Yes, but at the same time, an astounding amount of people are mad when it comes to tech.
My mate in IT says just this month someone in their corpo office used their work email to sign up to a malicious fake copy of a piracy website. If they were reusing the same password, that could let a hacker into the company account, let alone any other things that employee signed up to on that work email.
That doesn't even cover the people posting things they shouldn't on facegram.
The USA is a tyrannical regime. Their congress is about as meaningful as North Korea's at this point. They couldn't even impeach the corrupt criminal.
In fact, on paper, bloody NK already had better seperation of powers than the USA before this election, but obviously it means little because they're both tyrannical regimes in reality.
As for their malware, NSA TAO have a reputation to uphold. Private corporations aren't immune, we've known about PRISM for over a decade, for a famous example.
I rarely watch fj, so I'm not who they're talking about, but Manufacturing Consent is the first political theory book I properly read. It's certainly worth a read and clearly still relevant today (but if you know you never will read it, at least read the wikipedia summary). The book can be easily downloaded online for free.
There are chapters in this video labelled "corporatism", and I think this is one of the few times I've seen that poor term used correctly.
The word "corporatism" is so often misunderstood and misused instead of "corporatocracy", a system where business corporations have strong influence in politics (which is effectively just describing capitalism...).
But corporatism isn't even referring to these corporations, it's derived from the word 'corpus'; body, to refer to a system where economic interest groups like guilds and labour associations, collectively bargain on the basis of their common interests. Notably, it advocates for class collaboration rather than class struggle, an idea which sounds pretty nice in a speech but has repeatedly resulted in domination of labour by either the owning class or the state, and the suffering of the worker class, who has been disempowered by being forced into collaborating at a rigged table. Obviously, when the ruling class is threatened by the worker class, class collaboration such as corporatism is an appealing compromise (trap) for them to support.
While corporatism has a long and varied history, and I don't mean to oversimplify it, corporatism is especially well-known as a core aspect in Fascist ideology [wikipedia]. It's no coincidence that the video author is drawing comparisons to Mussolini's face on the Palazzo Braschi. The fascists said a lot of contradictory, arrogant and garbage things in speeches, but one can't ignore this quote of ᴉuᴉʅossnW in the book The Doctrine of Fascism:
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."
At some point you have to leave the past in the past and build a more equitable world for all, today.
Yep.
Unfortunately, some people confuse equity with "just treat everyone the same, I don't need to do anything about the things my ancestors stole". That leaving the past in the past means ignoring its continuing impacts. As long as systematic disadvantage from stolen land and oppression is ongoing, it's not the past - it's the present.
What's the point of blaming dead generations? That doesn't achieve anything for society. Guilt doesn't fix things.
If my dad stole your car five years ago and I inherited it, I wasn't involved at all, but you still had your car stolen. Would it be fine for me to say "I'm not a thief, you should blame my dad" and keep driving it around?
Of course, a car is a trivial example. Seizing entire communities' land, kidnapping and massacring them, for starters, is obviously a bit harder to forget about after a few generations, because the consequences still impact people today.
Sometimes it's not even about denial of what happened, but rather a mindset that the past doesn't affect the present anymore.
I often-enough hear people saying things along the line of, well, past generations took the land but society is better and less racist now, we collectively apologised, and my family weren't even here at the time, so we have no obligation to do anything now. Almost like if my dad stole your car ten years ago, died after, and I say well I've never stolen anything in my life, it was my dad's car, this car is mine, stop complaining about the past. It doesn't make sense to start acting like equal treatment is fair after so much is stolen and so little is given back. But I know people who believe morality is that own individual behaviour, whether they are doing hurtful acts, and disregard their own position in society, how they got there and who suffered to allow that to happen.
Guilt isn't what people are asking for, guilt actually doesn't do anything useful, but rather we need people to realise that it doesn't matter that we personally didn't commit massacres and seize land, because the consequences of those acts still disadvantage current generations of the victims, and it's not resolved if we dismiss the consequences as someone else's sins.
It's important not to confuse the Zionist Regime with the Jewish peoples of the world, just as one doesn't conflate neo-Nazis with all Europeans. Both the Zionist movement and anti-semites (esp. Nazis) intentionally try to push this false narrative for their own separatist goals, and it's important we recognise and counter it.
The majority of the world has always been in a bad mood because 90% of planet has always been poor, struggling, doesn’t have enough, live in poverty, are hungry and are generally not happy.
On one hand, there is absolutely harsh struggle around the world for the vast majority of the world.
On the other hand, it's not as if most people are never in a good mood. Australia's state broadcaster (ABC) had a show where people in small or disadvantaged groups answer anonymous questions, and when it came to Sudanese Australian refugees, a few were saying that life in Sudan was often happier despite their material struggles. IIRC a main part was that they had a collective culture, in some places outside of the cities even a communal village culture, and where good fortune was cause for celebration. Some contrasted that with our largely individualist, money-centric culture here.
All that to say, money doesn't buy happiness, poverty doesn't guarantee sadness. Money and other resources really really help, but it's far from the whole picture.
You're right, and I think I forgot to mention this in my reply - will people looking at those fans overlook it? When Musk was seen by many as a brilliant humanitarian ethical billionaire championing green vehicles and space innovation, that could be persuasive to typical people. But it's harder for typical people to respect any praise them now they've clearly unmasked themselves on a stage as a nazi.
And playing the “woke cancel culture leftists are taking him out of context” card.
An Australian neo-Nazi speaker recently pulled this coward move too, laughably. (Context: in their jurisdiction, the salute is illegal*).
Nazi promotion event 1: After [...] performing the Nazi salute, Mr Richardson asked the crowd if he was “going be fined now”.[1]
Nazi promotion event 2: i-i was just waving at my friend Beryl in the back row and they screencapped it out of context, it wasn't a salute :( leftism gone mad
Why would it? One does not imply the other.
Also, a Nazi salute isn't just a slur. It's (at least) signaling that you want a bunch of groups exterminated (Jews are one of those many groups).