4 ms·

Have you considered that the rational bond villains use celebrities as a visibility and accountability shield to accomplish goals that would otherwise be shut d

Have you considered that the rational bond villains use celebrities as a visibility and accountability shield to accomplish goals that would otherwise be shut down if proposed directly?

Redoubts 8y ago
Sounds like the Hitchhikers Guide.
pavlov 8y ago
Rupert Murdoch was overtly portrayed as a Bond villain in one of the late ‘90s films...
- skosch 8y ago
  Interesting, that's how I remembered it too! However, Wikipedia says: "While many reviewers compared Elliot Carver to Rupert Murdoch, Feirstein based the character on Robert Maxwell." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Dies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Dies)
  - tsunamifury 8y ago
    Either were just Edward Burnays archetypes.
vanderZwan 8y ago
"Celebrity isn’t just harmless fun – it’s the smiling face of the corporate machine" - George Monbiot https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/20/celebrity-corporate-machine-fame-big-business-donald-trump-kim-kardashian https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/20/celebr...
- tsunamifury 8y ago
  Yes if you were to apply the Mcleod Corp pyramid they would be he clueless layer, happily indoctrinating the loser layer at the behest of the sociopath top.
  - ModernMech 8y ago
    It was my understanding that the loser layer understands what's going on though, which should inoculate them from indoctrination. Celebrities would then be the ones who keep the clueless from becoming losers.
    - tsunamifury 8y ago
      Well, going too deep, there are three parts of the loser layer; committed losers, future clueless, and future sociopaths. The committed losers are aware and say things like “msm has always being lying”, future clueless are aspiring influencers, and future sociopaths are just waiting for the right opportunity to advance.
martythemaniak 8y ago
I have, and you can make the case that this is what's happening, and use Trumps 2017 tax cut as a very good example of elites complaining about him, but successfully using him for their own ends. And that would be true, but I don't believe that overall, since it presupposes that just because someone is a celebrity, they are necessarily some sort of mindless, insentient vessel that optimizes for fame and can otherwise be controlled. Why shouldn't Kim Kardashian have strong-but-misguided opinions like any other random person? And wouldn't her existing fame make her way less amenable to influence by unknown individuals? To use a real-life example, much of Trump's immigration obsession is not shared by the elites who benefited from his tax cuts. Ultimately, I don't believe it because I don't think any person can be as easily influenced as this scenario implies.
- tsunamifury 8y ago
  Useful idiots work freelance, because any longer and they become a liability. I think there is a vast pool of freelance celebrity today, with a deep bench of influencers attempting to expand it further. So if Kim doesn’t work tomorrow, someone else will. The difficulty with Trump is that his office has a 4 year appointment and he accomplished his goal in 2, leading to 2 more goalless years.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

Have you considered that the rational bond villains use celebrities as a visibility and accountability shield to accomplish goals that would otherwise be shut down if proposed directly?

Redoubts 8y ago

Sounds like the Hitchhikers Guide.

pavlov 8y ago

Rupert Murdoch was overtly portrayed as a Bond villain in one of the late ‘90s films...

skosch 8y ago
Interesting, that's how I remembered it too! However, Wikipedia says: "While many reviewers compared Elliot Carver to Rupert Murdoch, Feirstein based the character on Robert Maxwell." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Dies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Dies)
- tsunamifury 8y ago
  Either were just Edward Burnays archetypes.

vanderZwan 8y ago

"Celebrity isn’t just harmless fun – it’s the smiling face of the corporate machine" - George Monbiot https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/20/celebrity-corporate-machine-fame-big-business-donald-trump-kim-kardashian https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/20/celebr...

tsunamifury 8y ago
Yes if you were to apply the Mcleod Corp pyramid they would be he clueless layer, happily indoctrinating the loser layer at the behest of the sociopath top.
- ModernMech 8y ago
  It was my understanding that the loser layer understands what's going on though, which should inoculate them from indoctrination. Celebrities would then be the ones who keep the clueless from becoming losers.
  - tsunamifury 8y ago
    Well, going too deep, there are three parts of the loser layer; committed losers, future clueless, and future sociopaths. The committed losers are aware and say things like “msm has always being lying”, future clueless are aspiring influencers, and future sociopaths are just waiting for the right opportunity to advance.

martythemaniak 8y ago

I have, and you can make the case that this is what's happening, and use Trumps 2017 tax cut as a very good example of elites complaining about him, but successfully using him for their own ends. And that would be true, but I don't believe that overall, since it presupposes that just because someone is a celebrity, they are necessarily some sort of mindless, insentient vessel that optimizes for fame and can otherwise be controlled. Why shouldn't Kim Kardashian have strong-but-misguided opinions like any other random person? And wouldn't her existing fame make her way less amenable to influence by unknown individuals? To use a real-life example, much of Trump's immigration obsession is not shared by the elites who benefited from his tax cuts. Ultimately, I don't believe it because I don't think any person can be as easily influenced as this scenario implies.

tsunamifury 8y ago
Useful idiots work freelance, because any longer and they become a liability. I think there is a vast pool of freelance celebrity today, with a deep bench of influencers attempting to expand it further. So if Kim doesn’t work tomorrow, someone else will. The difficulty with Trump is that his office has a 4 year appointment and he accomplished his goal in 2, leading to 2 more goalless years.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]