Google is on the Wrong Side of History.
Google continues to show us why it chose to abandon its old motto of “Don’t Be Evil,” as it becomes more and more enmeshed with the military-industrial complex. Most recently, Google has removed four key points from its AI principles. Specifically, it previously read that the company would not...
You're viewing a single thread.
Literally every publicly owned corporation that is at the mercy of shareholders is on the wrong side of history.
As this shit gets normalized, watch all of them fall in line.
Apple is already back advertising on X.
Corporations only care about money, and they will change their values to match what makes money.
They never accepted women, blacks, latinos, LGBTQ+, and the disabled into their ranks because they thought those people were humans who had intrinsic value just for existing.
No, they accepted them because they knew they were leaving money on the table. They could market shaving to women to increase razor blade sales, because now women employees would have money to spend. They could market hair care products to the black community because now their black employees would have money to spend.
It was always about expanding markets and finding more people to sell shit to. Once that stops being profitable in the USA, treating those people like humans will stop. Watch it happen with the disabled and LGBTQ+ first.
It was never just Rainbow Capitalism, because this shit literally goes all the way back to Women's Suffrage and the Civil Rights eras. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Corporations just reflect the values of their owners. There are companies that emphasize things other than revenue, but as soon as a company goes public and becomes controlled by Wall Street, profit becomes their sole motivation
This is why the stock market was, fundamentally, a trojan horse. It was created so capitalism could intertwine the peoples wealth and retirement funds to the success of the wealth of the oligarchy, making the entire market too big to fail.
Now the entire system is designed to prevent damage to companies, no matter how moral, unethical, or criminal. The success of corporations IS treated as equal to "national security".
In the end, the stock market is a natural logical progression from the starts of capitalism, and the situation we are in today is again closer to capitalism logical conclusion
From capitalism's basic principles, profit above literally everything was always bound to happen. Just how evolution happens through natural selection. It's a similar process. Because ultimately capitalism is an economic system built on competition, not cooperation.
Yup, but most people have savings or some kind of pension, both are often put into the stock market by the bank or pension fund to give us the interest we want.
We need to try and exercise more of our power as stakeholder in these companies, in the end we still have the power to not use products from these massive corporations. Stop order from shit like Amazon, but go and order from smaller stores, switch search engine and browser, etc.
Capitalism is amoral
EDIT: to be clear that's A-moral not IM-moral
No ethical consumption under capitalism, yep.
Leave such takes for .ml, please.
Unfortunately alternatives aren't any better...
Your right.
Change is difficult so we should just give up.
Man too bad all I've got to eat is this cyanide. Those cookies over there? Don't you know how unhealthy those are?
Socialism is cyanide and capitalism is cookies. The former will kill you instantly, the second one long-term (diabetes etc.) – what we're looking for is fruit and vegetables, but for now I'm more than glad to eat some cookies.
Frankly, the problem with socialism (and with anything else, for that matter) is that it takes one high-up enough asshole to ruin things for everyone.
Then again, I have little-to-no proposals to counter your argument, so I guess it's back to cookies and diabetes for us
They very much are, there's just little to no political will to implement them
They could market shaving to women to increase razor blade sales, because now women employees would have money to spend.
That makes zero sense. Paying people so they can spend a tiny fraction of it back to your company? Why not just keep the money in the first place?
No, they hire them because they've run the math and realized it costs less to hire them than that it costs them in sales due to public perception.
You might need to pause and think a bit more. Corporations are competing for money. There isn’t just one big pile of money somewhere.
