This Is the Age of the Coward
This Is the Age of the Coward
The Age of the Coward is here, where America’s most powerful corporations, once eager to preach their values, now fold like cheap umbrellas at the first gust of political wind.
“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.”
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
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.
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.
I personally have been boycotting Nestle for almost 2 decades
And yeah there's times i slip or didn't realize that something is a nestle product but it's certainly possible to do it, without getting amishly extreme about it. But it's possible to do even if it's only as much as you can.
But i think your counter argument is a little flawed, not entirely. In spirit i do follow what you mean but i think you also changed the argument as well.
Boycotting everyone won't work, but i think it's important to pick you battles like any form of activism.
And while there are evil entities that should be burned down root and all and salted for good measure, they are a different breed of problem that should also be fought.
Boycotting is a tool, and some tools need to be used carefully to make anything useful with then, and that's where we seem to differ.
Taking a brand that is so iconic and ending it the way to go. Making them fill the void is a goal worth pursuing, it says watch the fuck out, this can happen to you.
Ending apple, or Disney, would scare the every living shit out of anyone who chose to fill that void, and it will pay dividends to all of us.
I don't expect it to happen, but it would be incredibly effective to do no matter how inevitable that void was filled.
Im sure this is full of holes and im not explaining well, wish we could grab a drink and discuss this, think we would enjoy exploring where we align and where we diverge
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.
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.
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.
Businesses will never willingly support the minority at the expense of the majority. They will always cater to the largest immediate profit margin
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.
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.
HeShe used PBS as an example of a "corporate behemoth". I stopped reading at that point.Yeah I like a lot of her writing, but this just doesn't sound accurate.
That said, I think PBS does have some cultural clout. So it would be nice to see them take a hard stand against these anti-DEI measures. Obviously there's only so much they can do, since I'm pretty sure they're publicly funded. But IMHO better to go down in a blaze, than bend the knee.
EDIT: I kept reading. The rest of the article is pretty good. Especially the part about Tim Cook.
I saw some other critiques in this thread but admit I recognize the site and did enjoy previous articles. I should have given this one more of a chance perhaps. But I do using the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would have been a better choice if going to use them as an example. And yet they are indeed publicly funded and a non-profit. It's kind of the antithesis of the point she was trying to make. They were also established and still funded by the federal government so in their survival interest to not go against Trusk/Mump
But I perhaps am not thinking about this correctly and have facts wrong.
It's a modern day worldwide religion .... the religion of money. It only exists if we faithfully attend church every week or every day and pray to the gods of finance and hold everlasting faith to the almighty dollar. Our churchs are the banks, ATMs, restaurants, stores, malls and online shopping sites we see every day. Our membership cards carry our prayers in our credit and debit cards. Once the brethen lose faith in any part of it, the whole organization starts to fall apart.
We've always been like this. 3,000 years ago it was a golden calf. Today it's the little numbers counting which god is winning or losing on a stock market website.
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.
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)
Unpopular opinion, but a company removing their DEI policies as to not pick a legal battle with the US government is not the problem, assuming their actual hiring practices are not really changing. If Google from now on only hired straight, white people, it would be detrimental to them for missing out on a huge pool of talent and they know this. If all they are doing is removing diversity requirements from writing and canceling black history month pizza parties (which face it no one really cares about celebrating culture at the workplace), then essentially nothing has changed and they can roll all this back in 4 years.
... on the other hand, Apple advertising on X is coward shit. 💩
assuming their actual hiring practices are not really changing
Why on earth would anyone paying even the slightest bit of attention assume that?
If Google from now on only hired straight, white people, it would be detrimental to them for missing out on a huge pool of talent and they know this
Even with DEI they still hire more straight white men than any other group, and they do so because they don't give a shit about the talent they might be missing out on because they don't consider marginalised people to be as talented in the first place, that's literally how white supremacy along with other systems of oppression function, and they aren't something that is just happening now, they are literally what America and capitalism are founded on.
You think Google, Meta, and all those silicon valley companies in CALIFORNIA are going to stop hiring Indian and Asian engineers because they don't have an official DEI policy anymore? Really? Do you even know who Google's CEO is?
The majority of IT applicants are straight white men, so even completely unbiased hiring practices would result in mostly straight white men being hired for IT positions. You can argue about why that's the case (societal norms, socioeconomic factors, etc), but it has nothing to do with corporations that hire based on merit.
Companies aren't your friends.
Defining an age while it's happening is the same mistake as trying to define a generation outside of an historic context. You either use arbitrary boundaries to define the category, or you wait for a historical context to define boundaries and categories under. We're in the ages of glass, plastic, misinformation, cowardice, social networks, corporations, etc. You have no idea what the defining characteristics will be to history until you are looking back from the next category or epoch.
This inaccurately presupposes that the execs running Disney and Meta don't simply genuinely want the changes they're making and are happy that Trump gave them an excuse.