Is the New York Times fuckin' serious right now. (AKA another attempt to undermine Luigi's support).
Is the New York Times fuckin' serious right now. (AKA another attempt to undermine Luigi's support).
It couldn't be because we've been starved of seeing anything resembling actual justice could it?
Horrible people do horrible things and have been getting away with it since before I was born. No wonder people are reacting the way they are.
Being handsome doesn't hurt, but people like him for what he did. He could be a hunchback and there'd be supportive quasimodo memes I'm sure.
NYT is as corpo as media can get. We must remember what side they are on. Journalism is dead.
NYT has always been pro-corporate.
Law/justice is also dead, especially as folks stop believing in any piece of state evidence.
Two seconds later it could be you or me who are picked up and demonized for random stuff.
Truthfully this is my image state power. They make shiat up 100% of the time. So it's not a question of is it true or not. It's a question of how they are lying. Like a puzzle to be solved or exposed for the entertainment, but even that eventually grows old. Oh a cop MSM or a politician corpo said it ... pfft!
Citizens don't believe anything out of the State or Media. Obviously not a healthy situation when everyone is considered an actor.
I was listening to the radio this morning and the dude was saying he'd rather have CEO shootings in the news than all the school shootings. It's not dead, it's just hard to find a pulse.
https://www.podbean.com/ep/pb-rfj2f-1765e1f
Here I was heavily paraphrasing.
They're trying every angle they can think of to avoid admitting that people didn't react negatively to this because literally everyone in the country has been negatively affected by people like that CEO.
people didn't react negatively to this because literally everyone in the country has been negatively affected by people like that CEO.
Also outside the US country. I'm Brazilian, I've been following the news about this event, and I can't help but notice there's a hope inside me that this event could somehow result in CEOs all around the world (especially in the southern hemisphere) changing and ditching their greed. Well, of course it's very unlikely to happen, maybe I have some tiny optimistic side buried under tons of massive pessimism of mine.
changing and ditching their greed
No they won't because while they of course are greedy, it's not really greed which is fueling that on the systemic level, but the inherent capitalism mechanism to concentrate capital. Companies compete and that competition ultimately leads to either monopoly or formation of cartel, the ones with more profits are the winners and the losers get eliminated from the market.
What they will do, is to hire more bodyguards, isolate themselves from society even more and fund more propaganda like the article in topic.
The only thing that can change things, as proven historically, is not adventurism (however cool is to dish at least minuscule part of overdue justice) nor the spontaneous outrage, but the organized workers power threatening the capitalist class and their government servants.
In another sense: these CEOs are the people responsible for infiltrating other countries with the shitty US model of healthcare.
I’ve been hoping it won’t be the last CEO to get deposed.
It won’t happen, best we can hope for is that it tempers the greed for a bit.
It would need to happen a few (dozen) more times to effect real change.
If I believed in a deep state (which I categorically do not) NYT would be part of it.
I do, however, believe in giant media companies funded by the 1%, who have just lost one of their own to one of the plebs, staffed by management who will steer things in the needed direction. Any doubt I had of that has been destroyed by their coverage of Gaza.
I've seen multiple stories about the positive reactions.
The classic scapegoats aren't there this time. Can't blame him being the wrong race, wrong economic class, wrong mentally, wrong physically, or wrong sexually. Now people are actually looking at the issue that caused the "crime" and that's not good to some people.
Pretty successful and well off kid, definitely not just someone desperate and broke they can tear apart, and he's articulating his position against these fuckers. It's really beautiful. A folk hero.
Luigi is deff what the media has fed society as "CHAD"
Not even being ironic here tbh
Now the only explanation why Chad would do this is "he had bad back"
Alright... go on...
FDR was also part of the elite class and he had his own issues....
Corporate media is going to protect their advertisers by shotgunning bullshit articles trying to change the narrative
"For the love of God, please stop looking up!" —Corporate Media
No matter what the topic, you can always count on the NYT for a shitty take. The NYT has a very distinctive flavor of editorial shittiness that's quite hard to define but instantly recognizable. They want us to catch their carefully curated blind spots.
Top recommended on my feed was NYT article headlined "largest immigration surge in US History" under Biden. That was their top number one story today. Suggested both that it was a key factor in Harris loss and that it has already ended because of Trump election
If it wasn't so tragic it would be amusing to see the bourgeois factions stumble over each other. The parties had their obvious policies and they made a certain twisted sense for a time.
Now that none of it has worked, they're both running out of policies and simply stealing the other's lines. You can see the visceral confusion in the demi-gods and priests of capital and in the faithful.
It's the same across the western world, as the 'left' parties are unanimously trying to out-compete the 'right' on immigration. The politicians and pundits are tripping over themselves and each other. They just don't know how to frame it.
Who now is the baddy and who the goody? If we all agree that immigration is bad, does that mean the baddies are now the goodies and are the goodies now the baddies because maybe being a racist isn't the best look.
Major policies have been swapped before. It's like light through a prism and the right colour is distilled and purified. The GOP takes up anti-abortion and we now see the result of that policy-swap once it becomes the platform piece. Fuck knows what horrors we're in for when all the 'left' parties steal and horde the anti-immigrant policy as the right abandons it in favour of 'more imported servants, please'.
I used to read it a lot because it had good arts and literary sections back when actual papers were a thing. Reading the Sunday Times with a cup of coffee on Sunday in my bathrobe was a pleasure. Now they just specialize in these garbage takes.
Fr. Even the right wing broadsheets had good investigative journalism at one point. It's all gone now.
The greatest trick the Times ever pulled was convincing the world it had a left-leaning bias[1].
The pro-slavery New York Times?
Because the arts and literary sections and the magazine were actually quite decent so it gave that impression.
Any place that names trump person of the year is a rag. Although the NYT has been such for quite a while anyways. I refuse to even give them click through a anymore.
Did they do that? Holy fuck.
Hey NYT. Suck it.
Stupid sexy Luigi.
More of a weird looking criminal really, but ok.
Not Antiwork for me, but a great post.
I can't find a better community for this, sorry. I just want left leaning people to know what bullshit they're pulling.
It is part of the class war... I would assume we can get some class solidarity here.