SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"Amid this global movement to end anti-Blackness, we credit these companies for answering our call swiftly and taking a clear stand for what's right so we can hold Facebook accountable for its racist policies," said Rashad Robinson, president of Color of Change, which is one of the groups organizing the boycott.
Almost 100 firms have joined the boycott so far, Robinson said, adding: "Facebook has a decision to make: adopt a civil rights infrastructure or continue to see key advertisers dropping from its platform."
[...] Most recently, the tension between Facebook and the content its users share has come to a head due to messages posted by President Donald Trump and his re-election campaign in the past month, amid nationwide protests in support of Black communities and against police violence. Twitter in late May took action against a Trump tweet by appending a warning that it glorified violence against protesters, in contravention of the site's rules. Facebook, however, took no action against the same content, and the company took heat from both civil rights advocates and employees over that choice.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 27 2020, @06:23PM (19 children)
Why feed the competition? When you can 'look good' doing it too.
They did not buy AOL because they had good tech, or Yahoo. They bought their ad networks. Anything else was gravy, to be sold off, or shut down. They made that 100% clear in internal meetings when they did it.
Mark my words. These Marxists do not have your best interest in mind. They are using the voice of purity to crush your throat. https://archive.org/details/AlexanderSolzhenitsynTheGulagArchipelagoVolume218 [archive.org] If they get in charge no one is safe. You can be erased from existence just because you said the wrong thing. The police state they will create will make the current one look like people playing with soft fluffy bunnies.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Sulla on Saturday June 27 2020, @07:51PM (6 children)
Its gonna be a fun ride. Marxists push for Corporations to do their bidding, they do it for good PR, Marxists win, Marxists behead the boards of those same corporations. Win win
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 27 2020, @08:21PM
Democrats push for Republicans to do their bidding, they do it for good PR, Democrats win, Democrats "behead" the Republicans in the press. Win win
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pe1rxq on Saturday June 27 2020, @08:49PM (1 child)
It is always funny to hear americans talk about marxists, communists and socialists. You really have no fucking clue what those words mean.....
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @03:40PM
Sorry, we weren't taught much about politics or economics in our slave schools. Good thing we have our sophisticated Dhimmi cousins in Europe to tell us how stupid we are. When they're not too busy letting their own kids get beat, maimed or killed by North/Sub-Saharan Africans or kidnapped and sold for sex by Pakistanis all why sucking the treasonous government's ass.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @12:30AM
Naah man, this is just the free market working itself out.
This is the exchange theory of value in action. Demand is way down. The exchange theory of value can be a bitch some days.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Spamalope on Sunday June 28 2020, @02:13AM
"Marxists push for Corporations to do their bidding"
The name for that is fascism. Where the state controls the corp through its board instead of nationalizing it...
Less efficient than capitalism, but far more than socialism and you can save by cutting consumer goods and putting unproductive folks in work camps.
I'm not a fan of any brand of authoritarianism...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @04:40AM
Pretty funny how the Republican language changes. The insulting names you make up for your political opponents keeps changing and I figured out why.
The rightwing narrative has to maintain interest. Throwing new labels on the same repetitive propaganda pieces makes them seem like new threats. It also allows them to more easily skip past the previous stories which did not result in the supposed end of the world.
"Marxist" is the new label that makes the covidiots feel smart like dem derrr academics.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Saturday June 27 2020, @08:27PM (11 children)
I don't know why you're calling them Marxists. Either you've never read Marx, or they are using the term to describe themselves inaccurately, for unknown reasons.
Marxism is not the only totalitarian philosophy. When it comes to corporations working with government the term you want is fascist. (See B. Mussolini.) When it comes to corporations taking over from government that's a form of anarchism...one that has few supporters considering it's success. I suspect, though, that it would quickly degenerate into warlordism...another form of anarchy, which tend to turn into monarchism which turns into an aristocracy which tends to turn into feudalism. That last one seems to be pretty stable. It's as if things can't get worse.
OTOH, perhaps advanced mechanism has made one or the other of those transitions infeasible...or at least not worth the effort. I wish I could believe that.
That said, bureaucracies tend to turn into aristocracies without the intermediate steps. China repeatedly went through cycles of warlordism->bureaucracies->aristocracies->warlordism. Some times the Emperor on top of either the bureaucracy or the aristocracy was more than a decoration, but much of the time, that's all he was.
There are probably other repeating patterns in human civilizations. I'm not sure they're any more desirable. India with no history, no respect for truth, and a rigid caste system is one example. Buddha tried to break out of that one with at best modest success. (Buddhism was more successful outside India.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Saturday June 27 2020, @08:57PM (6 children)
Marxism in its original form isn't a totalitarian philosophy either. For instance, in his commentary on the Communist Manifesto, Marx's BFF Fredrich Engels specifically states that communism is totally compatible with democracy, and that the simplest way to achieve the goals of communism in countries with democracy is for the lower classes to realize they're a majority and vote for their own best interests.
And in many democracies, that's already happened to a substantial degree, which is why millions of people live in highly developed countries with guaranteed freedoms similar to the US Bill of Rights, along with all-but-completely socialized health care and education system and representation on corporate boards of directors for low-level employees (possibly with a union) and the public and the government as well as shareholders. Not a complete "dictatorship of the proletariat", but definitely a system that has substantial Marxist influence and ideas, and also substantially better results by a lot of measures than the (allegedly) unfettered capitalism of many other countries.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 27 2020, @10:37PM (3 children)
The "dictatorship of the proletariat" is not totalitarian?
Then those that survive just sit around a campfire singing kumbaya in a perfect utopia. Happens every time!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday June 28 2020, @12:46AM (2 children)
Who is the proletariat? A significant majority of the population.
Who is supposed to be in charge in a democracy? A significant majority of the population.
And yes, Engels did advocate violent revolution ... in countries controlled by monarchies and totalitarian regimes. Revolt against Czar Nicholas or Emperor Franz Josef is a very different position than advocating the violent overthrow of, say, Boris Johnson.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday June 28 2020, @01:08AM
Well that's the nice thing about countries with democratic systems. Why bother violently overthrowing Boris Johnson when you can simply get people to vote him out of power? In a totalitarian regime, you don't have that option.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @02:26AM
The idea of a democratic socialism has existed since the days of Babeuf but it's now primarily promoted by the bourgeois. There's a real problem with too many "elites", over-educated and entitled people for whom no social roles exist. These are the people pushing Marxism and they're openly hostile to the proletariat - "go pull down a statue but don't dare open a business". Is violent revolution by the proletariat against the bourgeois Marxists justified?
(Score: 2) by The Vocal Minority on Sunday June 28 2020, @03:55AM
Pray tell which countries are these Marxist paradises of which you speak? I suspect you are referring to Social Democracies that are in no way Marxist and are built upon thriving free market economies (Australia, Canada, many European countries). Socialised healthcare and education hardly a Marxist make, the concept of state education goes back at least as far as Napoleon.
I've seen this trick played multiple times here and you need to stop doing it - you are attempting to legitimise a thoroughly discredited ideology which led the the murder of a magnitude more innocent people than any other in the 20th century.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 30 2020, @03:47AM
"Similar". Forcing representation on corporate boards is already a violation of the freedom of association, an implicit right of the First Amendment. And there are other problems with freedom than merely undermining the "guaranteed" parts. For example, the existence of a universal public education system in the US has resulted in remarkable institutional resistance to private education as well as a degree of indoctrination. And socialized health care creates several avenues for control of health information to the ability to withhold medical care.
These systems work as long as you're in control. When you're not, it's more levers of power to use against you.
In that, they're voting against the best interests of many other parties, such as the lower classes of the future. It's better that they don't get what they want rather than ruin the future of their societies.
"Allegedly".
You're not paying attention here to the things that make highly developed countries so. Eat the seed corn and you lose next year's crop. Obsess more over the publicness of education and health care, and less over its effectiveness, will result in systems that don't do what you want.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Sulla on Sunday June 28 2020, @12:45AM (2 children)
I call them Marxists because thats what some of the CHAZ types have been calling themselves, I have read Marx and while a special few are possible Marxists I think the vast majority are just authoritarians. I agree with everything you said. Either way, its fun watching corporations bend over backwards for the same people who will destroy them next.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @08:07AM (1 child)
You're idiot, mon cher.
Let's recap
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 30 2020, @03:50AM
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 28 2020, @05:31PM
They call themselves Marxists. It is their own words. You can go no further than watching the founders of these groups say it out of their own mouths and praise murders. Murders who basically quadrupled Hitlers high score. Either they are ignorant or maliciously evil. Both are scary.
I call them what they call themselves.
Take for example Nazism, Communism or Facsisim. They rarely disagree on the methods of 'seizing the methods of production'. They also all 3 disagree on who will be in charge after the aftermath. I have studied all 3. All come from the root tree of 'marxisim'. All pretending they will get it right this time. All of them end in blood shed and putting the boot on the necks of the very people they espoused to liberate. All of them.
You have also built a hallucination of a form of government then attacked it. Then espoused that this is what (I?) wanted?