Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

 
I fear there is a reckoning coming in Texas. People are pissed and they aren't going to force them to reduce the price of power after such a colossal fuck up, the power companies are not going to be punished, the people are.
Isn’t it amazing how the lack of federal interference is benefiting the Texan customers?
 
Isn’t it amazing how the lack of federal interference is benefiting the Texan customers?


It is the gift that keeps on giving, like herpes...
 
Jesus would have wanted for profit utilities after all.
 
I'm tired of old men complaining about cancelling shit. I'm watching Bill Maher bellyaching about Dr Susse and Mr Potato Dick. He called it a culture war I call it inoffencive business decisions.
 
And that is why I like listening to Bill Maher, at some point or another he pisses off everyone.
 
And that is why I like listening to Bill Maher, at some point or another he pisses off everyone.

My problem isn't specific to Bill Maher just a week ago old men at CPAC were the ones bellyaching. I can understand he feels that he was cancelled before. However; he should recognize the difference between his show being cancelled because he said terrorist on 9/11 were brave when it was called Politically Incorrect vs Disney firing an actor for their public statements.

Their point is that anything done to restrict peoples behavior to reflect on the company is bad. That's fine open a publishing house for children's books and publish racist shit. My problem is they are angry that a publisher chose not to continue to republish six book by Dr Susse. Who cares it's not your company buy the company buy the rights then publish it all you want.

The CEO of Hasbro had to come out and say we never were planning on canceling the Potato Head line of toys. Olds are angry because some rumor that they wouldn't be required to buy two boxes of gender specific accessories to gender a potato. It wasn't even reality they were angry about.

Meanwhile healthcare in this country is limited and extremely expensive to the point citizens choose medication or food.
 
Well, it is possible to be worried about healthcare and also feel angry about things getting changed or canceled. It does not have to be a zero-sum position. If anything thanks to doomscrolling everyone is angry and worried about everything. Also you may take solace that this is knee-jerk but the pressure on healthcare will continue to exist until a favorable solution is reached (and beyond).

As for the examples you posted, I feel the problem in the Potato Head toy was just an error in communication and a lazy story which would get outrage clicks. As for Dr. Seuss, I believe that a much better way to handle it is with the text equivalent of the disclaimers that you get on Old Cartoon DVD collections and other media making it clear that the contents therein contain "outdated cultural depictions" (Not my words). But again, let's cornflate it with outrage clicks. It's not revisionism to remove them of course, that would be to pretend they never existed like Disney does with Song of the South, but it is very hard to learn from acts from the past if we bury them.

Everything should be available to anyone at any time, even if it must be clearly labeled as a product of its time and explained that while it was something acceptable at the time of release, such actions are now questionable at best and horrifying at worst. That is just my opinion.
 
Everything should be available to anyone at any time

That's not how property works

As for the examples you posted, I feel the problem in the Potato Head toy was just an error in communication and a lazy story which would get outrage clicks.

That's my point besides the inaccuracy it's stupid to think that the potato has a gender. To me it would be something if the Hasbro corporation said "We get it Mr Potato Head, Mrs Potato Head, it's all one head. We have been robbing you blind buying two of these things so were making it all one toy and were paying reparations to the parents who we had buy two of the damn things." They arent even doing that these culture warriors lashing out at their own imagination.

even if it must be clearly labeled as a product of its time and explained that while it was something acceptable at the time of release, such actions are now questionable at best and horrifying at worst. That is just my opinion.

I think distilled your Seuss view and sure if you owned the property... Just know the culture warriors would think you cancelled it.

"Placing disclaimer warnings on a beloved kids' show is another example of the 'woke' mob's destruction."


If you owned that property it would be yours, to put a disclaimer on, or to alter the images (which they had done in the past), or to remove them from the market as you wish. No matter what's done it's not a culture war it's a business decision.
 
I'm tired of old men complaining about cancelling shit. I'm watching Bill Maher bellyaching about Dr Susse and Mr Potato Dick. He called it a culture war I call it inoffencive business decisions.
Than ask for a stop to cancelling things.

If you think some things are not suitable for children, do not give them to children. But to take them away from everyone -if- people would still buy them, that's a bad sign. It's ok to say: "hey, this does not sell anymore, we're closing it". It's unsettling to hear "hey, this 80-year-old comic book is racist, so we won't sell it anymore (because we have decided that you are unable to properly understand it in its context)". The first is business, the second is censorship. And quite bigoted.

Keep in mind that I firmly believe that culture and knowledge belong to everyone, so if a company dismisses a product because they don't want to produce it anymore, someone else should have the right to produce it instead.

If someone wanted access to something, either the owner of the rights accept to sell it to them, or it allows for it to be reproduced or published elsewhere for free. If it's commercially unviable, there's no risk of the owner getting denied it's earning, is it? If it is commercially viable, then why would you not produce and sell it, or allow someone else to produce and sell it?

The idea of not being able to access something because its rights belong to someone who won't sell or allow me to access it is common, but it is insane. The moment the owner will start selling the product again, then I won't have the right to get it for free anymore. This is how it should be.

If it was so, Dr Seuss books would still be printed, for example.

In Italy, it is forbidden to put on stage any work from Brecht, because the owner of the rights only allow a very selected few. It does not matter if you are doing it for free: you simply can't. It is a disgusting situation. Brecht has been effectively cancelled in italian theatres, and we have all lost something to the selfishness of the right's owner. Luckily, 2026 is near, after which, the owner's rights will cease to exist.
 
Keep in mind that I firmly believe that culture and knowledge belong to everyone, so if a company dismisses a product because they don't want to produce it anymore, someone else should have the right to produce it instead.

Well thats a fantasy.

Than ask for a stop to cancelling things.

My point is that some of this isn't even being "canceled" it's just crazy conservatives shouting insanity. Look back at the Potato Head issue, nothing happened. Yet some of the biggest names in conservative politics spent more time bemoaning the gender of plastic potatoes than discussing balancing the budget.
 
Last edited:
Well thats a fantasy.
Many things were fantasies, before they became reality. It might as well happen to this one.

My point is that some of this isn't even being "canceled" it's just crazy conservatives shouting insanity. Look back at the Potato Head issue, nothing happened. Yet some of the biggest names in conservative politics spent more time bemoaning the gender of plastic potatoes than discussing balancing the budget.

Mr Potato Head is a very big misstep by Hasbro. They gave a botched explanation that will get many people away from them while not getting anyone nearer. It's because they tried to virtue-signal and advertise it to get attention and praise.

Had they simply modified the logo/name in an organic manner, nobody would have complained.
 
That's not how property works

Sure it is. I own something. I make commercially available. If customers do not want it, I no longer produce it. If they do want it, I produce it and receive something in exchange. As I see you are doubling down on your viewpoint, fine, an example of that is licensing rights. I can give you my licensing rights in exchange for money.

Canceling it altogether is morally wrong, and not only because burying it will give it that Forbidden fruit status that makes the fringe crazies want to see it or because you give those people that you hate proper ammunition that "THE LIBRULS ARE CANCELING EVERYTHING", as you no doubt perceive that they are going.
 
Hey, I still can't over Land 'O Lakes butter no longer has the Native American on the box. Using butter now does not feel the same.
 
^Isn't that whitewashing, though?
 
^Isn't that whitewashing, though?

To me, it's just companies pandering to the public that any brown skinned mascot is used as a means to exploit a race. Perhaps I'm just ignorant to this but it's something I did not understand as being a problem other than to make companies look good as if what they did made any difference to the perception of their product.
 
Top