Eh, in a way. Libs are a huge block of the population who do the whole consooming. Not even Netflix expects hordes of black people watching some slow ass show about some queen seething and girlbossing zoomed in.
So sure, there is some mid-looking black girl on the cover, but it's not targeting mid-looking black girls as the main audience. It's for white liberals, who want to feel virtuous.
Also, just the fact they THINK it will make them money doesn't necessarily mean it will happen.
With the beer, stop looking for logic, the campaign was thought up by some horsefaced jewish girl who thinks she has superpowers to change the world because she was a 8/10 in the kibbutz.
Libs are a huge block of the population who do the whole consooming.
Not even the libs actually consoom this shit in the same numbers they would if it were unmolested.
We have seen this pattern unfold in everything. We saw it ten fucking years ago when they started covering up female videogame characters and hitting them with he ugly stick, adding queers into everything, etc.
The shitlibs who call for their sensibilities to be catered to barely buy the stuff they demand. It still gets bought mostly centrists and cuckservatives too addicted to CONSOOMING to stop, even when they hate what they're being fed. They learn to tolerate ever-shittier product until they're playing games full of rainbow tranny BLM faggotry and 'just ignoring it, bro. It's only cosmetic, who the fuck cares? It doesn't effect the game.'
We see the same shit in Warhammer. The calls for female space marines, the demand for more non-white face sculpts and paint jobs on the box art. You can't find a squad box of space marines or IG minis without black guys on the box these days, and SoBs are pushed harder in the marketing than ever before.
Does it translate into GW stores full of women and non-whites? Of course fucking not! The hobby is still 99% male, 99% white, and I would guess upwards of 70% what the media would meaninglessly call 'far right'.
Bud Light is canned piss; everyone knows it. Their brand has been in decline for years, not just because it's piss, but because there's a perception that it's piss.
So they're losing customers but they don't want to lose even more; the ones they can count on are the ones who base their identity off their beer brand and are the kind of people who hate change, regardless of the fact they're literally drinking piss. Those die hards aren't going anywhere, they'll just act like they were always pro-tranny.
So they need new customers, people who will drink piss if it means their identity is validated; that's trannies. Even with the boycott (maybe especially because of it), there will be tons of trans people now virtue-buying bud with lime and literally anything AB feels like selling them.
And it doesn't even matter if it's bad for their health because the average tranny life expectance is like 28.
Both probably are true. I know Bud Light is the best selling beer but with microbrews and IPAs on one side and hard seltzers on the other there is no way they aren't getting squeezed out from both sides. They are diversifying into other markets either with new products or acquisitions.
In case you don't remember, I'll go over this a bit again. The entirety of HR, Advertising, and PR is purely Leftist. There is no part of HR which is right-wing, centrist, Liberal, or even center-Left. All 3 industries are entirely captured. For the past 5-10 years, the entire HR industry, without exception, states explicitly that racial, ethnic, religious, ability, neurological, and sexual diversity are the only ways for these companies to make money. They have plethora of "studies" on it. Every single expert in the field will tell you the same thing: diversity = profit.
Then on top of that, they say that Zoomers are 100% Leftist, and vote very explicitly around politics. If you want any Zoomer to buy any product, it better have an inclusivity statement feature on the box, or you might as well not sell it.
Then, on top of that, the people at the top of these PR, Ad, & HR institutions are DIE zealots, themselves. They will actively seek to seize control of the company and centralizing all marketing, recruiting, and retention opportunities to their individual departments with no oversight or quantitative measurements. They will not accept outside input from leadership or other departments, especially regarding compensation and recruitment. They will not tell people why or if a marketing program is working; just whether or not they need more money or a lot more money. They will not allow for other departments (like IT, accounting, legal, etc) to make retention or recruiting decisions on their own. Those departments will never see potential hires without HR giving a DIE color swatch test first. Those departments will not be allowed to promote without HR deciding whether or not the equity balance of the department is jeaporidized by that promotion. Those departments will not be allowed to give raises before HR decides to close the "pay gap". Those departments will not be able to fire people before HR, and especially DIE, run consoling session after consoling session, advocate a dozen trainings, and basically run interference against all of the worst employees so long as those employees are of the correct demographic make-up. Those departments might suddenly find that an incorrect demographic employee who violates a rule might start being aggressively consoled before that department's leadership takes any steps at handling the situation in-house.
Then on top of that, they know to use activist institutions externally to their advantage. PR and Advertising used Twitter to cultivate bots and journalists to heavily popularize anything DIE, and condemn anything not DIE. If HR wants to justify seizing all control of compensation, pay disputes are leaked to the press, a hit piece is manufactured on the media, 1000 Leftists on Twitter screech, and a DIE organization offers to help mediate the dispute (in favor of HR having full control). Not only do you get 'hate-bombed' on social media if you step out of line, but if you walk the line: you will get 'love-bombed' for your "brave" stances, and be rewarded with positive attention.
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
Oh, and I almost forgot. These HR departments regularly do ideological excursions for senior leadership. They literally target senior leadership and send them on a "Diversity Training Session" to extremely wealthy and luxurious accommodations where they begin grooming them on Leftist ideology, and make book requirements.
So when these zealots tell corporations that DIE is the only way to make money going forward; these corporate leaders absolutely believe them because there is not a single dissenting voice that they are aware of.
Working in HR for a time (not anymore, thankfully), I can assure you, right-wingers do exist in it.
And they want diversity! Because those eye-gougingly bad diversity initiatives that everyone hates? They reduce employee cohesion, lower employee faith in each-other, and hinder cooperation. This means less unionization, weaker unions if they do form, with less bargaining power. And without unions, it leads to less talking about their wages and less negotiating for higher salaries, complete with a built-in excuse to not give raises or better salaries: Sorry, but our diversity quotas say we can't give you that raise or it throws them out of whack.
There are numerous studies on it. It's very reliable. Fastest way to break employee cooperation is to yell out lefty words at them, ideally from someone who seems like they should be their ally.
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
Just how many people did Bernie Madoff swindle again?
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
And has that happened in either case?
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
But there's no hope for people like you so keep doubling down to save face on something so simple that anyone with half a brain can see it.
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
Is this not at odds with the implication that billion dollar companies are so smart and wouldn't make the wrong decision? Or is the idea that all of this, including them backing down, is part of their grand plan?
Y'know, it's amazing how many people will like and share the Stone Toss meme, "Are you sure this will help sell more burgers?," and understand that it has nothing to do with making money and everything to do with pushing an agenda, but then go and actually question whether replacing Whites with Blacks and putting a Tranny on Budweiser beer is actually them believing that they would make money and it was "capitalism in full effect."
FFS, have y'all not learned ANYTHING or are you just trolls/shills?
I'm honestly done debating this. What a fucking waste of time.
it has nothing to do with making money and everything to do with pushing an agenda
Hmm, has anyone here argued against that? In the meme the guy pushing the interracial ad is the subversive. He's not the one running the company. Of course in real life he doesn't actually reply to questioning with "Burgers?" but strongly convinces the people running the company that it WILL make them more money in the long run.
You're getting tripped up on the subtle distinction between the corporation as a whole and the horsefaced bitch who pulled the trigger on that retardation. I dont have any doubt at all she was out to push an agenda. I have plenty of doubt that this entire debacle is all part of some grand plan by Bud Light. Funnily enough this distinction is also present in the Stonetoss analogy you brought up lmfao.
And how was it pushed exactly? The people who'd agree already agreed, and the people who hated it become multiplicatively enraged about the entire tranny nonsense. Many of whom were likely uncaring prior simply because it didn't effect their bud, race, wrestling lifestyle. Demographically, there aren't a lot of "on the fence, centrist" Bud drinkers.
So is it a 5d chess Reichstag Fire to create more tranny hate?
Y'know, it's amazing how many people will like and share the Stone Toss meme, "Are you sure this will help sell more burgers?," and understand that it has nothing to do with making money and everything to do with pushing an agenda, but then go and actually question whether replacing Whites with Blacks and putting a Tranny on Budweiser beer is actually them believing that they would make money and it was "capitalism in full effect."
FFS, have y'all not learned ANYTHING or are you just trolls/shills?
I'm honestly done debating this. What a fucking waste of time.
That happens in every case. That's the purpose of the regulation. These billion dollar companies are protected by bad decisions by the political racket. The issue is that the racket is weak. Not that Budweiser is more competent than all the false data they are fed.
Not sure where the aggression is coming from (you and u/Gizortnik have some kind of beef?) but there's plenty of stupid people in the business world. What he said obviously applies to much of the corporate rot today. It's not even at odds with the spirit of this post, the only thing at question is the amount of agency we assign to marketing/HR vs. other executives.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism. They usually defer to other "experts" for decisions. From my own experience, highly placed professionals in any field are typical NPCs and very myopic. They'll talk about specific technical topics at a level that makes you think they must have a super high IQ, but then turn into a midwit and claim "oh that's above my pay grade" or rattle off some liberal platitude they don't really believe when any social or political topic is broached. I can easily imagine the other execs at Bud deferring to the "expertise" of their marketing bitch-whore who probably said all the right things in meetings. They have literally zero pulse on what normal people like or want except for what she tells them.
I just don't see why someone would think that billionaires can be morons.
As much as I hate the WEF, they aren't in direct control over most things. They just have a financial and influence racket, and most of their time they are trying to react to sudden pressures or events. Also, their taste in music is terrible. Most of the stuff that actually happens at Davos is fart-huffing. They're still a dangerous cabal, but they are typically missing shit that many of us would find obvious due to their lack of exposure or prioritization of information.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism.
Yes, absolutely. If we were run by Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, or JP Morgan alive and well; we'd be actually in pretty good shape (we just wouldn't be free). It's one of my annoyances with Tucker Carlson: he's an industrialist. He wants a kind of industrialist oligarchy to run the country in a Chicago-School style economic way. I don't blame people for thinking that; that's a thousand times better than what we have; but none of those people are in positions of power.
The families of those same men are basically just monetary vehicles for other organizations. Those families are just husks of the men who made them.
What we have in front of us is actually far more horrifying than a secret cabal of dangerous and ruthless men enacting a scheme: we actually just have a hundred different factions of bureaucrats fighting among themselves for dominance of their own agenda; while their only unifying principle is their hatred of dissenters and people outside their racket. Some factions have larger paymasters, and some do not, but that only makes the situation more chaotic and more untenable.
The terrifying reality is that we think we here voices in the cockpit planning on crashing the plane. So, we kick the door open, only to realize that the cockpit is empty. There is no one in charge at all. The voice we heard is merely the GPWS alarm blaring: "TERRAIN! TERRAIN! PULL UP! PULL UP!"
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
I posted about these. Nobody gave a shit.
You're right. Captured from the bottom by female-dominated admin roles and from the top by feminist-backed banking agendas.
The executives unironically like blacks and gays and want more of them around on the movie set. Their own personal bias is overwhelming influencing casting decisions over things like accuracy or appeal.
Bc they live in a popularity hierarchy and the people above them express the same affection, and have decided that blacks and gays are in the in-group. The lizard brain of all leftists is spending 60% of its energy trying to come up with ways to please the people above them.
Why?
Bc the strategy is to form a coalition of the highly nervous and those high on anxiety. That's about 40% of women, 10% of men, plus the minorities.
They're winning bc they're the majority. The majority gets to decide what sort of hierarchy we're playing, the rest play along not to lose.
Social strategy explains so much of everything.
It's why leftists are such idiots. The popularity hierarchy is the defining characteristic of leftist thought, it's the centerpiece in their thinking, the evolutionary feminine drive. And in popularity hierarchies whatever the person above you says is The Truth even if they said something different 5m ago.
For right wingers it's the power hierarchy. They're less groupthinky, because you don't have to agree with people above you in a power hierarchy, you just have to obey.
Then there's competence hierarchies, where truth is a matter of logic, and power if held by the best qualified. Works well in small carefully selected clicks and companies but easily degrades into a popular or power hierarchy as soon as the tribe is of some size.
Soft times promote popularity hierarchies. In hard times, people are drawn to power hierarchies. We live in soft times, this explains everything.
My prediction for the next 10 years:
The US will get increasingly more degenerate, crime will skyrocket
A depression will hit
The ideologies clergy, members of the professional managerial class (PMC) will disproportionately start to lose their jobs due to AI and the depression, and the influence of the PMC will start to diminish
Pushback against the regime by it's own now down-on-their-luck supporters (the PMC) will weaken it significantly and make it more indecisive
With more general anxiety due to the downturn and crime, the coalition of the anxious gets diluted at the same time as the PMC start infighting
A strong man will get to power promising to rid of crime and provide security
He will use the opportunity of the weakened regime to ruthlessly dismantle the bureaucracy
Of course they thought it would make them money. The entire ESG infrastructure has been organized to convince corporations that going woke will make them money and to reward them with short term investments when they comply.
Eh, in a way. Libs are a huge block of the population who do the whole consooming. Not even Netflix expects hordes of black people watching some slow ass show about some queen seething and girlbossing zoomed in.
So sure, there is some mid-looking black girl on the cover, but it's not targeting mid-looking black girls as the main audience. It's for white liberals, who want to feel virtuous.
Also, just the fact they THINK it will make them money doesn't necessarily mean it will happen.
With the beer, stop looking for logic, the campaign was thought up by some horsefaced jewish girl who thinks she has superpowers to change the world because she was a 8/10 in the kibbutz.
Not even the libs actually consoom this shit in the same numbers they would if it were unmolested.
We have seen this pattern unfold in everything. We saw it ten fucking years ago when they started covering up female videogame characters and hitting them with he ugly stick, adding queers into everything, etc.
The shitlibs who call for their sensibilities to be catered to barely buy the stuff they demand. It still gets bought mostly centrists and cuckservatives too addicted to CONSOOMING to stop, even when they hate what they're being fed. They learn to tolerate ever-shittier product until they're playing games full of rainbow tranny BLM faggotry and 'just ignoring it, bro. It's only cosmetic, who the fuck cares? It doesn't effect the game.'
We see the same shit in Warhammer. The calls for female space marines, the demand for more non-white face sculpts and paint jobs on the box art. You can't find a squad box of space marines or IG minis without black guys on the box these days, and SoBs are pushed harder in the marketing than ever before.
Does it translate into GW stores full of women and non-whites? Of course fucking not! The hobby is still 99% male, 99% white, and I would guess upwards of 70% what the media would meaninglessly call 'far right'.
I think the campaign makes perfect sense.
Bud Light is canned piss; everyone knows it. Their brand has been in decline for years, not just because it's piss, but because there's a perception that it's piss.
So they're losing customers but they don't want to lose even more; the ones they can count on are the ones who base their identity off their beer brand and are the kind of people who hate change, regardless of the fact they're literally drinking piss. Those die hards aren't going anywhere, they'll just act like they were always pro-tranny.
So they need new customers, people who will drink piss if it means their identity is validated; that's trannies. Even with the boycott (maybe especially because of it), there will be tons of trans people now virtue-buying bud with lime and literally anything AB feels like selling them.
And it doesn't even matter if it's bad for their health because the average tranny life expectance is like 28.
It's the best selling beer in the world. It's a lie that it was in decline.
Both probably are true. I know Bud Light is the best selling beer but with microbrews and IPAs on one side and hard seltzers on the other there is no way they aren't getting squeezed out from both sides. They are diversifying into other markets either with new products or acquisitions.
I'm afraid the redditor is 100% correct.
In case you don't remember, I'll go over this a bit again. The entirety of HR, Advertising, and PR is purely Leftist. There is no part of HR which is right-wing, centrist, Liberal, or even center-Left. All 3 industries are entirely captured. For the past 5-10 years, the entire HR industry, without exception, states explicitly that racial, ethnic, religious, ability, neurological, and sexual diversity are the only ways for these companies to make money. They have plethora of "studies" on it. Every single expert in the field will tell you the same thing: diversity = profit.
Then on top of that, they say that Zoomers are 100% Leftist, and vote very explicitly around politics. If you want any Zoomer to buy any product, it better have an inclusivity statement feature on the box, or you might as well not sell it.
Then, on top of that, the people at the top of these PR, Ad, & HR institutions are DIE zealots, themselves. They will actively seek to seize control of the company and centralizing all marketing, recruiting, and retention opportunities to their individual departments with no oversight or quantitative measurements. They will not accept outside input from leadership or other departments, especially regarding compensation and recruitment. They will not tell people why or if a marketing program is working; just whether or not they need more money or a lot more money. They will not allow for other departments (like IT, accounting, legal, etc) to make retention or recruiting decisions on their own. Those departments will never see potential hires without HR giving a DIE color swatch test first. Those departments will not be allowed to promote without HR deciding whether or not the equity balance of the department is jeaporidized by that promotion. Those departments will not be allowed to give raises before HR decides to close the "pay gap". Those departments will not be able to fire people before HR, and especially DIE, run consoling session after consoling session, advocate a dozen trainings, and basically run interference against all of the worst employees so long as those employees are of the correct demographic make-up. Those departments might suddenly find that an incorrect demographic employee who violates a rule might start being aggressively consoled before that department's leadership takes any steps at handling the situation in-house.
Then on top of that, they know to use activist institutions externally to their advantage. PR and Advertising used Twitter to cultivate bots and journalists to heavily popularize anything DIE, and condemn anything not DIE. If HR wants to justify seizing all control of compensation, pay disputes are leaked to the press, a hit piece is manufactured on the media, 1000 Leftists on Twitter screech, and a DIE organization offers to help mediate the dispute (in favor of HR having full control). Not only do you get 'hate-bombed' on social media if you step out of line, but if you walk the line: you will get 'love-bombed' for your "brave" stances, and be rewarded with positive attention.
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
Oh, and I almost forgot. These HR departments regularly do ideological excursions for senior leadership. They literally target senior leadership and send them on a "Diversity Training Session" to extremely wealthy and luxurious accommodations where they begin grooming them on Leftist ideology, and make book requirements.
So when these zealots tell corporations that DIE is the only way to make money going forward; these corporate leaders absolutely believe them because there is not a single dissenting voice that they are aware of.
Working in HR for a time (not anymore, thankfully), I can assure you, right-wingers do exist in it.
And they want diversity! Because those eye-gougingly bad diversity initiatives that everyone hates? They reduce employee cohesion, lower employee faith in each-other, and hinder cooperation. This means less unionization, weaker unions if they do form, with less bargaining power. And without unions, it leads to less talking about their wages and less negotiating for higher salaries, complete with a built-in excuse to not give raises or better salaries: Sorry, but our diversity quotas say we can't give you that raise or it throws them out of whack.
There are numerous studies on it. It's very reliable. Fastest way to break employee cooperation is to yell out lefty words at them, ideally from someone who seems like they should be their ally.
Either the executives running a billion dollar business are stupid or you're stupid.
One of them has to give and it's not them being stupid.
I have bad news for you.
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
Just how many people did Bernie Madoff swindle again?
And has that happened in either case?
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
But there's no hope for people like you so keep doubling down to save face on something so simple that anyone with half a brain can see it.
Is this not at odds with the implication that billion dollar companies are so smart and wouldn't make the wrong decision? Or is the idea that all of this, including them backing down, is part of their grand plan?
Y'know, it's amazing how many people will like and share the Stone Toss meme, "Are you sure this will help sell more burgers?," and understand that it has nothing to do with making money and everything to do with pushing an agenda, but then go and actually question whether replacing Whites with Blacks and putting a Tranny on Budweiser beer is actually them believing that they would make money and it was "capitalism in full effect."
FFS, have y'all not learned ANYTHING or are you just trolls/shills?
I'm honestly done debating this. What a fucking waste of time.
Hmm, has anyone here argued against that? In the meme the guy pushing the interracial ad is the subversive. He's not the one running the company. Of course in real life he doesn't actually reply to questioning with "Burgers?" but strongly convinces the people running the company that it WILL make them more money in the long run.
You're getting tripped up on the subtle distinction between the corporation as a whole and the horsefaced bitch who pulled the trigger on that retardation. I dont have any doubt at all she was out to push an agenda. I have plenty of doubt that this entire debacle is all part of some grand plan by Bud Light. Funnily enough this distinction is also present in the Stonetoss analogy you brought up lmfao.
Go back to reddit.
I'm a Southerner. Fuck off back to your northern liberal shithole city, you fucking faggot.
It's perfectly aligned with that they know exactly what they're doing, and it's not about making money, it's about pushing an agenda.
And how was it pushed exactly? The people who'd agree already agreed, and the people who hated it become multiplicatively enraged about the entire tranny nonsense. Many of whom were likely uncaring prior simply because it didn't effect their bud, race, wrestling lifestyle. Demographically, there aren't a lot of "on the fence, centrist" Bud drinkers.
So is it a 5d chess Reichstag Fire to create more tranny hate?
https://communities.win/c/KotakuInAction2/p/16an0n3y0D/redditors-also-want-you-to-belie/c/4TsaJCjMCm4
That happens in every case. That's the purpose of the regulation. These billion dollar companies are protected by bad decisions by the political racket. The issue is that the racket is weak. Not that Budweiser is more competent than all the false data they are fed.
https://hbr.org/2016/12/the-scary-truth-about-corporate-survival
Really, the longer a large corporation is in business, the more likely it is to succumb to the Gervais Principle.
The Gervais Principle
Not sure where the aggression is coming from (you and u/Gizortnik have some kind of beef?) but there's plenty of stupid people in the business world. What he said obviously applies to much of the corporate rot today. It's not even at odds with the spirit of this post, the only thing at question is the amount of agency we assign to marketing/HR vs. other executives.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism. They usually defer to other "experts" for decisions. From my own experience, highly placed professionals in any field are typical NPCs and very myopic. They'll talk about specific technical topics at a level that makes you think they must have a super high IQ, but then turn into a midwit and claim "oh that's above my pay grade" or rattle off some liberal platitude they don't really believe when any social or political topic is broached. I can easily imagine the other execs at Bud deferring to the "expertise" of their marketing bitch-whore who probably said all the right things in meetings. They have literally zero pulse on what normal people like or want except for what she tells them.
I don't recognize OP, so no beef from me.
I just don't see why someone would think that billionaires can be morons.
As much as I hate the WEF, they aren't in direct control over most things. They just have a financial and influence racket, and most of their time they are trying to react to sudden pressures or events. Also, their taste in music is terrible. Most of the stuff that actually happens at Davos is fart-huffing. They're still a dangerous cabal, but they are typically missing shit that many of us would find obvious due to their lack of exposure or prioritization of information.
Yes, absolutely. If we were run by Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, or JP Morgan alive and well; we'd be actually in pretty good shape (we just wouldn't be free). It's one of my annoyances with Tucker Carlson: he's an industrialist. He wants a kind of industrialist oligarchy to run the country in a Chicago-School style economic way. I don't blame people for thinking that; that's a thousand times better than what we have; but none of those people are in positions of power.
The families of those same men are basically just monetary vehicles for other organizations. Those families are just husks of the men who made them.
What we have in front of us is actually far more horrifying than a secret cabal of dangerous and ruthless men enacting a scheme: we actually just have a hundred different factions of bureaucrats fighting among themselves for dominance of their own agenda; while their only unifying principle is their hatred of dissenters and people outside their racket. Some factions have larger paymasters, and some do not, but that only makes the situation more chaotic and more untenable.
The terrifying reality is that we think we here voices in the cockpit planning on crashing the plane. So, we kick the door open, only to realize that the cockpit is empty. There is no one in charge at all. The voice we heard is merely the GPWS alarm blaring: "TERRAIN! TERRAIN! PULL UP! PULL UP!"
I posted about these. Nobody gave a shit.
You're right. Captured from the bottom by female-dominated admin roles and from the top by feminist-backed banking agendas.
It's good that progressives are cynical and skeptical about these BLM cheerleading exercises.
The executives unironically like blacks and gays and want more of them around on the movie set. Their own personal bias is overwhelming influencing casting decisions over things like accuracy or appeal.
Exactly.
Bc they live in a popularity hierarchy and the people above them express the same affection, and have decided that blacks and gays are in the in-group. The lizard brain of all leftists is spending 60% of its energy trying to come up with ways to please the people above them.
Bc the strategy is to form a coalition of the highly nervous and those high on anxiety. That's about 40% of women, 10% of men, plus the minorities.
They're winning bc they're the majority. The majority gets to decide what sort of hierarchy we're playing, the rest play along not to lose.
Social strategy explains so much of everything.
It's why leftists are such idiots. The popularity hierarchy is the defining characteristic of leftist thought, it's the centerpiece in their thinking, the evolutionary feminine drive. And in popularity hierarchies whatever the person above you says is The Truth even if they said something different 5m ago.
For right wingers it's the power hierarchy. They're less groupthinky, because you don't have to agree with people above you in a power hierarchy, you just have to obey.
Then there's competence hierarchies, where truth is a matter of logic, and power if held by the best qualified. Works well in small carefully selected clicks and companies but easily degrades into a popular or power hierarchy as soon as the tribe is of some size.
Soft times promote popularity hierarchies. In hard times, people are drawn to power hierarchies. We live in soft times, this explains everything.
My prediction for the next 10 years:
Of course they thought it would make them money. The entire ESG infrastructure has been organized to convince corporations that going woke will make them money and to reward them with short term investments when they comply.
https://reveddit.com/r/JoeRogan/comments/12n3po0/elon_thinks_netflix_is_blackwashing_history/jgegxm7/
It was a crippling stupid marketing stunt. The can doesn’t exist outside the “celebratory” ones given to that grifting weirdo.