3 ms·

> "I would much rather trust people who are motivated by greed than ideology." it's ironic that this statement comes off so ideological. why so adamantly eithe

> "I would much rather trust people who are motivated by greed than ideology." it's ironic that this statement comes off so ideological. why so adamantly either-or? i guess it's the old upton sinclair saw about it being difficult to get a man to understand something when his (future) salary depends upon his not understanding it? no one is saying have a lovefest with the government, that they're your good friends. understand and expect more, yes, blindly trust, no. but the same goes for corporations. tech company good guys vs. evil oppressive government is not only simplistic, but simply wrong. it's not like racist political donors, ardent law-and-order police supporters, and corporate managers and owners are wholly separate groups of people. moreover, greed isn't some singular and exclusive vice of otherwise saintly corporations controlled by completely egalitarian and nondiscriminatory managers and owners. corporations not only condone discrimination and violence, they're inextricably complicit through direct and indirect influence. people who believe and do shitty things are spread through all institutions, not just some of them. and the way they effect those beliefs is unlikely to look the same in each institution, especially when they're actively trying to hide their actions.

scarface74 6y ago
Racist corporations don’t have “coercive” power - including local police with military grade weapons to shoot unarmed people in the back and choke then for nine minutes. The government already tried to file charges against an activist for “inciting riots” by speaking out in public. Yet and still the President can say the same thing on a public platform and be protected because corporations fear the government. There was a story just recently where a Facebook user posted Trump’s words verbatim and the poster was banned for inciting riots. We also have the case of Tim Cook basically kissing the President’s golden ring and standing beside him for photo op while the President was lying about what Apple was actually doing with regards to manufacturing in the US.
- clairity 6y ago
  i think the difference is that you see the government as a coherent body acting in unison under the direction of the president, and i see a bunch of thugs using both the government and corporations (and other institutions) as tools to oppress in many different and loosely coordinated ways. i actually don't think trump is an overt racist per se, only a highly self-centered opportunist who advances the white supremecist agenda because he couldn't care less about anyone but himself. an equal opportunity disregard, if you will. not a defense though, he's more suited to prison than office.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Its not just the President and it’s not just Republicans. It’s also Democrats like Clinton who got “tough on crime” and instituted policies that disproportionately affected minorities and naive Black politicians[1] who were dumb enough to think that the government was the answer to crime that was hurting their communities and that police would be used for something more than “border patrol” to keep minorities out of places where “they didn’t belong”. [1] For context, before I get downvoted to oblivion and flagged for being a “racist”, please read my previous comments. I am Black.
    - clairity 6y ago
      yes, democrats have been complicit, sometimes overtly, sometimes inadvertently. the idealogy around policing and use of force transcends party, institutions, and even race itself. policing needs to be completely reformed and its funding largely funneled to community building and support rather than use of force against minorities. there was a great story recently on latino usa[0] about josé tomás canales, a texas representative from 100 years ago who fought against the racist impunity of the texas rangers on the texas border. the lawyers for the rangers, knowing that the national media was trained on them in a time with little national media, magnified the threat and danger of the border and mexicans to turn the country toward support of the racist use force by the rangers. a hundred years later, we still curry in that bullshit. [0] https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/878316528/the-lone-legislator https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/878316528/the-lone-legislator

scarface74 6y ago

Racist corporations don’t have “coercive” power - including local police with military grade weapons to shoot unarmed people in the back and choke then for nine minutes. The government already tried to file charges against an activist for “inciting riots” by speaking out in public. Yet and still the President can say the same thing on a public platform and be protected because corporations fear the government. There was a story just recently where a Facebook user posted Trump’s words verbatim and the poster was banned for inciting riots. We also have the case of Tim Cook basically kissing the President’s golden ring and standing beside him for photo op while the President was lying about what Apple was actually doing with regards to manufacturing in the US.

clairity 6y ago
i think the difference is that you see the government as a coherent body acting in unison under the direction of the president, and i see a bunch of thugs using both the government and corporations (and other institutions) as tools to oppress in many different and loosely coordinated ways. i actually don't think trump is an overt racist per se, only a highly self-centered opportunist who advances the white supremecist agenda because he couldn't care less about anyone but himself. an equal opportunity disregard, if you will. not a defense though, he's more suited to prison than office.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Its not just the President and it’s not just Republicans. It’s also Democrats like Clinton who got “tough on crime” and instituted policies that disproportionately affected minorities and naive Black politicians[1] who were dumb enough to think that the government was the answer to crime that was hurting their communities and that police would be used for something more than “border patrol” to keep minorities out of places where “they didn’t belong”. [1] For context, before I get downvoted to oblivion and flagged for being a “racist”, please read my previous comments. I am Black.
  - clairity 6y ago
    yes, democrats have been complicit, sometimes overtly, sometimes inadvertently. the idealogy around policing and use of force transcends party, institutions, and even race itself. policing needs to be completely reformed and its funding largely funneled to community building and support rather than use of force against minorities. there was a great story recently on latino usa[0] about josé tomás canales, a texas representative from 100 years ago who fought against the racist impunity of the texas rangers on the texas border. the lawyers for the rangers, knowing that the national media was trained on them in a time with little national media, magnified the threat and danger of the border and mexicans to turn the country toward support of the racist use force by the rangers. a hundred years later, we still curry in that bullshit. [0] https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/878316528/the-lone-legislator https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/878316528/the-lone-legislator