this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
421 points (98.2% liked)

collapse of the old society

1133 readers
1 users here now

to discuss news and stuff of the old world dying

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“The brazen hypocrisy staggers the mind. Disney, which commands a market cap larger than the GDP of many nations, can't find the courage to even wait for court challenges? Meta, which regularly boasts its power to connect billions, suddenly can't muster the strength to defend its own policies and users? These aren't businesses making tough choices – they're paper empires run by moral cowards—simpering, whimpering, and weak.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ShareMySims@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

These aren’t businesses making tough choices – they’re paper empires run by moral cowards—simpering, whimpering, and weak.”

How desperate to hide from reality can someone be??

These are the most powerful people on the planet making perfectly reasonable decisions for their own benefit, because that's literally the only thing they've ever cared about.

The idea that corporations and the people who run them should be "brave" and stand up against the very system that enables them to exist, or somehow give a single fuck about society at large, otherwise they're "cowards" (and not simply self serving oppressors) is so far beyond absurd, it's actually enraging at this point.

[–] PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

While I disagree with the usual joke that says "corporations are people," I do think they represent the people who run them. In modern USA, our big companies are infinitely more powerful than our government, and it seems like SOME of them should be putting up a fight, standing up for their queer employees, Hispanic customers or at least the Palestinian family members of the board. Literally no one with real power is opposing this fascist takeover, and it fucking disgusts me. Companies are jumping at the chance to appease orange Hitler, and all struck down their gay pride policies before even being ordered or threatened. I guess somehow I was naive enough to hope that Starbucks or Patagonia or Target would pretend to resist the erasure of queer people, or even just push the oppressors into a courtroom before kneeling down to lick their spray tanned boots. This is America. Land of the cowards.

[–] ShareMySims@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

our big companies are infinitely more powerful than our government

The big companies ARE your government. Wtf do you think "lobbying" is? Who the fuck do you think funds both your parties? (Hint: It's bribery and billionaires, respectively)

and it seems like SOME of them should be putting up a fight, standing up for their queer employees, Hispanic customers or at least the Palestinian family members of the board.

Why the fuck would they?

Because they used pink/green/crip/whatever wash for a few days each year to fool you in to believing they care? They don't. Never have.

Companies exist to make profit, as long as appropriating marginalised peoples' struggles and pretending to care made them money, they kept the mask on, now it no longer does, nor do they have rules like (what they would consider) that "silly" DEI keeping them from openly discriminating and maintaining the white supremacist cis-heteronormative ableist patriarchy they still openly favoured even when the rules were in place. Bending the knee to fascism (which capitalism will always decay in to precisely for this reason) will ultimately be much more profitable for them - the billionaires who own the companies (the companies are just a shell, that they will drop for a bigger one. Prison labour? Deportation camp labour? Slave labour? They're already here, and are about to have a growth spurt) in a fucking flash.

Literally no one with real power is opposing this fascist takeover, and it fucking disgusts me.

Literally anyone with real power under capitalism is fascist, or at least dedicated to maintain the the capitalist system that leads to it, what the fuck did you expect?

Companies are jumping at the chance to appease orange Hitler, and all struck down their gay pride policies before even being ordered or threatened.

Welcome to pinkwashing, queers have been telling you for decades that rainbow capitalism is a mask and a trick you shouldn't fall for.

Also maybe consider doing some research in to war and other oppression, see how motherfuckingly eye-wateringly profitable it is.

I guess somehow I was naive enough to hope that Starbucks or Patagonia or Target would pretend to resist the erasure of queer people, or even just push the oppressors into a courtroom before kneeling down to lick their spray tanned boots.

I'm sorry, but that is beyond naive, that is wilfully out of touch. These companies, the government, and capitalism itself have been telling you all along who they are, and those who they oppress have been scream it forever, it was all there for you to see and hear, but you chose not to, probably because it was more comforting to believe the lie, and marginalised people couldn't possibly be right with our "cynicism".

This is America. Land of the ~~cowards~~ corporation.

FTFY.

These people are not cowards, and the longer you continue to frame them as such, instead of as the intentionally oppressive individuals, and their machine, that they are, that machine will continue to chug along uninterrupted.

The idea that corporations and the people who run them should be “brave” and stand up against the very system that enables them to exist, or somehow give a single fuck about society at large, otherwise they’re “cowards” (and not simply self serving oppressors) is so far beyond absurd, it’s actually enraging at this point.

[–] PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah thank you for that 12 page rambling. Essentially you just confirmed every single point in my original post. As I already stated, I'm under no illusions that corporations are people. It just sucks seeing them all fold under a month into our fascist dictatorship with literally no pressure on them.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Sorry what's the joke about 'corporations are people'?

[–] drthunder@midwest.social 2 points 5 days ago

Mitt Romney was a corporate raider before getting into politics. He ran for US president in the 2012 campaign, and in 2011 he told some hecklers that "corporations are people, my friend" and it's been clowned on ever since, even though the government treats it as true when it benefits corporations.

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

Companies aren't your friends.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

demonstrating that their much-touted values have all the staying power of a Snapchat message.

Does this author need help spelling "DUH?" Given that she managed to find her way to a keyboard, it seems impossible that she doesn't know corporate flags wave in whatever direction the current wind happens to be blowing. It makes perfect sense that the same companies that wrapped themselves in rainbows and Black Lives Matter banners are now kowtowing to nazis - unless she's dumb enough to think corporate gestures are ever sincere or genuine.

[–] isles@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

An author is writing to an audience, and surely you can't be surprised that there are larger-than-desired groups of people who actually do think corporations can act morally?

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world -3 points 6 days ago

You're right, there are people who think corporations have morals, or that Donald Trump was sent by God to save us, or that the Earth is flat. That doesn't create a standard that praising such articles is the Right Thing and criticizing them is the Wrong Thing.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why attack one of the few journalist (?) author (?) actually calling the bullshit of corporations when the rest of them are just toeing the line and licking the boot?

This is literally why nobody cares about the common good, it's incredibly thankless

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world -2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Because this thread is about this article by this author, and because people have been calling bullshit forever. Which makes them feel like they've actually done something when they haven't. "B-but it's raising awareness!" No it's not, it's just blowing off personal steam.

You know what's incredibly thankless? Caring enough about the common good to personally send out thousands of postcards urging Dems to vote, and seeing 10 million of them who voted for Biden in 2020 decide not to show the fuck up to vote for Harris in 2024. Because Genocide! Funny how nobody's talking about the ceasefire that took effect a couple days before Fuckface took office, which the Biden admin had been helping to negotiate during the election while pouty little shits were folding their arms and standing on their righteous moral pedestals and calling them nazis. Don't even try to lecture me about thankless.

[–] CaptSpify@lemmy.today 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I always find it very telling when people get mad at those who decided that they couldn't stomach voting for genocide, instead of getting mad at the party that ran on a pro-genocide platform.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Letting perfection get in the way of good is much more common among liberals than conservatives, who are more like "whatever, my team is my team". This gives conservatives a political advantage, and so does the more recent popularity of angry hardline moral absolutism among liberals. If every sin or misdeed is permanently unforgivable, you run out of saints very fast.

[–] CaptSpify@lemmy.today 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I feel like "funding a genocide" is a far cry from "letting perfection get in the way of good". Not backing a genocide seems like a pretty low bar to expect from a political party.

Additionally, I think liberals have long had a long history of "whatever, my team is my team". Did you see them during the last few campaigns? All I heard the entire time was "Vote Blue, No Matter Who", despite their canditates and policy being absolutely terrible.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Refusing to help stop a dictator because it would mean stepping down off your morality pedestal seems like a much lower bar to me.

And as I've pointed out and NOBODY ever addresses, while the Biden admin was being called genocidal nazis they were helping to negotiate the ceasefire that went into effect a few days before Li'l Shitler took office thanks to the people who refused to vote for Harris. But go ahead and pat yourself on the back and give yourself a gold star. The world thanks you for being a better person.

[–] CaptSpify@lemmy.today 1 points 4 days ago

Nobody addresses is because it was obviously bullshit. If he wanted to get a ceasefire in place, he had plenty of time to do it. Instead he chose to dick around and keep funding the genocide.

You can be mad all you want about people chosing to stand by their morals, but that seems like mis-directed anger. Why not get mad at the Pro-Genocide party instead? They could have easily won this election, but chose Genocide and Billionaires instead.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 64 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Unpopular opinion warning.

The real cowards are the masses who don't stop bitching about these entities and then keep on using them. You are enabling them and you are not just missing the ring, you are gagging on their chode

Want to talk about courage?

Stop buyng Apple.

Stop buying Disney and anything it produces.

You can start with whatever you have now being the last you will ever have.

Burn all your socials and go out until the world around you with the people around you.

Take your power back by sacrificing the convenience they provide you.

Do this in enough numbers and they will cease to exist. And if it takes 25 years to accomplish it, so be it.

Start today

[–] PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

It's easy and realistic to boycott one shitty company that supports Nazis. It is literally impossible to convince enough people to stop buying from every single company that has kissed king Orange Fantasy tiny little ring. You can't boycott everything, and literally none of them are putting up a fight, because they aren't interested in becoming a corporate martyr.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

People view boycotting as if enough homework will find them the fabled Free Market Unicorn©️, with sparkling udders they can ethically consume from to their hearts content.

Guess what: your coffee and chocolate are slave labor all the way down. Nestle owns all your water and 6 media conglomerates get your entertainment money no matter where you swipe your credit card.

But do you actually need to make those purchases in the first place? There's nothing other than habit, comfort, and convenience keeping you from cutting most of it out of your life. It makes the ethical calculus so much easier.

Of course, how much austerity you can stomach in your modern life is a personal threshold. But every dollar you don't spend is a dollar less to our corporate overlords. You could even donate it to a worthy cause for double the satisfaction (if you care to do that homework...)

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Exactly that's exactly what I'm saying

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I agree that's the way to resist corporate control, but I wouldn't really call people brave for changing their shopping habits. Maybe if they actually face some kind of hardship - like if they stop playing Steam games instead of bitching about Steam - [shudder OMG NOT THAT!]

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Ah the ol' "you can't participate in a society you gave criticisms about".

"Don't like capitalism? Stop buying things."

"Hate fossil fuels? Don't use transportation or electricity which relies on it."

"Hate slavery? Manufacture your own clothes."

"Don't like the country? Move away."

Even just social media is a sort of must today. It isn't, not really, but neither is a car or buying things if you really get down to it.

But for like a teenager, social media is pretty much a must. We can all pretend it isn't and how brave it is to be against the mainstream and do your own thing but you might feel a twinge of regret 20 years down the line when you have little to no relationships.

It's easier to use the things, complain about them, organise and change them, then it is to change them via expecting everyone to make the same personal choices. There's clearly something worthy or interesting about the systems. So let's just try to take out/regulate whatever makes them shit.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Ah, the ol' strawman approach - argue with a ridiculous version of what somebody said instead of what they actually said, which in this case was don't buy from companies you object to. Seems pretty straightforward and not at all stupid like move to a different country or stop using electricity. No need to be a dick.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

That's trivial when youre boycotting a single company that isn't relevant for some large industry, but try boycotting some large fossil fuels company.

You simply can not trace back the origins of all the products you use which have employed petroleum products at one point or another in the manufacturing process.

Being a moral consumer is legitimately impossible.

If you managed to have enough money to buy yourself a bit of land and built literally everything by hand, then perhaps you might avoid contributing to capitalism, but unless you plan to abandon literally all modern conveniences and hand-forge plumbing for your outhouse, it's not going to work.

It's not a strawman when there isn't a version of the argument that isn't hard to attack. I just steel-manned the argument and it still doesn't work.

Seems pretty straightforward.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You proved it's impossible to be a completely ethical consumer, but did you prove that it's necessary to be a consumer at all? Or that all volumes of consumption are equally culpable?

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

consumer, but did you prove that it's necessary to be a consumer at all?

Depends on how you define it

In 1906, Alfred Henry Lewis stated, “There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy.”

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Personal consumption accounted for 68.8% of US GDP in at the end of 2024, an all time high. Granted, ~45% of that is very hard to cut back on (healthcare, insurance, housing).

But even still, a drop of 10-15% would be devastating. If you could organize it, you could even skip payments on the big ticket services. Everyone skipping a month of bills at the same time would do serious, recession-level damage.

It's not a direct fix for our problems, but you can play serious economic chicken when most of the economy flows through your wallets.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Yes, you can influence the system while participating in it.

My point exactly.

You can't completely isolate yourself and boycott everything that should be boycotted, and it's not gonna be even marginally as effective as if a large group of people boycott a specific thing. Focus the economic power of many and you get results, instead of individually trying to boycott every single thing.

[–] madjo@feddit.nl 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Stopped my Netflix, Amazon Prime, Audible, Spotify, Disney accounts.

Stopped buying at Amazon.

Closed my instagram accounts. Was already permabanned on X-twitter.

I can't do much more than that.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

My point is being missed it seems.

It's not that im saying we can just stop. Being part of society, but, that if we can pick the right target, a target that will say send the right message, then boycotting something as a united front, and sticking to it, ending that one thing, if its the right thing, will do a lot of the heavy lifting, so you dont have to cancel everything that you are willing to use as long as its worth it

There isnt anything wrong with liking things and wanting those things, but they also arent needed.

I used 2 examples. Apple and Disney, because i think those 2 are good targets for the message ending them would send.

Apple is the first company to cross the Trillion Dollar worth. (IIRC)

they had products built in factories that literally had to put nets around them to stop people suiciding themselves due to the conditions they work in. Its modern slavery if not worse.

Ending that company BECAUSE they are worth so much sends a strong message that that level of success will not be tolerated any longer. But the sacrifice is that we cant let them come back to us. And if we simply repeat for everyone else that crosses the same threshold, while still showing that it isnt that we dont like the industries they belong to, we will need to be diligent in saying, NO you have too much you are cancelled.

Disney is different but they are so iconic. They are a culture that has grown like a cancer.

And many of us have strong emotional memories of their IP

Saying we reject you because of what you have become, inspite of our attatchment to them, will send the message that we dont need you if this is what you have become.

Not sure if this helps, but its not about trying to ignore the world, its about making a united effort and sending the right message.

[–] madjo@feddit.nl 1 points 6 days ago

And I'm saying, I'm already doing my part.

The only thing I can't quit, is my phone, kinda need one in today's society. And I chose not to support Google, (and I've been swindled by Sailfish in the past) so went with an Apple device.

[–] Wolf314159@startrek.website 40 points 1 week ago (5 children)

In spirit I totally agree with you, but that kind of strategy just doesn't work anymore. Boycotting Apple is relatively easy. Boycotting Disney is a little harder, unless you're already a pirate, but not impossible. Then there's companies like Nestle, arguably worse than any of them. Companies like Nestle, Johnson & Johnson, Kraft, Coca-Cola, and Pepsi are so diversified, with so many subsidiaries and shell companies spread the world over. It is damn near impossible for the average person to boycott Nestle in any meaningful way.

Network graph of major subsidiaries or global food and drug corporations.

Go ahead and try to boycott just one or two of the corporations in this image. Boycotts may still impact specific brands at a local level, but they have become pretty ineffective against corporations.

All of the boycotts in the world can't beat the apathy rotting away the foundation of democracy. Boycott one company or brand and another will step in to fill the political void. Apathy keeps young voters out of the voting booths in local elections. These companies have a vested interest in convincing you that your vote doesn't matter and that government regulation is ineffective. It's a lie to keep you apathetic and disinterested in politics because your vote is the only part of the system they can't directly influence.

[–] _BIFF_@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Not to be a dick, but it looks like it's easy to boycott 90% of that picture by just not being an unhealthy person

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This made me double check. Ahem

Tide? Dawn? Cheer? Gain? Cascade? Gillette? Charmin? Tampax? Crest? Oral B? Vicks? Duracell? This list is hardly exhaustive, especially because a lot of times the discount brands that you buy are made in the same factory, same supply chain, different box, so in some cases, you're still paying P&G even when you buy the off brand. AND THIS IS JUST PROCTOR AND GAMBLE, AND IT'S PROBABLY NOT EVEN A FULL REPRESENTATION OF THEIR PORTFOLIO AT THAT.

[–] _BIFF_@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Can't even remember the last time I bought any of those brands you mentioned. Maybe Gain. I might have a box of dryer sheets I barely use because it makes my clothes feel weird.

Also I'm Canadian, so lately I've had my phone out while shopping to make sure the umbrella company of anything I buy is at least a Canadian investment giant, or preferably not and I pay more for less if it means supporting local

EDIT: gum! I definitely buy gum without thinking about my purchase impact

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 3 points 6 days ago

Don't worry, some of them are a different brand in Canada.

Just like how half those brands on the lists are different brands in the EU.

You may have bought from the same company, rebranded more than you know.

That doesn't even get into the fact that generic brands and sometimes smaller brands often use the same factories as big brands but pay them for production time (butter is notorious for churning out 5 different brand labels on the same production line)

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

Okay, fair enough

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cheeseandkrakens@lemmy.blahaj.zone 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Businesses will never willingly support the minority at the expense of the majority. They will always cater to the largest immediate profit margin

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

I think I get where you’re going, but more accurately…

MAGA are a minority. The thing business support is profit. In this case, via sucking up to those in power.

And being considerate of racial minorities and gender minorities doesn’t cost the majority any expense. Regardless of the lies GOP and Fox “News” want us to believe.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

An out of control executive branch can destroy their company and they know it. What do they have to gain? Nothing. What do they have to lose? Everything. Of course they will fold.

[–] lewdian69@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

~~He~~ She used PBS as an example of a "corporate behemoth". I stopped reading at that point.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sorry, but the idea that powerful corporations ever had values is naive to the point of stupidity. The only value that ever mattered to these corporations is the one sitting in their bank account and the fact they used to pride-wash once a year implying they had values is bizarre. They've not folded, they're just following the profit.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It's literally illegal for these publicly traded companies to do anything that would be detrimental to their shareholders. The guy in oval office is telling them there will be consequences for not following his EOs (ie: lowering shareholder value). There's not any decision to be made here (not that they aren't laughing to the bank either way)

load more comments
view more: next ›