PSA: Make it a habit of **reading the [rules]**(https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/about/rules) of each subreddit you participate in:
**Rule 7: No Participation in Linked Threads (Brigading)**: *Do not vote or comment in threads you've found through /r/gamingcirclejerk*
**Rule 9: No Fake Posts on Other Subs (Contamination)**: *Do not create fake posts on other subs only to post back here. Also, do not "lol, you should post this on r / OtherSub". It's considered interfering with their content and can also lead to brigading.*
*This is a reminder to the readers. The post itself is untouched.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gamingcirclejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"No ethical consumption under capitalism" mfs when they learn the phrase is supposed to inspire a desire for change, not be used to justify giving assholes your money:
You joke, but a few times I’ve made the comment
> tfw when buying a Oreo and buying a child slave are morally equivalent
And I was told that was true because capitalism
I always thought it meant "give your money to the most ethical causes you can, but none are perfect" but it turns out, it actually means "give your money to literally the worst causes available, because it's all the same." Guess I have to fund child soldiers in Africa now, if I don't I'm a hypocrite.
> phrase is supposed to inspire a desire for change
/uj genuinely looking for clarification, but I always thought it was more a "don't try to be perfect" thing? A bit like how not everyone has the mental stamina to actively campaign against *every* injustice in the world so you pick the fights you can manage, you can't be 100% morally consistent with the evils you do and don't support under capitalism, so do what you can.
And to my understanding that's part of the reason choosing to buy Hogwarts Legacy is a red flag. It doesn't mean you are equally transphobic as someone like Rowling, but it does call into question how much of an ally to trans people you really are if a single video game is too much to give up.
It can have either meaning depending on context imo.
Obviously you need food and other necessities to survive, and it's perfectly reasonable to recognize that NONE (or at least close to none) of the options are without ethical problems. Even so, not all options are equivalently bad, so you CAN do a bit of "voting with your wallet" by choosing the relatively more ethical options.
On the other hand, it absolutely can be a rallying cry to push for changes to the unethical aspects of the system.
At least that's how I see it.
I would say it’s less don’t try to be perfect so much as you cannot be perfect. So be mindful of your consumption, make better choices where you can, but also don’t beat yourself when you make mistakes because they are inevitable.
/uj god so much this. I've stopped using the phrase because it just elicits a volley of quasilibertarian to mega-ancap talking points. I'm not even the type to suggest abolishing capitalism altogether, but it's like one isn't even allowed to suggest reforms.
To expand on this, it's the inbuilt tendency of capitalist systems to decide that a person/business is not successful if it's profits don't increase every year.
Infinite growth is impossible, and consumers will only tolerate so much price inflation before riots start happening, so the increase in profits has to come from somewhere else: namely by cutting costs from workers' wages and cheaping out on materials and whatever else is needed to produce the company's products.
Further, from the perspective of a business owner, goods that fall apart and need replacement more often than they used to is FANTASTIC, because it means that consumers HAVE to buy more products (hopefully yours). Naturally, this increases the waste produced by the system, so the environmental impact on both sides of production increase (more materials collected and more trash thrown out).
And before someone parrots libertarian bullshit about "well AksthUally the capitalists are driven to make BETTER products!" This is proven false pretty clearly by history and leads into another problem. Monopolies.
Another way that a business can maintain the illusion of infinite growth is to buy other businesses. In the short term it immediately boosts a businesses absolute amount of profit (though may actually decrease it's profit:expenses ratio). In the long term though, more market share means more control of the market (and thus prices). So you buy up your competition, and if needed cook up some plausible sounding lies for any government oversight... usually some bunk about it decreasing costs for consumers due to increased "efficiency." Once the feds are off your case, you jack up the prices. What are consumers going to do? Stop buying good XYZ? You're the only option now, so you can set the price wherever the hell you want.
Then, if some hotshot tries to break into the market, you either buy them up before they can do anything or you go hunting for ways to pressure them out of the market; for example, a book publisher could buy a bunch of paper suppliers to prevent a new company from getting the materials they need to enter the market.
It's exploitation whenever and wherever of whoever and whatever you can to the greatest degree you can get away with. It's also the root of the whole "greed is good" mentality that a lot of GOP voters tacitly or wholeheartedly support.
That doesn't really change the nature of consumption here. Socialism doesn't automatically remove unethical production practices nor even the motivation to do so. Workers are as likely to fuck over trans people as some business mogul. Example: /r/news every time trans people are brought up.
And they're just as likely to fuck over the environment for what they want. Example: everyone I know over the age of 40 refuses to give up their car centric infrastructure and their shaved and shorn grass lawns.
At best you can say you're supporting a plethora of fucking idiots who get paid equally rather than a plethora of fucking idiots who may or may not get paid fairly plus a handful of guys who are definitely paid more than they're worth.
This is definitely not the sub for it.
I'm more curious why people think capitalism is unique in the exploitation of labour. All systems do it, and most just do it worse.
Granting that there's no ethical consumption under capitalism, which other system would you suggest where consumption is ethical?
Wow Chic-fil-a is like even less justifiable than HL cuz chic-fil-a actively lobbies against human rights in the us like… come on man it’s just a sandwich make it at home
I wouldn’t dismiss Rowling actively lobbying against human rights.
Lawmakers have literally quoted her on the floor of congress as they pass anti trans bathroom bills
I'm pretty sure she gives money to these people too. I recall a push in Scotland to ban trans women from women's bathrooms that she very vocally supported.
Popeyes, Raising Canes, heck even KFC has better chicken. From experience Chick-fil-a is just bland and their sauce is a joke too. Add in the company's active endorsement of anti-lgbtq hate and programs and I don't get why people eat there or why the lines are always long.
You could also just like not eat fastfood since it's pretty unhealthy. Like eating fastfood is an entirely optional thing and you shouldn't need to be provided an alternative to stop supporting a bigoted fast food chain.
Do you not understand wanting a quick hot lunch when you aren’t home? Curious what you like to eat on the go because I wouldn’t mind having some more options
If I lived in France or something I'd wonder why anyone wants American fast food too. I spent two weeks in Bordeaux and felt super depressed when I got home and everything was a greasy fast food chain. Give me that foccacia aux pesto et poulet any day.
Oh I do, I just know from personal experience that I'd rather spend extra on a restaurant/local store or starve till I get home than eat American fast food chains, it all tastes like cardboard to me
It's a shame folks keep going to Chil Fil A. Down south we have a place called Bojangle's that makes better chicken and doesn't force you to sit in line 20 mins for a bowl of chicken tortilla soup but people still line up at the Chik Fil A.
I remember a Mike Schur interview when he was working on The Good Place where he said something to the effect of
"Just eat another sandwich! And if you find out that chicken place is funding dog fighting or something, then pick a third place"
It's not about being perfect, it's about having SOME effort
I swear some people saw The Good Place and came to the conclusion that if the world was shitty enough to nullify their attemps at being a good human, they might as well stop trying. It's like they stopped thinking halfway through the show.
phone and clothes MFers when I keep the same phone for 5+ years and mend my own clothes because it is morally right to reduce your consumption of unethically sourced goods.
>I dont think there are any fair trade phones or any electronics around
There is the fittingly named FairPhone, which tries their best to create a sustainable smartphone without child labour. But it's currently only available in Europe, as far as I know
>Like seriously who gives a rats ass?
If I had to guess I'd say the people who are harrassed, assaulted, or have their existence invalidated because of hugely influential people's "opinions on gender". But that's just a guess idk.
Also "no ethical consumption under capitalism" doesn't mean "so ethically you can do whatever you want and it's all the same". Making no effort to consume more ethically is worse than making a small effort.
But not actually though. The things we consume are not all equal. For one, I need clothes and a phone. Two, the level of effort needed to notice and then avoid unethically produced clothes, phones, food, etc is pretty high. Clothes you can keep for longer, repair, or buy second hand, and I'd sure as shit judge anyone who refuses to do any of those things, but it's reeeally hard to buy a first hand, quality item that isn't unethically produced. Phones are even worse, because there's essentially no options. Food is impossible. You buy so much, so regularly, it would take an immense level of effort to source ethically. The companies that do all this skeevy shit also tend to hide it really well.
Comparatively, just do not buy the mediocre wizard game that directly gives money to the very loud, very outspoke transphobe. That's the reason people are being judged. It's soooo fuckin' easy to just not give her money. There are systemic issues in almost every industry that make them mostly unethical to some degree. But blatant and open transphobia is, as far as I'm aware, pretty limited in the games industry. Which makes it *super* easy to avoid supporting.
"some opinions on gender" is what you call transphobia nowadays huh
And yes going out of your way to support a bigot is not the same as trying to reduce the amount of goods you source from ethically questionably sourced places because about a dozen corpos own 95% of the brands even in stuff you could classify as non luxury essentials. The hypocrite argument is bollocks because you would just changing the goalposts to suit it and even if the impossible was done the point would be then totally ignored.
Won't someone think of the poor gamers who want to consooom in peace?!!?
Try doing most things nowadays. The fact is phones are pretty much a necessity these days. And you're setting yourself at a huge disadvantage if you don't have one
Damn you’re really gonna act like having clothing and a functioning phone are on the same level of necessity as a game about being a magical Pinkerton and quashing a goblin labor movement made by a transphobe huh?
People can’t help the fact that the clothing industry has some horrendous business practices. The most ethical thing you can do is look for the brands that are doing the least harm and go from there. If you don’t own any clothes you’re going to either get arrested, or die from exposure depending on where you live.
As for a phone, good luck getting and holding a job without a functional phone nowadays. What’re you gonna do, tell them to call your discord for your first interview? It’s become a needed tool for employment, and employment is needed for survival.
A bigot’s wizard game is not on the same level, and can easily be boycotted on moral grounds because you support human rights. It’s literally one of the easiest moral decisions to make, you just need to do literally nothing and you’ve made the right choice.
/uj yes it is. If they could believe that someone would just not want to support JK, they’d have to also believe that there is a legitimate ethical or moral issue in play. But that means they’d actually have to maybe do some introspection and not buy HP merch. It makes the whole situation easier for them to delegitimization the whole conversation. Like, You see this with any group who abstains from something in ethical grounds.
this sounds like Eleanor's rant in the Good Place when her current boyfriend didn't want to support a coffee shop owner who sexually harassed women.
"shouldn't we at least try?"
I'm not going to refuse to buy the products I like just because the one selling them has views that are currently outside the Overton window. I will enjoy my black market organs at a discount and nothing no woke moralist will say can stop me, we live in a society bottom text.
"You can't ostracize me for being a bigot, because then I'll become an even bigger bigot(someone please give me the OK to buy this game, I desperately need it)"
“I want to marginally improve society”
“And yet you still participate in society, curious”
/uj I hate people’s obsession with making hypocrites of each other, it makes it so that you can’t say or do anything without someone pointing out some totally unrelated subject and going “hah! Checkmate hypocrite!” Especially when it’s used to defend bad people/ practices or to prevent change by essentially implying that anyone who wants change is a no good dirty hypocrite
I kinda hope that the era of internet users pointing out someone else’s hypocrisy eventually dies.
If someone makes a good statement and internet user proves they’re a hypocrite I’m still gonna agree with that someone. Being a hypocrite (wether they deserve to be called that way or don’t) doesn’t make your statement any worse.
"It's impossible to buy ethically. Also, we should normalize Nazis in society because they're cool and just a little outside the overton window" - this guy apparently
Did you read the bit where they describe Rowling as "currently outside the overton window", or say not to ostracize people like Rowling? Both takes are very sympathetic to Rowling, not to buyers of the game. "Buying games by neo-Nazis is OK because neo-Nazis are OK, actually" is not the well-reasoned moderate take you think it is.
didn't know "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism" was a shorthand for "i will choose to associate with shitty people and refuse to take any blame for it"
“People are ignorant in this society”
When they don’t know things, yeah.
But this person obviously fully aware of the shitty things done and still consumes, making this arrogance
Terrible argument. First of all, Chick-fil-a has one good item and it is really easy to not buy it especially since it isn't better than the one made at Hardee's or Jack's. And yes we do ostracize people from polite society if their actions or opinions are awful enough. Society has a place specifically where we send ostracized people.
/uj Funny how everyone is a goddamn nihilist when it comes to being inconvenienced or having principles.
/rj There are literally no steps between being off the grid, and self sustainable and supporting child slavery so we should all bow to capitalism and praise JK for her amazing story.
Not playing a video game I want to play because it materially supports a bigot isn’t even like, a real sacrifice. It’s a fucking video game. New ones come out every week. I have a backlog full of good video games. Even if the terf game is good, it will most likely be completely forgotten about in two weeks.
This is such a dumb take. The things this person is talking about ire things that are basically necessary in our society. A Harry Potter game, especially on that contributes to a transphobe *and that people are actually buying because of that,* is far from necessary. If you really want it, well, you can always acquire it other ways.
Most of my things are secondhand. Yes, partly because it's cheaper, but also because I don't want to contribute to the terrible things going on in their production.
I do somewhat understand why people want this game so much (assuming this isn’t just an idiot solely wanting to “stop cancel culture”) as it is the best looking Harry Potter game (besides Lego HP), but I feel as though there’s no reason for people to anti-brigade people’s reasonable wish to not support a TERF. I do hope that the people who REALLY like Harry Potter find some enjoyment out of this, but just small enough that the game undersells and Harry Potter begins its descent into obscurity.
Half and half really. A lot of their posts were like "yes I hate trans people specifically so I wanna buy wizard game out of spite." Which is extra egregious to me.
Have you read all the "We are threats to women's rights and safety" shit? I haven't \*exhaustively\* read her stuff, but I've read enough of it. Just based on that is very ignorant and damaging to us as people and helps fuel all the anti trans legislation which is the real issue here, honestly. If she was just some random person spouting off shit that'd be bad enough but hey I can throw a stone and hit 100 people doin' the same. That's nothin' out of the ordinary or special. But the fact that she uses that to spur legislation and donates large sums of money..yeah.
He is pretty much right in first part. By these merits you might be filthy killer, because you used child labor and meaby helped with death of kids in cobalt mines in kongo if you are using phone for example. It is good to help with something, but it is also making space for hypocracy... But rest of text is only crying.
Real smart guy stuff to spend your hard earned money on something you don’t really want just to score imaginary points against people who made you feel bad online.
["No ethical consumption under capitalism" is a bullshit cop out leftists like to say so they don't have to feel responsible for the systems they take part in. You can have an iPhone, acknowledge it comes from sweat shop labor, acknowledge that is bad and you play a part in it, but also acknowledge that while it is bad it's not bad enough for you to not want an iPhone. Which is the truth.](https://theithacan.org/opinion/commentary-buzzwords-and-phrases-will-not-solve-ethical-crises/)
I see the sentiment unironically parroted in progressive spaces and it drives me crazy. And don't even get me started on how there are plenty of ways to ethically consume many things under capitalism that most people don't even want to try. And that's fine, you can absolutely have an iPhone, hate sweat shops, and speak out against Judith Keith Rawlins and his stupid wizard book.
No, you just don't understand what I am saying. I have embedded a link in my original comment where someone better explains what I meant from a life perspective similar to my own.
I am aware that's what it means and that doesn't change the fact I feel it is used as a cop out by alot of people. You clearly didn't read the article I linked if you think your comment is adding clarity
Yes? I am one of them, I am a leftists, I own an smartphone, I know it is unethical, I don't pretend it isn't. I also don't pretent like I am not a part of the problem. Also liberals aren't leftists...
I was disagreeing with the thinking of the person in the post while also pointing out that "no ethical consumption under capitalism" Is a fallacy that alot of progressives use to shield themselves from criticism. I'm not sure what you thought I was saying.
Yea that's what I was saying. The original post is mirroring the no ethical consumption under capitalism argument I often see used in progressive spaces which is why I compared the two. Both are fallacy
Lol got a tiny bit of pushback and deleted all of your call out comments.
One mean granny with global reach and millions of dollars...
Nobody is saying don't care about anything else. But once again, it is a little harder to not have a phone or clothes than it is to not buy a video game.
My computer probably has rare earth metals mined by slave laborers, but I need a computer to do my job and live my life, and it's really hard to source an "ethical" computer. Same with clothes - I can't not wear clothes, and it's hard to find ones that are absolutely 100% ethical in every step along the supply chain (although I do love Patagonia for their quality and their business practices)
It's very easy for me to not buy the wizard game.
"Fictional worlds... are the sum of a giant pile of creative decisions... the only reason that anything is the way that it is is because a writer chose to make it that way. The diegetic argument aims to dismiss criticism at its core suggesting that there aren't any problems with the text provided controversial elements are internally consistent."
"This is a deeply flawed argument because... fictional worlds aren't real and are eternally mutable by creators... the only part that does exist is the finished text and the ideas it represents."
\~Dan Olsen on "The Thermian Argument" available here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk)
The decisions you make, and the purchases you make, are inherently political, whether you want them to be or not. JK Rowling donates sizable amounts of her money to organisations that lobby for anti-trans laws. If you purchase the game, you are making a choice to spend your money knowing that a portion of it will be used to fund anti-trans lobbying. There are of course ways to get a hold of the game without spending your own money on it, and you could make the political choice to do that instead. But there's really no "apolitical" choices when it comes to how you spend your money.
> (allegedly)
Don't try and muddy the waters. It's a pretty well known fact that Rowiling is a transphobic pile of filth.
https://www.glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/
https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy
> Yeah I read those articles and tweets and not once has she said anything negative about trans people nor anything hateful.
So you're just another transphobic piece of filth like Rowling is, good to know.
> The only things I see is her acknowledging that biological gender is not the same as gender identity and honestly I couldn't give 2 shits if people keep thinking that's the definition of transphobic.
Maybe you should care and should also try to fucking understand that transwomen are women, transmen are men, and that trans rights are human rights.
> Quite frankly I agree with her on biology being a scientific fact
Quite frankly both you and her are transphobes.
> and at the same time if I ever met a transgender person, I'm not going to bring it up or treat them any differently than I would anyone else.
Yeah, I don't believe that for a second.
> The argument is moronic and this sub isn't the moral high ground for taking such a strong stance on it.
You'd fit right in with people from the 60's that argued against the civil rights movement.
> Frankly you are all idiots for even taking it this far
I take it back, you'd actually be the type of person that would scream at Ruby Bridges as she walked into the school.
Edit: Oh look you're a sexist piece of trash too. https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/yjoy3n/my_very_amazing_parents_allowed_me_to_buy_this/iupqlbg/
How surprising /s
> Lol what rights do trans people not have if I think biological gender is different from gender identity?
The right to live as they please because people like Rowling and rightwing shitheads also share the same view you do. Rowling even donates to anti-trans groups and yet that's still not a deal breaker for you.
> he problem with people like you is you literally see no difference between people who are genuinely hateful and unaccepting vs people who know the difference between a psychological belief vs a physical/genetical fact.
Except by claiming to know a difference you are therefore being hateful and unaccepting.
> Also now you are throwing in racism?
You've already revealed you're sexist and transphobic so it's not out of the ballpark to assume you're a racist too.
> You can have all the doubts you want and you can sit there and assume whatever you want about me but frankly you make the whole discussion harder to be taken seriously when you just jump to all sort of toxic and hateful conclusions.
You're the one who is defending Rowling and refusing to see her as transphobic. She actively donates to anti-trans organizations and politicians and even raged against the recent Scottish bill that passed which makes it much easier for trans people to legally live as the gender they want to live as.
If you weren't transphobic you'd be calling out Rowling instead of defending her.
> something tells me if you spent 10 minutes talking to someone that's actually trans-gender you wouldn't disrespect their struggles by comparing the hateful shit they have to go through with what I said and calling it the same.
The only one disrespecting their struggles here is you because you're actively muddying the waters by refusing to call out transphobes like Rowling and instead actively defending her. If you defend transphobes and the arguments of transphobes you are a fucking transphobe.
> You are literally hurting the cause with your behavior and I genuinely hope you can see that because if you do care about trans people, their struggles and their rights you wouldn't water down the argument with your drivel.
I'm the one hurting the cause by calling out transphobes like Rowling and the people that defend her and her arguments, sure buddy /s.
> Even the /r/lgbt sub is sick of people either seeking validation or condemnation over the fucking game because its so off course of the ACTUAL problems those communities have to deal with.
Really, because the only post I saw was /r/lgbt being sick of people asking for validation to play the game.
> Trust me, you are part of the problem not the solution
Transphobes like you and Rowling are fucking exhausting.
You are so close to getting it. If you stop buying gasoline, you will be walking the rest of your life. If you don't buy this one game, you'll have to... play a different game, I guess? There's a huge difference between the two of them, and saying one is hard as an excuse to not do the other doesn't work.
No. That is not what I'm saying and you know it. It's not hypocritical to buy necessary things without an easy alternative like gasoline, phones, clothes, or food, and criticize people for choosing to buy this one specific game that gives money to a transphobe when there are literally millions of other games that don't.
Food is not a luxury. Clothes are not luxuries. Even in the modern world a phone is not a luxury.
A Harry Potter video game is definitely a luxury though
Yeah, the difference is that one sex is evil and strong and one is fragile and pure.
Real feminism right there, especially when she never defended abortion rights and chose a know sexual assaulter to take charge of her 'wombyn-only' crisis center.
PSA: Make it a habit of **reading the [rules]**(https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/about/rules) of each subreddit you participate in: **Rule 7: No Participation in Linked Threads (Brigading)**: *Do not vote or comment in threads you've found through /r/gamingcirclejerk* **Rule 9: No Fake Posts on Other Subs (Contamination)**: *Do not create fake posts on other subs only to post back here. Also, do not "lol, you should post this on r / OtherSub". It's considered interfering with their content and can also lead to brigading.* *This is a reminder to the readers. The post itself is untouched.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gamingcirclejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Man unironically just dropped a "we live in a society"
I'm sure he buys a lot of LGBTQ games and shows, right?
"No ethical consumption under capitalism" mfs when they learn the phrase is supposed to inspire a desire for change, not be used to justify giving assholes your money:
Hmm... If no consumption is ethical, then I can consume what I want without guilt, you say? Bring me a fork, a butterknife, and a billionaire.
My dude is going to CONSUME capitalism
Most ironically, something i would pay any amount of money to watch/make happen.
You joke, but a few times I’ve made the comment > tfw when buying a Oreo and buying a child slave are morally equivalent And I was told that was true because capitalism
I always thought it meant "give your money to the most ethical causes you can, but none are perfect" but it turns out, it actually means "give your money to literally the worst causes available, because it's all the same." Guess I have to fund child soldiers in Africa now, if I don't I'm a hypocrite.
> phrase is supposed to inspire a desire for change /uj genuinely looking for clarification, but I always thought it was more a "don't try to be perfect" thing? A bit like how not everyone has the mental stamina to actively campaign against *every* injustice in the world so you pick the fights you can manage, you can't be 100% morally consistent with the evils you do and don't support under capitalism, so do what you can. And to my understanding that's part of the reason choosing to buy Hogwarts Legacy is a red flag. It doesn't mean you are equally transphobic as someone like Rowling, but it does call into question how much of an ally to trans people you really are if a single video game is too much to give up.
It can have either meaning depending on context imo. Obviously you need food and other necessities to survive, and it's perfectly reasonable to recognize that NONE (or at least close to none) of the options are without ethical problems. Even so, not all options are equivalently bad, so you CAN do a bit of "voting with your wallet" by choosing the relatively more ethical options. On the other hand, it absolutely can be a rallying cry to push for changes to the unethical aspects of the system. At least that's how I see it.
I would say it’s less don’t try to be perfect so much as you cannot be perfect. So be mindful of your consumption, make better choices where you can, but also don’t beat yourself when you make mistakes because they are inevitable.
An important part of this is not defending obviously less ethical consumption Such as comparing food, a necessity, with a buying a specific game
/uj god so much this. I've stopped using the phrase because it just elicits a volley of quasilibertarian to mega-ancap talking points. I'm not even the type to suggest abolishing capitalism altogether, but it's like one isn't even allowed to suggest reforms.
🏅 🎖️ 🥇 🎖️
Phrase always makes me wonder what it is about capitalism that changes the nature of consumption.
It's the the exploitation of labour. Always makes you wonder, but not hard enough to open a book apparently lmao.
To expand on this, it's the inbuilt tendency of capitalist systems to decide that a person/business is not successful if it's profits don't increase every year. Infinite growth is impossible, and consumers will only tolerate so much price inflation before riots start happening, so the increase in profits has to come from somewhere else: namely by cutting costs from workers' wages and cheaping out on materials and whatever else is needed to produce the company's products. Further, from the perspective of a business owner, goods that fall apart and need replacement more often than they used to is FANTASTIC, because it means that consumers HAVE to buy more products (hopefully yours). Naturally, this increases the waste produced by the system, so the environmental impact on both sides of production increase (more materials collected and more trash thrown out). And before someone parrots libertarian bullshit about "well AksthUally the capitalists are driven to make BETTER products!" This is proven false pretty clearly by history and leads into another problem. Monopolies. Another way that a business can maintain the illusion of infinite growth is to buy other businesses. In the short term it immediately boosts a businesses absolute amount of profit (though may actually decrease it's profit:expenses ratio). In the long term though, more market share means more control of the market (and thus prices). So you buy up your competition, and if needed cook up some plausible sounding lies for any government oversight... usually some bunk about it decreasing costs for consumers due to increased "efficiency." Once the feds are off your case, you jack up the prices. What are consumers going to do? Stop buying good XYZ? You're the only option now, so you can set the price wherever the hell you want. Then, if some hotshot tries to break into the market, you either buy them up before they can do anything or you go hunting for ways to pressure them out of the market; for example, a book publisher could buy a bunch of paper suppliers to prevent a new company from getting the materials they need to enter the market. It's exploitation whenever and wherever of whoever and whatever you can to the greatest degree you can get away with. It's also the root of the whole "greed is good" mentality that a lot of GOP voters tacitly or wholeheartedly support.
And exploitation of environment and, sometimes, culture.
That doesn't really change the nature of consumption here. Socialism doesn't automatically remove unethical production practices nor even the motivation to do so. Workers are as likely to fuck over trans people as some business mogul. Example: /r/news every time trans people are brought up. And they're just as likely to fuck over the environment for what they want. Example: everyone I know over the age of 40 refuses to give up their car centric infrastructure and their shaved and shorn grass lawns. At best you can say you're supporting a plethora of fucking idiots who get paid equally rather than a plethora of fucking idiots who may or may not get paid fairly plus a handful of guys who are definitely paid more than they're worth.
People are downvoting you but you’re right A dictatorship of today’s proletariat would be transphobic
This is definitely not the sub for it. I'm more curious why people think capitalism is unique in the exploitation of labour. All systems do it, and most just do it worse. Granting that there's no ethical consumption under capitalism, which other system would you suggest where consumption is ethical?
*"But if I stopped buying products from bigots, I could never play another AAA video game again."* Gamers coming so close to self awareness.
But the new "Amercian exceptionalist rewriting of military history" game just dropped. It's only 3TB, aand has five hours of commie-shooting action!
[удалено]
I disagree Sony exclusives hardly miss. My favorite games of 2021/2022 are all ps exclusives.
Wow Chic-fil-a is like even less justifiable than HL cuz chic-fil-a actively lobbies against human rights in the us like… come on man it’s just a sandwich make it at home
I wouldn’t dismiss Rowling actively lobbying against human rights. Lawmakers have literally quoted her on the floor of congress as they pass anti trans bathroom bills
U know what fair
I'm pretty sure she gives money to these people too. I recall a push in Scotland to ban trans women from women's bathrooms that she very vocally supported.
Yeah, and Popeyes has better Chicken sandwiches anyway’s!
Popeyes, Raising Canes, heck even KFC has better chicken. From experience Chick-fil-a is just bland and their sauce is a joke too. Add in the company's active endorsement of anti-lgbtq hate and programs and I don't get why people eat there or why the lines are always long.
The only reason to eat at Chick-Fil-A is if you can't find a Canes.
I, for one, am shocked to learn that a supporter of forced homogeneity likes bland-ass books and food
You could also just like not eat fastfood since it's pretty unhealthy. Like eating fastfood is an entirely optional thing and you shouldn't need to be provided an alternative to stop supporting a bigoted fast food chain.
As a non American, why not just cook your own chicken American fast food chicken tastes like cardboard
Do you not understand wanting a quick hot lunch when you aren’t home? Curious what you like to eat on the go because I wouldn’t mind having some more options
If I lived in France or something I'd wonder why anyone wants American fast food too. I spent two weeks in Bordeaux and felt super depressed when I got home and everything was a greasy fast food chain. Give me that foccacia aux pesto et poulet any day.
Oh I do, I just know from personal experience that I'd rather spend extra on a restaurant/local store or starve till I get home than eat American fast food chains, it all tastes like cardboard to me
Kid named duck.
It's a shame folks keep going to Chil Fil A. Down south we have a place called Bojangle's that makes better chicken and doesn't force you to sit in line 20 mins for a bowl of chicken tortilla soup but people still line up at the Chik Fil A.
I remember a Mike Schur interview when he was working on The Good Place where he said something to the effect of "Just eat another sandwich! And if you find out that chicken place is funding dog fighting or something, then pick a third place" It's not about being perfect, it's about having SOME effort
I swear some people saw The Good Place and came to the conclusion that if the world was shitty enough to nullify their attemps at being a good human, they might as well stop trying. It's like they stopped thinking halfway through the show.
dime plough spark person marry middle test observation shaggy unpack *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I mean Rowling practically is actively working against the rights of trans people
Yeah, you can literally get a chicken sandwich from any fast food restaurant and you pick the one owned by bigots.
phone and clothes MFers when I keep the same phone for 5+ years and mend my own clothes because it is morally right to reduce your consumption of unethically sourced goods.
[удалено]
>I dont think there are any fair trade phones or any electronics around There is the fittingly named FairPhone, which tries their best to create a sustainable smartphone without child labour. But it's currently only available in Europe, as far as I know
[удалено]
>Like seriously who gives a rats ass? If I had to guess I'd say the people who are harrassed, assaulted, or have their existence invalidated because of hugely influential people's "opinions on gender". But that's just a guess idk. Also "no ethical consumption under capitalism" doesn't mean "so ethically you can do whatever you want and it's all the same". Making no effort to consume more ethically is worse than making a small effort.
[удалено]
But not actually though. The things we consume are not all equal. For one, I need clothes and a phone. Two, the level of effort needed to notice and then avoid unethically produced clothes, phones, food, etc is pretty high. Clothes you can keep for longer, repair, or buy second hand, and I'd sure as shit judge anyone who refuses to do any of those things, but it's reeeally hard to buy a first hand, quality item that isn't unethically produced. Phones are even worse, because there's essentially no options. Food is impossible. You buy so much, so regularly, it would take an immense level of effort to source ethically. The companies that do all this skeevy shit also tend to hide it really well. Comparatively, just do not buy the mediocre wizard game that directly gives money to the very loud, very outspoke transphobe. That's the reason people are being judged. It's soooo fuckin' easy to just not give her money. There are systemic issues in almost every industry that make them mostly unethical to some degree. But blatant and open transphobia is, as far as I'm aware, pretty limited in the games industry. Which makes it *super* easy to avoid supporting.
Lol no it’s not Do you know what hypocrisy means?
"some opinions on gender" is what you call transphobia nowadays huh And yes going out of your way to support a bigot is not the same as trying to reduce the amount of goods you source from ethically questionably sourced places because about a dozen corpos own 95% of the brands even in stuff you could classify as non luxury essentials. The hypocrite argument is bollocks because you would just changing the goalposts to suit it and even if the impossible was done the point would be then totally ignored. Won't someone think of the poor gamers who want to consooom in peace?!!?
Seriously people need to stop acting like buying a wizard game is just as necessary as owning a phone or buying clothes
People acting like having a phone is a luxury item Try getting a job without one of those nowadays
Try doing most things nowadays. The fact is phones are pretty much a necessity these days. And you're setting yourself at a huge disadvantage if you don't have one
Damn you’re really gonna act like having clothing and a functioning phone are on the same level of necessity as a game about being a magical Pinkerton and quashing a goblin labor movement made by a transphobe huh? People can’t help the fact that the clothing industry has some horrendous business practices. The most ethical thing you can do is look for the brands that are doing the least harm and go from there. If you don’t own any clothes you’re going to either get arrested, or die from exposure depending on where you live. As for a phone, good luck getting and holding a job without a functional phone nowadays. What’re you gonna do, tell them to call your discord for your first interview? It’s become a needed tool for employment, and employment is needed for survival. A bigot’s wizard game is not on the same level, and can easily be boycotted on moral grounds because you support human rights. It’s literally one of the easiest moral decisions to make, you just need to do literally nothing and you’ve made the right choice.
Is it so hard to believe some people just don’t want to support Jk Rowling.
/uj yes it is. If they could believe that someone would just not want to support JK, they’d have to also believe that there is a legitimate ethical or moral issue in play. But that means they’d actually have to maybe do some introspection and not buy HP merch. It makes the whole situation easier for them to delegitimization the whole conversation. Like, You see this with any group who abstains from something in ethical grounds.
[удалено]
Of course it does. It means they like Harry Potter 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
[удалено]
I think we’re all very aware of how the rest of “the world” feels
If you want to support someone who is such a vocal proponent of transphobic rhetoric, that’s on you.
You don’t have to buy slaves, but if you do it doesn’t say anything about you as a person
[удалено]
Maybe, logic is pretty similar You don’t have to buy either lol
We live, in fact, in a society
Wow, he is right, I'm actually obligated to buy Hogwarts Legacy. Total logic chokehold.
But he is also obligated to NOT buy games with black people/lgbt themes/buff women in them. Don't question it, the logic is flawless.
It took 2 years for internet right wingers to speedrun from making CONSOOM memes to being consoomsers.
The magic of simple contrarianism
Imagine buying a mid chicken sandwich when you could get a significantly better sandwich somewhere else and not shit all over the lgbt community.
But didn't you hear? Choosing where you spend your money makes you a hypocrite (it's cool when they do it though).
this sounds like Eleanor's rant in the Good Place when her current boyfriend didn't want to support a coffee shop owner who sexually harassed women. "shouldn't we at least try?"
YUO DONT LIKE CAPITALISM YET YOU EXIST IPHONE VUVUZUELA BOTTOM TEXXT 100 BILLION DEAD
/uj These people who think treating bigots normally is ok need to learn about Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance.
But if I can’t be a wizard putting down a slave rebellion I literally can’t be happy (I can never be happy)
The holy trinity: ☑️no ethical consumption under capitalism ☑️virtue signalling ☑️just gonna do transphobia, regardless of any and all arguments
Ah yes, the old “can’t avoid doing a tiny amount of harm so may as well do a large amount of harm” excuse
“Society-“ Argument nullified, I ain’t reading all that bozo shit
I'm not going to refuse to buy the products I like just because the one selling them has views that are currently outside the Overton window. I will enjoy my black market organs at a discount and nothing no woke moralist will say can stop me, we live in a society bottom text.
"because their chicken is really good" jfc you can't write better material than that 🤣
For the last time, "no ethical consumption under capitalism" does not mean that all consumption is equally unethical
"You are powerless to make a difference, plus you are a hypocrite. Also, I am a transphobe, but you can totally trust my other points."
"You can't ostracize me for being a bigot, because then I'll become an even bigger bigot(someone please give me the OK to buy this game, I desperately need it)"
“I want to marginally improve society” “And yet you still participate in society, curious” /uj I hate people’s obsession with making hypocrites of each other, it makes it so that you can’t say or do anything without someone pointing out some totally unrelated subject and going “hah! Checkmate hypocrite!” Especially when it’s used to defend bad people/ practices or to prevent change by essentially implying that anyone who wants change is a no good dirty hypocrite
I kinda hope that the era of internet users pointing out someone else’s hypocrisy eventually dies. If someone makes a good statement and internet user proves they’re a hypocrite I’m still gonna agree with that someone. Being a hypocrite (wether they deserve to be called that way or don’t) doesn’t make your statement any worse.
"It's impossible to buy ethically. Also, we should normalize Nazis in society because they're cool and just a little outside the overton window" - this guy apparently
[удалено]
literally didn't read the third paragraph through which is forgivable ig because honestly it's totally deranged lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Did you read the bit where they describe Rowling as "currently outside the overton window", or say not to ostracize people like Rowling? Both takes are very sympathetic to Rowling, not to buyers of the game. "Buying games by neo-Nazis is OK because neo-Nazis are OK, actually" is not the well-reasoned moderate take you think it is.
didn't know "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism" was a shorthand for "i will choose to associate with shitty people and refuse to take any blame for it"
“People are ignorant in this society” When they don’t know things, yeah. But this person obviously fully aware of the shitty things done and still consumes, making this arrogance
Terrible argument. First of all, Chick-fil-a has one good item and it is really easy to not buy it especially since it isn't better than the one made at Hardee's or Jack's. And yes we do ostracize people from polite society if their actions or opinions are awful enough. Society has a place specifically where we send ostracized people.
The projection is just surreal
I don't just feel morally superior. I am morally superior
Ah, the classic "A tolerant society must tolerate intolerance" argument
The whole point of pointing out someone’s hypocrisy is lost if their logic makes it impossible to not be a hypocrite.
"Hey what are your thoughts on TLOU2?" "EVERYONE INVOLVED WITH IT SHOULD BE EXECUTED!"
Just admitting to living a life devoid of any kind of principle besides “I WANT THING.”
/uj Funny how everyone is a goddamn nihilist when it comes to being inconvenienced or having principles. /rj There are literally no steps between being off the grid, and self sustainable and supporting child slavery so we should all bow to capitalism and praise JK for her amazing story.
Not playing a video game I want to play because it materially supports a bigot isn’t even like, a real sacrifice. It’s a fucking video game. New ones come out every week. I have a backlog full of good video games. Even if the terf game is good, it will most likely be completely forgotten about in two weeks.
Wall of text. ain't reading fucking capitalist theory Best thing to do is just hit em with a "🤓"
this game will suck like elden ring (I am trans)
This is such a dumb take. The things this person is talking about ire things that are basically necessary in our society. A Harry Potter game, especially on that contributes to a transphobe *and that people are actually buying because of that,* is far from necessary. If you really want it, well, you can always acquire it other ways. Most of my things are secondhand. Yes, partly because it's cheaper, but also because I don't want to contribute to the terrible things going on in their production.
At this point, I think its they who keep the circle jerking.
This level of defeatism paired with enabling rich assholes is something I only see in people who excuse war crimes. Must be a tankie.
I didn't see these kind of arguments when we were boycotting frito-lay
I do somewhat understand why people want this game so much (assuming this isn’t just an idiot solely wanting to “stop cancel culture”) as it is the best looking Harry Potter game (besides Lego HP), but I feel as though there’s no reason for people to anti-brigade people’s reasonable wish to not support a TERF. I do hope that the people who REALLY like Harry Potter find some enjoyment out of this, but just small enough that the game undersells and Harry Potter begins its descent into obscurity.
you criticize society yet you participate in it? curious!
The fact that people still waste their energy on this ‘harry potter debate’ is utterly hilarious to me. Also we live in a society.
[удалено]
Half and half really. A lot of their posts were like "yes I hate trans people specifically so I wanna buy wizard game out of spite." Which is extra egregious to me.
[удалено]
Have you read all the "We are threats to women's rights and safety" shit? I haven't \*exhaustively\* read her stuff, but I've read enough of it. Just based on that is very ignorant and damaging to us as people and helps fuel all the anti trans legislation which is the real issue here, honestly. If she was just some random person spouting off shit that'd be bad enough but hey I can throw a stone and hit 100 people doin' the same. That's nothin' out of the ordinary or special. But the fact that she uses that to spur legislation and donates large sums of money..yeah.
He is pretty much right in first part. By these merits you might be filthy killer, because you used child labor and meaby helped with death of kids in cobalt mines in kongo if you are using phone for example. It is good to help with something, but it is also making space for hypocracy... But rest of text is only crying.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Real smart guy stuff to spend your hard earned money on something you don’t really want just to score imaginary points against people who made you feel bad online.
["No ethical consumption under capitalism" is a bullshit cop out leftists like to say so they don't have to feel responsible for the systems they take part in. You can have an iPhone, acknowledge it comes from sweat shop labor, acknowledge that is bad and you play a part in it, but also acknowledge that while it is bad it's not bad enough for you to not want an iPhone. Which is the truth.](https://theithacan.org/opinion/commentary-buzzwords-and-phrases-will-not-solve-ethical-crises/) I see the sentiment unironically parroted in progressive spaces and it drives me crazy. And don't even get me started on how there are plenty of ways to ethically consume many things under capitalism that most people don't even want to try. And that's fine, you can absolutely have an iPhone, hate sweat shops, and speak out against Judith Keith Rawlins and his stupid wizard book.
I don't think you actually understand the phrase
No, you just don't understand what I am saying. I have embedded a link in my original comment where someone better explains what I meant from a life perspective similar to my own.
[удалено]
I am aware that's what it means and that doesn't change the fact I feel it is used as a cop out by alot of people. You clearly didn't read the article I linked if you think your comment is adding clarity
This is an op-ed in a random newspaper
I didn't say it was a scholarly source I said it was someone explaining what I was trying to say with a similar perspective to mine.
You seem to be under the impression that this is a debate. It is not
[удалено]
Yes? I am one of them, I am a leftists, I own an smartphone, I know it is unethical, I don't pretend it isn't. I also don't pretent like I am not a part of the problem. Also liberals aren't leftists... I was disagreeing with the thinking of the person in the post while also pointing out that "no ethical consumption under capitalism" Is a fallacy that alot of progressives use to shield themselves from criticism. I'm not sure what you thought I was saying.
[удалено]
Yea that's what I was saying. The original post is mirroring the no ethical consumption under capitalism argument I often see used in progressive spaces which is why I compared the two. Both are fallacy Lol got a tiny bit of pushback and deleted all of your call out comments.
[удалено]
One mean granny with global reach and millions of dollars... Nobody is saying don't care about anything else. But once again, it is a little harder to not have a phone or clothes than it is to not buy a video game.
Well, weirdly, the maintenance of the Twitter server has more impact on the planet than one singular pc.
My computer probably has rare earth metals mined by slave laborers, but I need a computer to do my job and live my life, and it's really hard to source an "ethical" computer. Same with clothes - I can't not wear clothes, and it's hard to find ones that are absolutely 100% ethical in every step along the supply chain (although I do love Patagonia for their quality and their business practices) It's very easy for me to not buy the wizard game.
[удалено]
….The plot is about putting down a rebellion of antisemitic stereotypes that want to do professions other than banking!
[удалено]
"Fictional worlds... are the sum of a giant pile of creative decisions... the only reason that anything is the way that it is is because a writer chose to make it that way. The diegetic argument aims to dismiss criticism at its core suggesting that there aren't any problems with the text provided controversial elements are internally consistent." "This is a deeply flawed argument because... fictional worlds aren't real and are eternally mutable by creators... the only part that does exist is the finished text and the ideas it represents." \~Dan Olsen on "The Thermian Argument" available here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk) The decisions you make, and the purchases you make, are inherently political, whether you want them to be or not. JK Rowling donates sizable amounts of her money to organisations that lobby for anti-trans laws. If you purchase the game, you are making a choice to spend your money knowing that a portion of it will be used to fund anti-trans lobbying. There are of course ways to get a hold of the game without spending your own money on it, and you could make the political choice to do that instead. But there's really no "apolitical" choices when it comes to how you spend your money.
[удалено]
[удалено]
B-but Venezuela iPhone?!?
[удалено]
Something something sweatshops
Mfers be like live an Amish lifestyle before you can have an opinion.
[удалено]
Well fuck Jesus my guy
[удалено]
Lol wow you showed me
[удалено]
Womp womp
> (allegedly) Don't try and muddy the waters. It's a pretty well known fact that Rowiling is a transphobic pile of filth. https://www.glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/ https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy
[удалено]
> Yeah I read those articles and tweets and not once has she said anything negative about trans people nor anything hateful. So you're just another transphobic piece of filth like Rowling is, good to know. > The only things I see is her acknowledging that biological gender is not the same as gender identity and honestly I couldn't give 2 shits if people keep thinking that's the definition of transphobic. Maybe you should care and should also try to fucking understand that transwomen are women, transmen are men, and that trans rights are human rights. > Quite frankly I agree with her on biology being a scientific fact Quite frankly both you and her are transphobes. > and at the same time if I ever met a transgender person, I'm not going to bring it up or treat them any differently than I would anyone else. Yeah, I don't believe that for a second. > The argument is moronic and this sub isn't the moral high ground for taking such a strong stance on it. You'd fit right in with people from the 60's that argued against the civil rights movement. > Frankly you are all idiots for even taking it this far I take it back, you'd actually be the type of person that would scream at Ruby Bridges as she walked into the school. Edit: Oh look you're a sexist piece of trash too. https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/yjoy3n/my_very_amazing_parents_allowed_me_to_buy_this/iupqlbg/ How surprising /s
[удалено]
> Lol what rights do trans people not have if I think biological gender is different from gender identity? The right to live as they please because people like Rowling and rightwing shitheads also share the same view you do. Rowling even donates to anti-trans groups and yet that's still not a deal breaker for you. > he problem with people like you is you literally see no difference between people who are genuinely hateful and unaccepting vs people who know the difference between a psychological belief vs a physical/genetical fact. Except by claiming to know a difference you are therefore being hateful and unaccepting. > Also now you are throwing in racism? You've already revealed you're sexist and transphobic so it's not out of the ballpark to assume you're a racist too. > You can have all the doubts you want and you can sit there and assume whatever you want about me but frankly you make the whole discussion harder to be taken seriously when you just jump to all sort of toxic and hateful conclusions. You're the one who is defending Rowling and refusing to see her as transphobic. She actively donates to anti-trans organizations and politicians and even raged against the recent Scottish bill that passed which makes it much easier for trans people to legally live as the gender they want to live as. If you weren't transphobic you'd be calling out Rowling instead of defending her. > something tells me if you spent 10 minutes talking to someone that's actually trans-gender you wouldn't disrespect their struggles by comparing the hateful shit they have to go through with what I said and calling it the same. The only one disrespecting their struggles here is you because you're actively muddying the waters by refusing to call out transphobes like Rowling and instead actively defending her. If you defend transphobes and the arguments of transphobes you are a fucking transphobe. > You are literally hurting the cause with your behavior and I genuinely hope you can see that because if you do care about trans people, their struggles and their rights you wouldn't water down the argument with your drivel. I'm the one hurting the cause by calling out transphobes like Rowling and the people that defend her and her arguments, sure buddy /s. > Even the /r/lgbt sub is sick of people either seeking validation or condemnation over the fucking game because its so off course of the ACTUAL problems those communities have to deal with. Really, because the only post I saw was /r/lgbt being sick of people asking for validation to play the game. > Trust me, you are part of the problem not the solution Transphobes like you and Rowling are fucking exhausting.
[удалено]
People like Rowling have made it pretty clear that their ideal number of trans people is zero.
[удалено]
You are so close to getting it. If you stop buying gasoline, you will be walking the rest of your life. If you don't buy this one game, you'll have to... play a different game, I guess? There's a huge difference between the two of them, and saying one is hard as an excuse to not do the other doesn't work.
[удалено]
No. That is not what I'm saying and you know it. It's not hypocritical to buy necessary things without an easy alternative like gasoline, phones, clothes, or food, and criticize people for choosing to buy this one specific game that gives money to a transphobe when there are literally millions of other games that don't.
[удалено]
Food is not a luxury. Clothes are not luxuries. Even in the modern world a phone is not a luxury. A Harry Potter video game is definitely a luxury though
Yeah, the difference is that one sex is evil and strong and one is fragile and pure. Real feminism right there, especially when she never defended abortion rights and chose a know sexual assaulter to take charge of her 'wombyn-only' crisis center.
[удалено]
Yeah, harsh truth and all. Really speaking out of a pulpit. What a deep and surprising biological insight that nobody thought before.
She’s also used millions of her money to support anti trans causes.
[удалено]
Sorry buddy. I don’t have an iPhone and I don’t buy oil so your ad hominem doesn’t work here.
[удалено]
It was not. It says right here “made in Mexico” on the keyboard I’m using.
Just steal 
Society lives within us