been using their resources, which we give them, to further their own pet agendas.
Take Dominoes Pizza. I do not, ever order from there. Not only because it's disgusting, but because their CEO donates heavily to prolife organizations. This was something they do not broadcast on every box of pizza.
But if they did...it would be a hell of a lot easier to pick choose which shitty pizza place I want to order from.
It may be that I just want some god damned cheap pizze without the message that abortion is right or wrong, but the money I spend will fund one of those options, if it is a certain size.
We don't get to have secular, non-involved products. We are at the mercy of those who have the supply, and those meatsack have feelings, and those feelings transform into action. The only difference between now and then is the internet broadcasts this fairly critical information so fast, and somewhat accurately.
You walk into a grocery, you are beset by visible signs of the consequnces of your choice. This choice alredy existed, there are now companies who choose to market with pin-point accuracy and those who choose not to do so.
This trend will continue as long as corporations exist, but it is only removing the curtain, not creating the wizard.
That's a good point, and I guess we've gotta distinguish -- companies like Chick Fil A actually give money to anti-gay lobbying. So purchasing Chick Fil A is political, to a degree.
But a lot of these companies revenue is harder to connect to their causes.
Take Nabisco -- got a lot of attention (and probably sales) for waving a flag in favor of gay marriage.
(http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ht_oreo_pride_mr_120626_wblog.jpg)
but you know who they give money to? Mainly republicans. The top recipient of Nabisco money is Rick Fucking Santorum. http://influenceexplorer.com/organization/nabisco-brands-inc/181d3af138f74ba4844cd9d846729f55
And you'll see a similar story with a lot of the politicized brands.
That kind of thing is why I see these high profile corporate opinions as marketing and not activism. We don't want activism, we just want the spectacle surrounding it.
Related: two very good videos on this topic
IdeaChannel: How is Seeing Enders Game a Political Action? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHZyzvLxEpU
Zizek's talk "First as Tragedy, then as Farce" (animated by RSA) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g
Oh yeah, its marketing all the way down, excepting a few instances. It's cheap and it's why I find it so god damned frustrating whenI see people piddle themselves with excitement that JOY OF JOYS someone is finally marketing to ME!
Jesus. they don't care. They want your money! They're sort of legally bound to want your money!
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 10, 2014, 07:54:59 PM
Good, it looks like a few of you are starting to get it. What we're seeing is a massive amount of new ideology being pushed into our culture, as university progressivism infects corporations and governments, producing a level of propaganda that I've never seen before. And of course, this Amerikan "rainbow ideology" doesn't appeal to me, since it is clearly motivated by a power agenda that doesn't favor my kind. The mystery is why many of you aren't similarly threatened by it. This is some incredible sorcery that is being worked upon the Western world, to successfully brainwash people into accepting this level of reality distortion and cultural engineering!
:stfu1:
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
Consumption has always been political. Usually it is more abut avoiding companies which have unpleasant political agendas which they hide from us (like having their products manufactured by Chinese children) but I am personally glad that companies are putting their opinions on gays right out front. All else being equal I'd rather patronize a company that supports gay rights, rather than one that does not and the easier the companies make it for me to make that decision the better for me. That means I am grateful not only to Google, but also to Chik-Fil-A.
Quote from: Pergamos on February 10, 2014, 08:28:10 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
Consumption has always been political. Usually it is more abut avoiding companies which have unpleasant political agendas which they hide from us (like having their products manufactured by Chinese children) but I am personally glad that companies are putting their opinions on gays right out front. All else being equal I'd rather patronize a company that supports gay rights, rather than one that does not and the easier the companies make it for me to make that decision the better for me. That means I am grateful not only to Google, but also to Chik-Fil-A.
But most don't connect what they fund with what they advertise with. They may advertise pro-gay but they will fund a rabid anti-gay politician.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 10, 2014, 07:54:59 PM
Good, it looks like a few of you are starting to get it. What we're seeing is a massive amount of new ideology being pushed into our culture, as university PC progressivism infects corporations and governments, producing a level of propaganda that I've never seen before. And of course, this Amerikan "rainbow ideology" doesn't appeal to me, since it is clearly motivated by a power agenda that doesn't favor my kind. The mystery is why many of you aren't similarly threatened by it. This is some incredible sorcery that is being worked upon the Western world, to successfully brainwash people into accepting this level of reality distortion and cultural engineering!
What, pray tell,
is your kind?
Quote from: :regret: on February 10, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 10, 2014, 08:28:10 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
Consumption has always been political. Usually it is more abut avoiding companies which have unpleasant political agendas which they hide from us (like having their products manufactured by Chinese children) but I am personally glad that companies are putting their opinions on gays right out front. All else being equal I'd rather patronize a company that supports gay rights, rather than one that does not and the easier the companies make it for me to make that decision the better for me. That means I am grateful not only to Google, but also to Chik-Fil-A.
But most don't connect what they fund with what they advertise with. They may advertise pro-gay but they will fund a rabid anti-gay politician.
Like Nabisco in Cram's example. I'm rather surprised that wasn't spread all over the internet by the various gay rights support organizations when they were running their rainbow oreo campaign. Currently I am assuming that they offer same sex partner benefits, since otherwise there would have been an uproar. If they don't then I am, honestly, more disappointed in the pro gay political machine for not pointing out the hypocrisy more loudly. I'm not a dues paying member, but I like several advocacy groups on facebook and it is kind of their job to point out this sort of hypocrisy.
That is precisely why you should never trust any political machine, left/right/upside down, to protect you from corporate interest.
Quote from: Pergamos on February 10, 2014, 08:28:10 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
Consumption has always been political. Usually it is more abut avoiding companies which have unpleasant political agendas which they hide from us (like having their products manufactured by Chinese children) but I am personally glad that companies are putting their opinions on gays right out front. All else being equal I'd rather patronize a company that supports gay rights, rather than one that does not and the easier the companies make it for me to make that decision the better for me. That means I am grateful not only to Google, but also to Chik-Fil-A.
Here's where I think it gets messy -- If I accept that buying a chicken sandwich hurts gays, what am I to make of the
substantially larger amount of money that Chick Fil A gives to charitable and educational organizations? Do I just ignore that because they
also give to organizations I don't like?
I feel like if I'm going to treat brand loyalty as a legitimate form of activism/political participation, it's highly unclear whose politics that chicken sandwich represents. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a product which isn't problematic.
At the heart of it is the power and influence a small handful of people have gained over us. It is symptomatic of the larger corporateproblem.
You are right, Cram, we should not have to make these decisions when buying a chicken sandwich.
the sliver of optimism I have surrounding this topic is that after the political backlash, Chick Fil A revised its donation policies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick-fil-A#Report_of_policy_change).
I hope that CEOs across the board get the message that we want their products, not their opinions. Using your brand to push your politics should come with a heavy price tag. I hope we're moving towards a period where a company's political agenda is very measured because having one is costly.
I guess that's my form of commercial activism - I want to send the message that I resent having my wallet jerked around by my politics while I'm standing in the food court or pasta isle.
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 08:00:06 PM
Oh yeah, its marketing all the way down, excepting a few instances. It's cheap and it's why I find it so god damned frustrating whenI see people piddle themselves with excitement that JOY OF JOYS someone is finally marketing to ME!
Jesus. they don't care. They want your money! They're sort of legally bound to want your money!
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 10, 2014, 07:54:59 PM
Good, it looks like a few of you are starting to get it. What we're seeing is a massive amount of new ideology being pushed into our culture, as university progressivism infects corporations and governments, producing a level of propaganda that I've never seen before. And of course, this Amerikan "rainbow ideology" doesn't appeal to me, since it is clearly motivated by a power agenda that doesn't favor my kind. The mystery is why many of you aren't similarly threatened by it. This is some incredible sorcery that is being worked upon the Western world, to successfully brainwash people into accepting this level of reality distortion and cultural engineering!
[stfu1]
Oh man, the Brother Nihil word-cloud is going to be a FUN one. Nice to see actual discussion happening, tho.
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 08:51:00 PM
At the heart of it is the power and influence a small handful of people have gained over us. It is symptomatic of the larger corporateproblem.
You are right, Cram, we should not have to make these decisions when buying a chicken sandwich.
Mmmmm, welcome to the Aftermath of Memetic Feudalism.
Quote from: Telarus on February 10, 2014, 09:54:36 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 08:00:06 PM
Oh yeah, its marketing all the way down, excepting a few instances. It's cheap and it's why I find it so god damned frustrating whenI see people piddle themselves with excitement that JOY OF JOYS someone is finally marketing to ME!
Jesus. they don't care. They want your money! They're sort of legally bound to want your money!
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 10, 2014, 07:54:59 PM
Good, it looks like a few of you are starting to get it. What we're seeing is a massive amount of new ideology being pushed into our culture, as university progressivism infects corporations and governments, producing a level of propaganda that I've never seen before. And of course, this Amerikan "rainbow ideology" doesn't appeal to me, since it is clearly motivated by a power agenda that doesn't favor my kind. The mystery is why many of you aren't similarly threatened by it. This is some incredible sorcery that is being worked upon the Western world, to successfully brainwash people into accepting this level of reality distortion and cultural engineering!
[stfu1]
Oh man, the Brother Nihil word-cloud is going to be a FUN one. Nice to see actual discussion happening, tho.
Funny thing is I didn't even read that post.
We can never discount a good discussion due to the source.
Bullshit may make the flowers grow, but it doesn't mean I have to set it on my dining table.
Quote from: Pergamos on February 10, 2014, 08:35:30 PM
Quote from: :regret: on February 10, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 10, 2014, 08:28:10 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
My opinion isn't so much about google, or this issue in particular, but the broader trend... The world is a screwed up place, and you'd have a heart of stone if you didn't feel bad about that and want to help. And that desire is very easy to capitalize on - so I'm very wary of products which act as a stand-in for political activism.
People are so eager to express their opinions and identity through consumerism. Look at chick-fil-a, or the rainbow colored oreos that circulated the net after the Prop 8 thing. The market is getting very political. You can't just eat a bowl of cheerios anymore, you have to consume the politics that comes with it. All your brand choices are now considered a form of activism.
Now you're standing there in the super market wondering what your opinion on immigration is. This union of consumerism and politics is a manipulative and effective way to move product and foster brand loyalty.
Right now you don't mind the rainbow google doodle because it's a topic that you agree with. But imagine them using their visibility and brand to push more controversial political opinions. I just want a search engine to deliver the info I'm looking for, I don't want google's editorial along with it.
Look at the memetic kung-fu that Coke did with their America the Beautiful superbowl commercial. They've positioned your preference for Coke in the context of the great american story and turned it into a discussion about racism and culture. You can participate in the culture war by buying coke.
The trend makes me very uncomfortable.
Consumption has always been political. Usually it is more abut avoiding companies which have unpleasant political agendas which they hide from us (like having their products manufactured by Chinese children) but I am personally glad that companies are putting their opinions on gays right out front. All else being equal I'd rather patronize a company that supports gay rights, rather than one that does not and the easier the companies make it for me to make that decision the better for me. That means I am grateful not only to Google, but also to Chik-Fil-A.
But most don't connect what they fund with what they advertise with. They may advertise pro-gay but they will fund a rabid anti-gay politician.
Like Nabisco in Cram's example. I'm rather surprised that wasn't spread all over the internet by the various gay rights support organizations when they were running their rainbow oreo campaign. Currently I am assuming that they offer same sex partner benefits, since otherwise there would have been an uproar. If they don't then I am, honestly, more disappointed in the pro gay political machine for not pointing out the hypocrisy more loudly. I'm not a dues paying member, but I like several advocacy groups on facebook and it is kind of their job to point out this sort of hypocrisy.
Can someone direct me to that Nabisco example? I'm looking but not finding anything.
So...
I'm feeling like there's some pretty faulty logic happening in this thread. I'm still collecting my thoughts on this, but isn't advertising always reflective or embracing of cultural mores, by necessity? It occurs to me that what many of you are talking about is that it makes you feel uncomfortable when some companies embrace shifting social mores, that they likely feel is reflective of the direction their customer base is going in, faster than other companies. I recall extremely similar conversations in the 1980's about the increase in black actors in commercials. At first, the companies that used black actors were "pandering to political correctness" but as time went on, the companies that DIDN'T use black actors became the conspicuous ones. People used to roll their eyes when there were black characters included in sitcoms or women included (as other than ornamentation) in financial or business advertising because it was seen as political manipulation or kowtowing.
Advertising is always going to be part of "culture wars", or what you might accurately call cultural evolution. Jump onto a cultural shift too soon and you're "politicizing your product". Jump onto it too late and you're a fossil, or worse, a bigot.
That's an excellent point.
I have actually heard the idiocy that gay people are all over TV used in the same context as I have heard dumbasses, in 2000's, complain that Samuel L Jackson was in the star wars movies for PC purposes.
What his purple lightsaber means is anyone's gue....
Oh. Oh myyyy.
It definitely helped in the UK. While I'm somewhat wary of some of the ways in the representation argument is deployed (ie; by idiots to harass artists irrespective of the context of their work), the biggest shift in social attitude to gays in the UK coincided with much greater use of gay TV presenters, like Graham Norton, and when soaps included storylines with gay characters. Soap operas are especially good for this because, pointless drama aside, they are mostly vehicles for ongoing social issues and concerns, and tend to reach large audiences.
I mean, homosexuality was socially unacceptable (if legal) in the UK right through to the late 80s. Things like Section 28 and talking about rounding up homosexuals because of AIDS were not exactly uncommon (interestingly, TV helped change the perception of AIDS too). Things changed in the 90s and 2000s for the better, and I'm pretty sure that TV showing Teh Gaze were not some demonic force, but were rather like everyone else, was part of it.
That and Graham Norton is funny as hell. I mean, how can you hate a guy like that?
It depends on what representation TV does too. Ive seen far less "catty gossip hairdresser gays" into now so e representation of basicly "fat and nurturing woman (with a penis)" trope... this last is in reference to this one show with the hot latina married to the father actor from Married with Children.
So TV representation is a not only a mirror of social judgement but a bit of moral guideline for judgements.
Oh yes, absolutely. Negative stereotyping, or even well intentioned but patronising examples can be absolutely horrible, both in terms of artistic quality and in terms of social consequences. I mean, perhaps in America, the Magical Negro trope could be an example of a well meant but patronising positive representation?
But in the case of most of the soaps, they were played by straight actors, they were totally normal people aside from their sexual orientation and usually the plot involved them being unjustly ostracized or punished for their sexuality and overcoming the disapproval of these authority figures. The overwhelming message was of normality.
Did anyone see "the L word" and can commentate how it would apply to the case at hand?
Not seen, couldn't comment.
Also, I'd like to ask why this (http://pando.com/2014/01/16/edward-snowden-demands-press-freedom-for-journalists-who-dont-live-or-work-in-russia/) isn't a greater priority in discussing the villainous Rus Horde:
Quotepro-Kremlin Duma members introduced the latest in a series of harsh anti-terrorism censorship measures: a new packet of laws requiring "websites, content providers, and possibly search engines" to inform on online users to law enforcement upon request. The law will also effectively ban online money transfers between Russia and the outside world, and restrict domestic online transfers as well — bad news for leading US and Russian online payment firms like PayPal, Qiwi and Yandex.Money.
The new anti-terrorism bill is co-authored by Andrei Lugovoi, chief suspect in the polonium assassination of Putin critic Alexander Litvinenko; the bill also authorizes the FSB spy agency to conduct domestic searches of persons and their vehicles inside of Russia, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Just a couple of weeks earlier, on December 30, Putin signed another harsh Internet censorship law co-authored by Lugovoi, granting Russian authorities the power to shut down websites without a court order if the website is deemed "extremist."
Well, I mean, apart from the fact it would draw attention to a) "anti-terrorism legislation" as a cover to suspend human rights, and b) might make Google look like even bigger hypocrites than they already are, given their relationship with the NSA.
Quote from: The Johnny on February 12, 2014, 10:47:56 AM
Did anyone see "the L word" and can commentate how it would apply to the case at hand?
As far as I remember it, it drew in viewers because hot women were getting naked (even the "butch" lesbians were pretty damn femme), but as the series progressed, it became more of a 'clothes on' drama, where people were just trying to get through life the same way anyone else was. So that does sort of fit in with the "normalcy" idea.
Quote from: Nigel's Red Volvulus Skin Sacs on February 12, 2014, 03:43:49 AM
So...
I'm feeling like there's some pretty faulty logic happening in this thread. I'm still collecting my thoughts on this, but isn't advertising always reflective or embracing of cultural mores, by necessity? It occurs to me that what many of you are talking about is that it makes you feel uncomfortable when some companies embrace shifting social mores, that they likely feel is reflective of the direction their customer base is going in, faster than other companies. I recall extremely similar conversations in the 1980's about the increase in black actors in commercials. At first, the companies that used black actors were "pandering to political correctness" but as time went on, the companies that DIDN'T use black actors became the conspicuous ones. People used to roll their eyes when there were black characters included in sitcoms or women included (as other than ornamentation) in financial or business advertising because it was seen as political manipulation or kowtowing.
Advertising is always going to be part of "culture wars", or what you might accurately call cultural evolution. Jump onto a cultural shift too soon and you're "politicizing your product". Jump onto it too late and you're a fossil, or worse, a bigot.
No doubt, marketing and advertising plays some role in these cultural shifts of opinion. It's complicated though.
(and I realize this is getting away from the google rainbow doodle, which is less problematic than the other similar marketing+ethics ventures I'm talking about)
I see it this way -- there is a DEMAND for products which "fix the world". People feel a totally reasonable responsibility to improve the world around them. Companies recongize that and market their products in a way designed to make you feel like your purchase is socially and ethically responsible. They want you to feel like you are fulfilling your ethical obligations to the world around you through your purchase. (there's a South Park episode that comes to mind, where people buy hybrid cars and then instantly get very self-superior and fall in love with the smell of their own farts)
One example that pops into mind is this service that is on the radio all the time around here... It's this grocery discount card that is marketed as helping the environment. Because if you use this card, you don't have to clip coupons. That's the whole reason their branding is 100% about being "environmentally friendly". Why? It's not because customers clipping coupons are singlehandedly destroying the environment. It's not because they give any money to environmental causes. It's just a sales gimmick.
(and why, btw, is the onus of change purely on the consumer rather than on the company producing the waste? It's because
we all know they're only going to behave ethically when it's profitable -- we expect that if people love clipping coupons, the company isn't going to make an effort to stop printing them)
My company did the same thing... an internal survey indicated that most of us want the company to be more environmentally friendly. The response was to give everybody "WE'RE GOING GREEN" mugs (which I guess means we don't have to use paper cups?), and start a "walk to work" campaign. But it was in name only. The reality was that they held a weekly event where groups of employees walk around downtown during lunch while wearing "We're going green!" t-shirts. I'm pretty sure our levels of corporate waste were unaffected, but employee satisfaction went up. All they did was make us FEEL like they addressed the problem.
That Zizek talk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g) I posted upthread says it well, I think... that we should be wary of products which seem to fulfill our "ethical duties", especially when those companies participate in the harm we're trying to address. Zizek gives an example of Tom's shoes, who at one point offered that for every pair of shoes you buy from them, they will give a pair to a kid in some third world country.
If we really squint at it, this is weird. Because those third world country conditions - where 10 year old kids are stitching together sneakers in some sweatshop in the Honduras -- aren't those conditions CREATED by companies like this? They can only give away a pair of shoes because their production costs are so low. Giving kids shoes is charitable, but it does nothing to address the actual conditions created by rampant capitalism. It prolongs the actual problem by being a false remedy. It's like they have included a half-assed apology for what they are doing as part of the price tag.
Nabisco example, quoted for Burns.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 10, 2014, 07:55:46 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 10, 2014, 07:41:38 PM
I think I get what you're saying.
These companies though, they will and have had their own agendas beyond ensuring increased shareholer profits. Many people in charge of these large organizations already do play this game, have been using their resources, which we give them, to further their own pet agendas.
Take Dominoes Pizza. I do not, ever order from there. Not only because it's disgusting, but because their CEO donates heavily to prolife organizations. This was something they do not broadcast on every box of pizza.
But if they did...it would be a hell of a lot easier to pick choose which shitty pizza place I want to order from.
It may be that I just want some god damned cheap pizze without the message that abortion is right or wrong, but the money I spend will fund one of those options, if it is a certain size.
We don't get to have secular, non-involved products. We are at the mercy of those who have the supply, and those meatsack have feelings, and those feelings transform into action. The only difference between now and then is the internet broadcasts this fairly critical information so fast, and somewhat accurately.
You walk into a grocery, you are beset by visible signs of the consequnces of your choice. This choice alredy existed, there are now companies who choose to market with pin-point accuracy and those who choose not to do so.
This trend will continue as long as corporations exist, but it is only removing the curtain, not creating the wizard.
That's a good point, and I guess we've gotta distinguish -- companies like Chick Fil A actually give money to anti-gay lobbying. So purchasing Chick Fil A is political, to a degree.
But a lot of these companies revenue is harder to connect to their causes.
Take Nabisco -- got a lot of attention (and probably sales) for waving a flag in favor of gay marriage.
(http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ht_oreo_pride_mr_120626_wblog.jpg)
but you know who they give money to? Mainly republicans. The top recipient of Nabisco money is Rick Fucking Santorum. http://influenceexplorer.com/organization/nabisco-brands-inc/181d3af138f74ba4844cd9d846729f55
And you'll see a similar story with a lot of the politicized brands.
That kind of thing is why I see these high profile corporate opinions as marketing and not activism. We don't want activism, we just want the spectacle surrounding it.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 09, 2014, 01:44:21 AM
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on February 09, 2014, 12:33:57 AM
Is it still a conspiracy when a plurality of the civilized world is on board and actively participating?
Are you being serious here? In reality of course it's a tiny minority that give a flying fuck about Russia's policy toward homosexuals. Entire continents and civilizations have absolutely no sympathy for what radprogs are trying to do there (Africa, the Middle East, much of Asia, etc.). It's really only small cliques within the West and their fellow travellers that push this shit around the world. Do yourself a favor and travel the world, experience non-Western cultures, do some simple math and get a rudimentary grasp of how the vast majority of people outside the Western Progressive bubble actually think.
Been there, done that. Probably since before you were even an unfortunately escaped sperm. And guess what? You're pretty much dead wrong. People are people, and most people are sincerely interested in bettering their own lives and the lives of those around them, frequently through acts of increasingly progressive (even if that term is relative to the society in question) legislation and social action.
So, y'know, maybe you could shut up now.
When it comes to companies capitalising on some political or social agenda, I get where Cram is coming from but I'm a kinda pragmatic about it. ie - what's the net result? Google tries to increase its company profitability by cashing in on the russia/gay rights issue. Does this raise the profile of a cause that i agree with, amongst a demographic which, potentially might have been unaware? Probably yes. Ergo no harm - no foul.
Like it or not a large number of our fellow earthlings require to be spoonfed their opinions. In lieu of a magical unicorn using fairy dust to change this situation anytime soon, I'm all in favour of the zombies being programmed with some decent opinions for a change.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 12, 2014, 11:15:03 PM
When it comes to companies capitalising on some political or social agenda, I get where Cram is coming from but I'm a kinda pragmatic about it. ie - what's the net result? Google tries to increase its company profitability by cashing in on the russia/gay rights issue. Does this raise the profile of a cause that i agree with, amongst a demographic which, potentially might have been unaware? Probably yes. Ergo no harm - no foul.
Like it or not a large number of our fellow earthlings require to be spoonfed their opinions. In lieu of a magical unicorn using fairy dust to change this situation anytime soon, I'm all in favour of the zombies being programmed with some decent opinions for a change.
:lol:
Now that is cynicism done right!
Quote from: Pergamos on February 12, 2014, 08:09:02 PM
Nabisco example, quoted for Burns.
..........snip.......
I suppose I should have just gone back :lol: thanks! I didn't realize there was a link when I went through the first time.
Sochi/pussy riot related:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26240794
QuoteTwo members of the protest group Pussy Riot say they have been arrested in the Russian resort of Sochi where the Winter Olympics are being held.
Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, who were freed from jail in December, said they had been detained in the centre of the town on suspicion of a criminal offence.
Probably going to get interesting.
No.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 04:50:27 PM
So to recap: Pussy Riot, who is widely despised in their homeland for their filthy antics, travels to the West, meets with many high level bourgeois bohemians and "progressives" (who are clearly sponsoring them in order to undermine Putin), then returns to Russia to attempt further provocations, just as a massive Western propaganda campaign to embarrass Putin at the Olympics has failed miserably.
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/80840a739181c2dca41fdcfc0e7f9a42/tumblr_inline_n0i3q2afLf1rbw4b5.png)
QuoteThis is what the modern West has come to? Declining fast, yet promoting its brand of late Roman cultural decay and crudity around the world, and calling it progress? Does anyone still wonder why the Islamic world, and indeed most of the civilized world, hates you? Have you no dignity, decency or shame left, Western "progressives"?
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/d405341d53b60641a24c3142be8f1446/tumblr_inline_n0i3qcZnfm1rbw4b5.png)
QuoteIf these bitches want to be truly provocative and progressive, why don't they try their antics in a mosque, where the real forces of reaction, homophobia and sexism operate, and see how long they last? Oh that's right, they're Western progressives; they only attack Christians, because they're fucking hypocrites and cowards!
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/0b261934b947f4bb35ad91973942a122/tumblr_inline_n0i3qlVknS1rbw4b5.png)
:mittens: :lulz:
:lulz: :lulz:
I'm just waiting for the follow up picture for when someone bites. :lulz:
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher, and the whole wretched liberal educational system she represented.
(http://i1146.photobucket.com/albums/o526/gifs-gifs-everywhere/tumblr_mh0hppzMwd1qd67m0o1_500_zps1dc39925.gif)
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when, as the best speller in my school district, I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher[,] and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
I know the misspelling was intentional, but those commas really bugged, me.
Quote from: Alty on February 18, 2014, 09:18:08 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when, as the best speller in my school district, I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher[,] and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
I know the misspelling was intentional, but those commas really bugged, me.
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "mispell" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't make mistakes, friend. The last time I did was when I was ten, and I did it
on purpose to terrorise, and subvert the expectations of my would-be oppressors, or parents, who were ignorant servants, of progressive Amerikka.
:lulz:
:lulz:
Quote from: Pæs on February 18, 2014, 09:38:00 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 18, 2014, 09:18:08 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when, as the best speller in my school district, I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher[,] and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
I know the misspelling was intentional, but those commas really bugged, me.
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "mispell" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't make mistakes, friend. The last time I did was when I was ten, and I did it on purpose to terrorise, and subvert the expectations of my would-be oppressors, or parents, who were ignorant servants, of progressive Amerikka.
:lulz:
Quote from: Pæs on February 18, 2014, 09:38:00 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 18, 2014, 09:18:08 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when, as the best speller in my school district, I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher[,] and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
I know the misspelling was intentional, but those commas really bugged, me.
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "mispell" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't make mistakes, friend. The last time I did was when I was ten, and I did it on purpose to terrorise, and subvert the expectations of my would-be oppressors, or parents, who were ignorant servants, of progressive Amerikka.
Genius!
Putin goes full Russian:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26265230
QuoteRussian protest group Pussy Riot have been beaten with horsewhips by Cossacks who are helping patrol Sochi during the Winter Olympics.
Footage shows members of the band, which became famous after performing a protest song in a church against President Vladimir Putin, being beaten.
Police questioned witnesses, but no-one was arrested.
On Monday, two band members were arrested on suspicion of theft at Sochi, but later released.
The footage shows Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, who both served prison sentences for their Moscow church performance, being attacked along with other band members.
A Cossack appears to spray a substance in the face of one of the band members, who were wearing ski-masks.
An officer with a whip then proceeds to attack the band members along with a man with a camera.
Other Cossacks then jump in, punching the band members and throwing them to the floor.
Where to begin. Seriously. Not even going to try.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 01:44:03 AM
The first rule of any conspiracy is that you must always deny the conspiracy -- if that fails, mock or fight anyone who persists.
But thank you for the correction comrade. Of course there's no conspiracy; quoting this charter below a rainbow colored flag on the eve of the Russian Olympics has no political agenda behind it whatsoever. Silly old me for being so cynical!
Tiny Marxists live under my bed. They whisper to me in their jooooooo voices. They are, at most, 6" tall.
If you don't believe me or mock me, you are obviously denying the conspiracy.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 02:43:04 AM
That's the funny thing about it; I lived in Moscow for a year, and homosexuals are under no threat there at all.
:lulz:
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 09:18:11 PM
Right Cain, that's rule #2:
2. Whenever someone brings up the IPC, ridicule them by comparing them to the most outlandish conspiracy theorists around. Always seek to discredit the entire notion of conspiracy as a factor in world events (at least of the Progressive variety -- accusations of a "vast right wing conspiracy" may be given a pass).
Insane Posse Clowns?
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when as the best speller in my school district I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher, and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
Boy I bet that showed them!
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 10, 2014, 07:54:59 PM
And of course, this Amerikan "rainbow ideology" doesn't appeal to me, since it is clearly motivated by a power agenda that doesn't favor my kind.
Everybody hates Nazis, fucker. Everybody.
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 08, 2014, 10:18:13 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 08, 2014, 10:07:01 PM
Oh Joy, it's the idiot racist.
Nice work, you didn't waste any time executing rule #1. I'm a little disappointed that no one has called me a Nazi yet though. Where's that dumb thug Roger?
Right here. Even I'm not on this board 24/7, so I missed your latest appearance. Which is sad, because you are one hilarious little prick.
And I hardly think it's fair to call me a "thug", just because I like to thump on Nazis.
Everyone likes to thump on Nazis. It's why they exist.
Quote from: Pæs on February 18, 2014, 09:38:00 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 18, 2014, 09:18:08 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 09:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jet City Hustle on February 18, 2014, 08:43:31 PM
I just noticed that he misspelled "deacon" in his personal title. He can't even get his soapbox decorated correctly. :lulz:
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "Decon" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't mispell words, friend; the last time I did was in the 6th grade, when, as the best speller in my school district, I intentionally spelled earth "urth" just to spite my teacher[,] and the whole wretched educational system she represented. Death to spelling bees and liberal indoctrination!
I know the misspelling was intentional, but those commas really bugged, me.
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "mispell" is a word I invented -- it's meaning shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't make mistakes, friend. The last time I did was when I was ten, and I did it on purpose to terrorise, and subvert the expectations of my would-be oppressors, or parents, who were ignorant servants, of progressive Amerikka.
Try to be a little more clever (or at least respect those who are). "word" is a spell I invented -- it's purpose shouldn't be hard to guess. I don't make mistakes, friend. The last time I did was when I was ten, and I did it to a
porpoise to terrorise, and subvert the expectations of my would-be oppressors, or parents, who were ignorant servants, of progressive Amerikka.
Quote from: Cain on February 18, 2014, 05:46:58 PM
Quote from: Brother Nihil on February 18, 2014, 04:50:27 PM
So to recap: Pussy Riot, who is widely despised in their homeland for their filthy antics, travels to the West, meets with many high level bourgeois bohemians and "progressives" (who are clearly sponsoring them in order to undermine Putin), then returns to Russia to attempt further provocations, just as a massive Western propaganda campaign to embarrass Putin at the Olympics has failed miserably.
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/80840a739181c2dca41fdcfc0e7f9a42/tumblr_inline_n0i3q2afLf1rbw4b5.png)
QuoteThis is what the modern West has come to? Declining fast, yet promoting its brand of late Roman cultural decay and crudity around the world, and calling it progress? Does anyone still wonder why the Islamic world, and indeed most of the civilized world, hates you? Have you no dignity, decency or shame left, Western "progressives"?
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/d405341d53b60641a24c3142be8f1446/tumblr_inline_n0i3qcZnfm1rbw4b5.png)
QuoteIf these bitches want to be truly provocative and progressive, why don't they try their antics in a mosque, where the real forces of reaction, homophobia and sexism operate, and see how long they last? Oh that's right, they're Western progressives; they only attack Christians, because they're fucking hypocrites and cowards!
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/0b261934b947f4bb35ad91973942a122/tumblr_inline_n0i3qlVknS1rbw4b5.png)
:lulz:
Sochi over and as such no one is really paying any attention to goings on inside Russia.
http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-opposition-figures-charges/25276568.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
QuoteTwo of Russia's leading opposition figures, Boris Nemtsov and Aleksei Navalny, have been sent to jail on charges of disobeying police during an unsanctioned public gathering.
Nemtsov, a former deputy prime minister who is currently a lawmaker in Yaroslavl Oblast, was sentenced to 10 days in jail, while Navalny, an outspoken Kremlin critic and blogger, received seven days in jail on February 25.
The two were detained along with more than 400 others on February 24 for participating in a protest near a court in Moscow, where seven participants in a 2012 anti-Putin protest on Moscow's Bolotnaya Square received jail terms of between 2 1/2 to four years on charges of rioting and assaulting police.
Sentences for the other protesters are pending.
Amnesty International condemned the activists' arrests, saying their detention indicated that "the Russian authorities' rampant violation of freedom of expression and assembly shows no sign of letting up."
The population of Siberia is looking at a large increase this year.