4 ms·

Agreed. I think the premise is sound. I feel like the US needs to incorporate a new right, similar to the separation of church and state but instead focused on

Agreed. I think the premise is sound. I feel like the US needs to incorporate a new right, similar to the separation of church and state but instead focused on the separation of politics and companies. I have no idea how politics would be defined or how it would be enforced. However similar to the premise of this article I think the one thing both sides can agree on is all of this became worse and jaded when companies became self aware and brandished a political agenda. I mean if we want free speech how can their be disinformation? Even if crazy earl wants to talk about the “good old days” where women stayed home and cooked all day why does a company need to take a stand on eliminating that post? Why do people working at companies feel compelled to incorporate their beliefs into their work? Disney makes movies for kids. I understand that a small % of the population feels marginalized because they don’t have direct representation in media, but kids are inpressional, and if we want to be “Fair” we’d present ALL sides, from straight, to gay, from hero to terrorist. Or Disney could go back to making neutral kids movies about fictional talking animals struggling through life. Why do they need to take a stance on something.

beaconstudios 5y ago
If disney made all their characters white, people would call that political; if they made their characters diverse, people would call that political too. Media doesn't exist outside the political sphere. Many people call for apolitical media, but I'm not sure that's possible without avoiding any contentious issue whatsoever, and basically everything is contentious at the moment.
- mdmdmdk 5y ago
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    [flagged]
Steltek 5y ago
At a government level, you can not banish politics without infringing on speech. Your proposal directly conflicts with the first amendment. If Disinformation was simply promoting outdated chauvinism, it wouldn't be perceived as such a threat to society. But that's not what's happening. Disinformation campaigns are convincing people that the election was rigged and the current government is illegitimate. Even your "present all sides" idea has flaws because it's a tactic used in propaganda. You ostensibly take two "experts" and hold a mock debate. One of those experts is going to take a dive, looking like a fool, and as a result, your chosen side appears to prevail.
bilbo0s 5y ago
Even if crazy earl wants to talk about the “good old days” where women stayed home and cooked all day why does a company need to take a stand on eliminating that post? Um, because those women buy a crap-ton of product. Depending on your business, probably a lot more than men. If they boycott you, (which incidentally happens to be a right guaranteed to them by the 1st restricting the government from decreeing its denial), there goes your bottom line. I'm always the big, bad, Halliburton capitalist in my social circle, but I'm actually not the jackhole people think I am when they see the suit coming. What happens is that liberals and conservatives have ideas that are detrimental to the efficient function of market capitalism and I point that fact out. Why should a business owner and his employees suffer to ensure the right of some beer gutted unemployed Bubba to offend women who probably worked their posteriors off to be able to afford your product? If you want to keep politics out of business, then keep the politicians out of my businesses.
tablespoon 5y ago
Your suggestion goes directly against freedom of association. Also there really isn't such a thing as being "neutral" like you describe, "neutral" is just when everyone agrees to the point where they don't release there's something to disagree about. However your comment does seem to touch on one the major deficit/contradictions in small-l liberalism: you don't really solve disagreements by pushing them into the private sphere, you just avoid them, and eventually that avoidance can tear society apart.

beaconstudios 5y ago

If disney made all their characters white, people would call that political; if they made their characters diverse, people would call that political too. Media doesn't exist outside the political sphere. Many people call for apolitical media, but I'm not sure that's possible without avoiding any contentious issue whatsoever, and basically everything is contentious at the moment.

mdmdmdk 5y ago
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  [flagged]

Steltek 5y ago

At a government level, you can not banish politics without infringing on speech. Your proposal directly conflicts with the first amendment. If Disinformation was simply promoting outdated chauvinism, it wouldn't be perceived as such a threat to society. But that's not what's happening. Disinformation campaigns are convincing people that the election was rigged and the current government is illegitimate. Even your "present all sides" idea has flaws because it's a tactic used in propaganda. You ostensibly take two "experts" and hold a mock debate. One of those experts is going to take a dive, looking like a fool, and as a result, your chosen side appears to prevail.

bilbo0s 5y ago

Even if crazy earl wants to talk about the “good old days” where women stayed home and cooked all day why does a company need to take a stand on eliminating that post? Um, because those women buy a crap-ton of product. Depending on your business, probably a lot more than men. If they boycott you, (which incidentally happens to be a right guaranteed to them by the 1st restricting the government from decreeing its denial), there goes your bottom line. I'm always the big, bad, Halliburton capitalist in my social circle, but I'm actually not the jackhole people think I am when they see the suit coming. What happens is that liberals and conservatives have ideas that are detrimental to the efficient function of market capitalism and I point that fact out. Why should a business owner and his employees suffer to ensure the right of some beer gutted unemployed Bubba to offend women who probably worked their posteriors off to be able to afford your product? If you want to keep politics out of business, then keep the politicians out of my businesses.

tablespoon 5y ago

Your suggestion goes directly against freedom of association. Also there really isn't such a thing as being "neutral" like you describe, "neutral" is just when everyone agrees to the point where they don't release there's something to disagree about. However your comment does seem to touch on one the major deficit/contradictions in small-l liberalism: you don't really solve disagreements by pushing them into the private sphere, you just avoid them, and eventually that avoidance can tear society apart.