The Annals of Corporate Cringe and Woke Marketing

[LordsFire]

Yeah, well your interpretation is meaningless, because that's not what your all powerful courts have said. Look at OSHA, FBI, EPA, other federal agencies enforcing standards. So no the 10th amendment is not as clear as you think it is, also the government building and running a factory is not exactly a power that it enforces on citizens, the government is allowed to own property, it has national parks there is nothing in the constitution that says it can own parks but it does.

I'd be fine with having National Parks handed over to the states.

And no, it doesn't matter what 'all powerful courts' have said. The law is plainly written, they've just refused to respect it. This clearly matters in what effective law becomes, but this is not a good thing, it is an evil thing.

Most of the directly governmental woes in the Fed come from the rejection of limited government and refusal to respect constitutional law.

As for your second argument, maybe the products they make will be substandard. That does not matter the quality of goods are not a constitutional issue. You are free to buy better quality products from private companies, the free market will ensure that those companies will stay afloat if the products the government makes are completely useless.

Except that the government subsidizes the cost of its product at the taxpayer's expense. Then you end up with the government producing a car with 80% the quality of the privately-produced equipment, at 200% the actual cost, but selling it at 50% of the cost, thus both sabotaging the private sector and wasting money at the same time.

Sure, the sufficiently-wealthy will pay the premium for better cars, but the middle and lower classes will increasingly be forced to settle for inferior products they can 'afford' while the government wastes their money.

Because then people can sue the government directly it is much easier to hold the government to task. Because right now you can't sue a company or the government to enforce the platform/publisher rule because you don't have standing. But if the government bans you for your politics you would most definitely have standing.

And here's the real crux of the problem, you have a perception of accountability that has zero connection to reality.

Let's take a current very real and very tangible example of a government organization handling a major concern, the CDC, and the handling of the Coronavirus.

Has it been competent? No.

Has it been effective? No.

Has it been destructive? Yes.

Has the CDC (particularly through Fauci) actively lied to us? Yes, and that has been directly admitted.

Has anyone in the CDC been held accountable, arrested, fired, even been put on paid administrative leave for their offenses? No.


Government bureaucrats are the next-best thing to untouchable. Are you even aware of the IRS scandal during the Obama administration, how they systematically targeted conservative political groups under Lois Lerner, and not a single person was jailed for it, or even fired?


Conversely, when it comes to the private sector, you can generally just stop doing business with a company if you don't like what they're doing. Sure, the effect of one person getting off Twitter or Facebook is very small, practically insignificant, but that is a greater effect than we've had from all the congressional hearings on the CDC, on the IRS under Lerner, etc.

Further, outside of a couple very specific tech monopolies (where again, the government is already failing to enforce the law), you can take your business to someone else in the same field, and help build up an alternative to whatever scummy organization. Over time, this builds the competitor up, and gradually tears the bad actor down.

And most importantly, personal freedom is not violated in this process. I think Facebook, Apple, Youtube, etc, have behaved in such scummy ways that everyone should be jumping ship to alternative platforms. But my will is not being dictatorially enforced, each individual gets to make their own decision where to host their content, and where to go to look for and watch content.

Unlike the ATF, FBI, CDC, etc, who have committed massive, gross offenses very publicly over the last half-century, and have only continued to grow in power and influence, rarely even having individual members censured, fired, or jailed.

Where was this 'much easier to hold the government to task' when Ashli Babbitt's shooter was 'cleared of any wrongdoing?

Why are the political prisoners from the January 6th riots still in jail?

Why have the Epstein/Maxwell records been sealed, rather than a new mass of trials for people who went to Epstein's island been started?

Why hasn't the DA who pushed false charges against Kyle Rittenhouse himself been imprisoned?

Why did Biden get away, and still continue to get away with, with his clear corruption in the Ukraine and with China?


At least in the private sector, when a company is behaving horrendously, some people will move to an alternative. When the government monopoly business is behaving horrendously, you're stuck with what you've got.

 

[Sobek]

They do that shit piracy would come back so hard it wouldn't even be funny.

 

[King Arts]

The same thing that stops the government from just buying cars on the free market and giving them away. Or just giving people money to buy cars. It would be just a fucking expensive exercise in taxpayer's money giveaway, except with extra steps that more likely than not would be fucked up and result in a crappy car on top of the aforementioned issue.
Many governments in the world did, or still do similar things, the problem is that the price and quality of resulting products is usually not so good.
As @LordsFire said, after the fall of Iron Curtain its not the westerners who were trying to replace their cars with imports from state owned car manufacturers in the east, but very much the other way around.
Point in case:

You do realize there is a differance between can't and won't right? We spend hundreds of billions on our Armed Forces, note that a specefic ammount is not specefied in the Constitution, so if Congress voted on it, they could cut the Military budget by half and it use that money for almost anything they want. Now obviously they won't do that, it would be a bad idea for them to do it also, but it's not illegal, or against the constitution.

Also that's called dumping, and its kinda illegal, definitely not within the bounds of what is considered fair competition.

Some countries have laws against dumping. However that is nowhere in the constitution, and if congress can get a majority to pass a bill to give everyone free shit, they also have enough to repeal that law, or carve out an exception to the law for that specefic thing, it's only a problem if it violates the constitution because to change THAT you need not just a simple majority but 2/3's of congress in both houses AND of the states. But a simple budget bill a simple majority would work.

I'd be fine with having National Parks handed over to the states.

And no, it doesn't matter what 'all powerful courts' have said. The law is plainly written, they've just refused to respect it. This clearly matters in what effective law becomes, but this is not a good thing, it is an evil thing.

Most of the directly governmental woes in the Fed come from the rejection of limited government and refusal to respect constitutional law.

Ok, you would be ok with it, your interpretation is not realistic. And it has never been the majority interpretation even at the begining of the nation. Do you know when the supreme court became "all powerful"? In the lifetime of the founding fathers, it was a compromise, you oppinion is wrong, and modern conservative oppinions are worth shit if they can't change it and just meekly obey it.

Except that the government subsidizes the cost of its product at the taxpayer's expense. Then you end up with the government producing a car with 80% the quality of the privately-produced equipment, at 200% the actual cost, but selling it at 50% of the cost, thus both sabotaging the private sector and wasting money at the same time.

Sure, the sufficiently-wealthy will pay the premium for better cars, but the middle and lower classes will increasingly be forced to settle for inferior products they can 'afford' while the government wastes their money.

Again this is a practical objection. It may be true but it does not matter, you are saying that the government doing something is a bad idea, but something being a bad idea does not make it unconstitutional. There is no provision in the constitution where the government can't do the wrong thing.

And here's the real crux of the problem, you have a perception of accountability that has zero connection to reality.

Let's take a current very real and very tangible example of a government organization handling a major concern, the CDC, and the handling of the Coronavirus.

Has it been competent? No.

Has it been effective? No.

Has it been destructive? Yes.

Has the CDC (particularly through Fauci) actively lied to us? Yes, and that has been directly admitted.

Has anyone in the CDC been held accountable, arrested, fired, even been put on paid administrative leave for their offenses? No.


Government bureaucrats are the next-best thing to untouchable. Are you even aware of the IRS scandal during the Obama administration, how they systematically targeted conservative political groups under Lois Lerner, and not a single person was jailed for it, or even fired?


Conversely, when it comes to the private sector, you can generally just stop doing business with a company if you don't like what they're doing. Sure, the effect of one person getting off Twitter or Facebook is very small, practically insignificant, but that is a greater effect than we've had from all the congressional hearings on the CDC, on the IRS under Lerner, etc.

Further, outside of a couple very specific tech monopolies (where again, the government is already failing to enforce the law), you can take your business to someone else in the same field, and help build up an alternative to whatever scummy organization. Over time, this builds the competitor up, and gradually tears the bad actor down.

And most importantly, personal freedom is not violated in this process. I think Facebook, Apple, Youtube, etc, have behaved in such scummy ways that everyone should be jumping ship to alternative platforms. But my will is not being dictatorially enforced, each individual gets to make their own decision where to host their content, and where to go to look for and watch content.

Unlike the ATF, FBI, CDC, etc, who have committed massive, gross offenses very publicly over the last half-century, and have only continued to grow in power and influence, rarely even having individual members censured, fired, or jailed.

Where was this 'much easier to hold the government to task' when Ashli Babbitt's shooter was 'cleared of any wrongdoing?

Why are the political prisoners from the January 6th riots still in jail?

Why have the Epstein/Maxwell records been sealed, rather than a new mass of trials for people who went to Epstein's island been started?

Why hasn't the DA who pushed false charges against Kyle Rittenhouse himself been imprisoned?

Why did Biden get away, and still continue to get away with, with his clear corruption in the Ukraine and with China?


At least in the private sector, when a company is behaving horrendously, some people will move to an alternative. When the government monopoly business is behaving horrendously, you're stuck with what you've got.

Again because conservatives are feckless cucks who let the left infest those institutions. Conservatives if they were smart would purge those institutions of proto commies and put their own people in. Because the modern cuckservative is the biggest sell out they claim the govt. has no legitimacy and yet still obey "yes officer."

 

[LordsFire]

Again because conservatives are feckless cucks who let the left infest those institutions. Conservatives if they were smart would purge those institutions of proto commies and put their own people in. Because the modern cuckservative is the biggest sell out they claim the govt. has no legitimacy and yet still obey "yes officer."

As opposed to you, who is just straight-up a leftist?

I have a better idea, and so have plenty of other conservatives. Purge those institutions of proto commies, commies, and every single employee, then just shut them down.

Much simpler and cleaner.


Also, your argument on constitutionality devolves to 'the constitution says whatever I want it to say,' at which point it is not a law at all, just an old bit of paper on which some meaningless lines are scribbled out.

If clear-cut simple phrases mean in the highest law of the land mean nothing except what the whims of the social elite say, so do the lesser laws in the land. At which point there are no functional laws, just the whims of the social elite.

That is not a healthy way to run a society.

 

[King Arts]

As opposed to you, who is just straight-up a leftist?

I have a better idea, and so have plenty of other conservatives. Purge those institutions of proto commies, commies, and every single employee, then just shut them down.

Much simpler and cleaner.


Also, your argument on constitutionality devolves to 'the constitution says whatever I want it to say,' at which point it is not a law at all, just an old bit of paper on which some meaningless lines are scribbled out.

If clear-cut simple phrases mean in the highest law of the land mean nothing except what the whims of the social elite say, so do the lesser laws in the land. At which point there are no functional laws, just the whims of the social elite.

That is not a healthy way to run a society.

See this is what I mean by a loser cuckold mentality. You say we have to keep following the same plan that leads to failure or we become leftists. I don't care, my religion is not capitalism or communism. When capitalist policies work, I believe in implementing them, if socialist policies work in some situations we should use them.

As for your idea of purging them and ending them. That's unrealistic people say let's do it and never follow through. If they try it would end up as a big fight. It's easier to just put loyal people in charge and subvert those institutions.

As for your arguments on the constitution it is unworkable and radical, a healthy society is one that is stable not trying radical solutions just because you think you know what the constitution actually means and the simple meaning of the words is accurate.
Tell me out of curiosity are you a protestant what type evangelical or Baptist?

 

[WolfBear]

Intel has apologized to China for complying with US laws regarding slave labor used to make electronics, and for asking for their suppliers to avoid goods manufactured in Xianjang via forced labor of Uyghers. They've reassured China it is not Intel's stance, but rather just them being forced to do so by the US.

Intel is latest US company to apologize to China while pushing social justice at home

Intel has apologized for discouraging suppliers from doing business with China's Xinjiang region, after a letter published on its website sparked backlash from a Chinese state-run publication and social media users.

www.foxbusiness.com

Breakingviews - Intel’s apology underlines China dilemma

U.S. chipmaker Intel is the latest multinational company to struggle with the geopolitics of doing business in China. The $207 billion technology group had to say sorry to defuse a social media backlash in the People’s Republic after telling suppliers they could not use products or labor from...

www.reuters.com

However this shouldn't be taken as a sign they aren't still big on social justice, it's just that taking a stance against slavery isn't part of that platform. But they're still anti-racist so don't worry about that part.

Newsroom Home

Intel Newsroom home page

newsroom.intel.com

This sort of reminds me of any Indian Brahmin in the US or any other Western country who supports BLM while at the same time also supporting Dalit (low-caste Hindu) oppression, including in the West:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/10/27/indian-caste-bias-silicon-valley/

How Big Tech Is Importing India’s Caste Legacy to Silicon Valley

Graduates from the Indian Institutes of Technology are highly sought after by employers. They can also bring problems from home.

www.bloomberg.com

California's Legal Ground in Battling Caste Discrimination Takes Centre Stage in Historic Cisco Case

The California government used sections of the Civil Rights Act, which emerged out of the struggle against segregation, to file a lawsuit on grounds that a Dalit had been discriminated against by his 'upper' caste supervisors.

thewire.in

Explosive report reveals caste discrimination in Silicon Valley, 30 Dalit engineers call out Indian bosses

A few weeks after a case was filed against Cisco by the State of California alleging caste-based discrimination at the company, an explosive report has highlighted how Indian engineers in the US are still practicing caste biases.

www.indiatoday.in

Advocacy Group Fights India Caste System Discrimination in Silicon Valley

Santa Clara County's Human Rights Commission is tackling the thorny issue of caste discrimination in education and on the job in Silicon Valley.

sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com

Silicon Valley Has a Caste Discrimination Problem

Dalit Indians working at U.S. tech companies tell VICE News they try to hide their identities to avoid caste-based discrimination they thought they had left behind.

www.vice.com

It seems that the Woke Left doesn't care that much about certain minorities, such as Asians and Uyghurs, who are probably considered white-adjacent anyway, and only really cares about poorly-behaved blacks and, to a lesser extent, poorly-behaved Hispanics. It's almost as if the Woke Left really loves the concept of the Noble Savage:

Noble savage - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Successful conservative blacks and Hispanics, such as Thomas Sowell and Glenn Loury, are, of course, conveniently ignored by the Left unless they ever need a conservative token black or Hispanic.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Why is it that all of the Ethno-White Nationalists on this forum seem to share a disdain for the Constitution, capitalism, embrace Communist ideals. Oh and the kneejerk talking point of calling anyone who disagrees with them variations of the term 'Cuck' because they "lose" unlike the Ethno-White Nationalists who've done such a bang up job espousing their ideals and advancing their arguments in the public sphere over the past seventy years or whatever.

The assumption, especially from those of the Left, is that there is some common ground between Conservatism and the Ethno-White Nationalists but from the discussions on here it clearly doesn't seem to be the case. Maybe there's commonality with whatever one defines as populism or the "reactionary" right but most the time it's White Nationalists winging about right wing spaces because no one else is giving them the time of day anymore which I guess is an ironic twist of the 'Paradox of Tolerance.'

 

[King Arts]

Why is it that all of the Ethno-White Nationalists on this forum seem to share a disdain for the Constitution, capitalism, embrace Communist ideals. Oh and the kneejerk talking point of calling anyone who disagrees with them variations of the term 'Cuck' because they "lose" unlike the Ethno-White Nationalists who've done such a bang up job espousing their ideals and advancing their arguments in the public sphere over the past seventy years or whatever.

The assumption, especially from those of the Left, is that there is some common ground between Conservatism and the Ethno-White Nationalists but from the discussions on here it clearly doesn't seem to be the case. Maybe there's commonality with whatever one defines as populism or the "reactionary" right but most the time it's White Nationalists winging about right wing spaces because no one else is giving them the time of day anymore which I guess is an ironic twist of the 'Paradox of Tolerance.'

I demand you retract your statement. I am not a white nationalist.
How about you don't casually call other people racists.

 

[WolfBear]

This is another example of Woke logic:

Smithsonian Race Guidelines: Rational Thinking & Hard Work Are White Values

A graphic displayed in the guidelines, entitled "Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness in the United States," declares that rational thinking and hard work, among others, are white values.

www.newsweek.com

Timeliness and hard work are now officially white values. "Oh, he's half an hour late for a job interview? Don't worry! He's black!" The idea that he can't simply set his clock half an hour ahead is simply radical!

 

[WolfBear]

I demand you retract your statement. I am not a white nationalist.
How about you don't casually call other people racists.

I'm not a white nationalist either. I would eagerly prefer a Based minority to a Woke white, all else being equal.

 

[Husky_Khan]

I demand you retract your statement. I am not a white nationalist.
How about you don't casually call other people racists.

Bro I didn't call you racist.

Referring to ones arguments as that of Ethno-White Nationalists and calling someone racist are two different things... Reference:

You can be ethno nationalist and still Christian. Ethno nationalism is not the same as racism or Nazism.

Umm ethno nationalism doesn’t require racial purity. I doubt there even is such a thing.

Ethno nationalism has very little to do with skin color. Russians and poles are both white yet are different ethnic groups.

See never accused you of racism.

Glad you agree with the sentiments I expressed on everything else though.

 

[King Arts]

Bro I didn't call you racist.

Referring to ones arguments as that of Ethno-White Nationalists and calling someone racist are two different things... Reference:

See never accused you of racism.

Glad you agree with the sentiments I expressed on everything else though.

You said ethno WHITE NATIONALIST. White nationalists are racist. You can argue my posts there are supportive of Ethno nationalism but even then over there I did not support or rebuke it, simply said that ethno nationalism is not racist.

 

[LordsFire]

I demand you retract your statement. I am not a white nationalist.
How about you don't casually call other people racists.

How about you don't casually call people cucks?

See this is what I mean by a loser cuckold mentality. You say we have to keep following the same plan that leads to failure or we become leftists. I don't care, my religion is not capitalism or communism. When capitalist policies work, I believe in implementing them, if socialist policies work in some situations we should use them.

I don't know if you could actually even identify what free market policies are, given you seem to think that socialist policies actually work sometimes.

 

[Sobek]

Maybe he is mistaking protectionism policies with socialism?

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Just imagine a magical world where "bullying" someone on XBox means the liquidation of your thousands of dollars worth of games in the Steam Library.

Xbox Boss Wants Cross-Platform Bans for “Destructive” Conversations

A report reveals Xbox boss Phil Spencer wants cross-platform bans to be standard, in the hopes of shutting down “destructive” conversations.

nichegamer.com

I've learned that you can't really talk to just anyone online anymore. I hardly ever talk to anyone in FFXIV because the chat rules are very draconian and it seems people nowadays are fragile as snowflakes. Only crack jokes behind closed doors with friends you trust.

 

[Zachowon]

Or get on COD or Battlefield

 

[Sobek]

Call of Duty seems to be at least trying to keep the flames burning

 

[King Arts]

How about you don't casually call people cucks?

You are right, I don't think I called you that, I just said republicans in general. But I did not mean to imply you are a cuck. If you felt I called you that, I apologise. But I want an apology from husky for implying I'm a white nationalist.

I don't know if you could actually even identify what free market policies are, given you seem to think that socialist policies actually work sometimes.

Free market policies are where the government does not interfere in aspects of business, or the economy. Socialism is the opposite it's various regulations, or government entitlements or benefits. Most of the time the government should not micromanage the economy I agree with this people will unconsciously self organize in such a way that market equillibrium will be achieved, call it the "hand of the free market" if you wish. But sometimes the government needs to get involved if it wants to achieve certain things, or if it wants to provide certain services like roads, police, firefighters, etc.

Maybe he is mistaking protectionism policies with socialism?

protectionist policies are socialistic. Anything that is not An Cap free market anything goes is some form of socialism, now obviously there are levels of socialism free police protection and firemen (paid by taxes) is a type of socialism very small, same goes for hospitals, but then you can go into extremes where the government owns almost everything and it decides quotas on what to be produced that's extremist socialism aka communism.

 

[Marduk]

You do realize there is a differance between can't and won't right? We spend hundreds of billions on our Armed Forces, note that a specefic ammount is not specefied in the Constitution, so if Congress voted on it, they could cut the Military budget by half and it use that money for almost anything they want. Now obviously they won't do that, it would be a bad idea for them to do it also, but it's not illegal, or against the constitution.

You have no sense of scale and didn't do the math either.
Let's assume a cheap government car costs 20k a piece.
If we only issue one of them to every driver's license holder, that's about 230 million cars.
230m x 20,000 = 4.6 trillion dollars.
The whole military budget would take 7 years to pay that.

Some countries have laws against dumping.

And the WTO. And all sorts of other economic treaties USA is in, like USMCA could also be an issue. And the government may get sued for damages by auto industry.
At minimum this move would get everyone else to put massive tariffs on car exports from USA.

 

[WolfBear]

Interesting that Woke corporations who previously said "We need more diversity and equity" are now in fact being asked for proof that their efforts in regards to this are actually working:

Companies that declared solidarity after George Floyd killing may be 'woke washing,' shareholder advocates warn

A year after the murder of George Floyd, and the subsequent wide-ranging corporate reaction that included public commitments to racial justice and equity,...

www.marketwatch.com

Also, the Woke corporate CEOs who previously celebrated BLM thugs are now sad that their profits have shrunk as a result of BLM's mass rioting and looting:

CEOs Of Corporations That Bent The Knee To BLM In 2020 Beg Congress For Help With Black-Fueled Retail Crime Surge | Blog Posts

Earlier: "Be Brave, Do Something"—Ashley Rae Gol...

vdare.com

It's almost as if coddling thugs doesn't actually work and only encourages them to misbehave even more! Who'da thunk?