A whopping total of 1670 major American corporations sign a "diversity pledge"

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

[deleted]

all 31 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]CircumsteinRabbi Circumstein 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

Here's why claims that 'capital is the prime mover' a la Keith Woods are stupid.

Capital is clearly subordinate to ideology here. There is no way that the sycophantic genuflecting towards alphabet and Left-wing extremist groups is even remotely good for business. Yet it's exactly what they do, donating millions to these groups and plastering pro-alphabet and pro-BLM propaganda all over their social media pages.

They're the fools making people like that corrupt lesbian BLM 'leader' who bought four mansions filthy rich. Nobody seriously thinks that she got that money legitimately. She effectively got away with it, too, simply resigning from BLM so that the spotlight is no longer on her.

Capitalists probably full well realize all this but simply suffer from short-termism. They know that the 'global economy' will likely last long enough for them to get out fine, and that's the furthest ahead most people care to think. Forced diversity and financing extremism won't ruin their businesses fast enough for the individuals in them to care. Those running the groups pushing all this from top-down, like BlackRock, will be dead by that time.

They're no different to those environmentalist cranks who make no meaningful changes to their lifestyles, and for whom environmentalism consists purely of performative waffling about how everyone else (capitalists, states, everyone else but themselves, as well as abstractions like 'racism') is responsible. When everyone has this mindset all that happens is perpetual blameshifting.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

There is no way that the sycophantic genuflecting towards alphabet and Left-wing extremist groups is even remotely good for business.

How do you know that? Left wing groups have a massive amount of power and I look at these payments as a form of a protection racket. You're paying not to get bad press and not be attacked. Sounds like a pretty sound business investment to me.

For me globohomo and big capital are two interlocking beasts. Trying to separate them doesn't work. The people who really pull the strings of capital share the globohomo ideology and are insanely to the left of the normal population -- even when you do find non left wing ones they're usually some various shade of libertarian like the Kochs.

Capital is the prime mover of globohomo because those with capital are globohomo. You can't say one is subordinate to the other.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're exactly right. Also check my comment, this is in the economic interests of capitalists.

The only way you can say otherwise is if you believe in the dumb 'Go Woke, Go Broke' myth which has no basis in reality. Woke companies don't care about losing low time preference demographics' money because that money will soon be transferred to high time preference groups who will gladly hand it back to them with interest.

[–]CircumsteinRabbi Circumstein 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Your first paragraph essentially admits that capital fears ideology ('massive amount of power') whereas ideology does not fear capital. Antifa/BLM do not fear 'bad press', etc.

Your second paragraph ends up reaffirming the same thing, i.e. that those who pull the strings of capital are using capital as a means to bring about a very-Left wing (i.e. ideological) end.

Keith Woods' debate with The Distributist at some point really came to this argument. KW subordinates ideology to capital, the Distributist subordinates capital to ideology.

I think it's a bit of a 'chicken and egg' thing. Capital and Left-wing ideology are so entwined that it's hard to see which is the mover and which is the responder (and then you have all the other stuff that relate to these two, like pathological altruism, J's, etc.)

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Capital and Left-wing ideology are so entwined that it's hard to see which is the mover and which is the responder

Read my comments, it'll become clear to you.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Antifa/BLM do not fear 'bad press', etc.

Because they have nothing to fear

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Nope. If you know anything about marketing and time preference you know that this is good for businesses long term. Non-whites and women spend all of their money, and it's on consumer goods. This increases cashflow for businesses that are selling consumer goods and allows them to continually grow. White and Asian men save a lot of their money, and buy assets. Obviously capitalists want to monopolise all assets and rent them out or put them to use producing consumer goods, whites and asians having wealth should be kept to a minimal from their perspective.

Women are responsible for a STAGGERING 85% of all consumer purchases, transfer as much wealth from men to women as possible and you have a whole lot of spending on essentially nothing. Capitalists are salivating at this prospect.

Wealth transfer from whites (and asians) to non-whites and you again get a lot of spending on consumer purchases rather than assets, allowing the capitalists to continue funneling all the wealth to themselves.

Not to mention white men are recognised as the only revolutionary threat by capitalism, transferring as much wealth away from them as possible means that in the event that they do organise in a mass movement they will have far less resources behind them to make anything of it.

All of this is led by political strategists and marketing departments. These same strategists occupy the CIA (and its predecessor) that funded guys like Marcuse to transform economically populist movements into defensive measures against any potential revolutionary movements. This is where the birth of Postmodernism, Critical Theory, the New Left came from. These things are the foundations of the post-Occupy 'Woke', 'Critical Race Theory' etc stuff. It's literally just capital and the state defending themselves from white men, the only group they have identified as a potential threat to their power. These are the people who dictate what the educational policy will be to the Intelligence-funded academics that create the curriculum taught in the education institutions. It comes directly from the capitalists and intelligence agencies (political strategists and counter-revolutionary officers IE FBI, CIA etc), the myth of the 'long march through the institutions' and leftoid subversion to the point they have power to bend capital to their whims is absolutely ridiculous. A brief study of the movements and individuals reveals endless links with intelligence, then any study of the effects of their ideas reveals how capital suddenly exploded in value when guys like Bernays and Marcuse were around (watch Century of the Self) and later on again in the 70s with the New Left, which is mysteriously precisely when wages got frozen in time but GDP has tripled since then. So the capitalists have tripled their wealth while the workers have actually depreciated in relative wealth. But we're expected to believe the rightoid myth that it just so happened that all of the leftoid stuff only benefited capital and they were just fools with bad ideas bumbling around? Doubtful.

The ideal world from the capitalist perspective is to have the low time preference in all the lowest paid jobs and high time preference in all the highest paid jobs. This way all that money immediately leaves the hands of the well paid dummies and enters the hands of the capitalists who can put it to use increasing their power.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

So women are literally destroying the environment.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

lol that's one way of looking at it

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Reading these numbers is surreal to be honest. I had no idea women had such a cancerous role in the economy.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah it was shocking the first time I saw it too, 85 fucking percent. It's insane.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It explains why there was the big push in the 1960s to get them out housemaking/traditional wives, are now just consumer NPC's.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Those numbers linked to are obviously not accurate.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

They're literally all sourced, feel free to prove them wrong.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

All from a single source, doesn't mean that source is correct.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Why are you trying to lie when people can literally click the link and see for themselves lmao? Every single claim there is sourced and there's a bunch of different sources

Why don't you go ahead and tell what's actually incorrect and show us what the truth is?

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Consumer Purchases by Women" gives various percentages of women consumer purchases and that is where the 85% comes from. The numbers are sourced from Yankelovich Monitor & Greenfield Online. Common sense would tell you that women are not responsible for 91% pharmaceuticals or 90% of home purchases or many of the other percentages listed.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe we can meme that into a new form of environmentalism. Let your husband control the finances to save the planet!

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Women bad. Don't eat the propaganda.

Women are amazing and we need each other. Women aren't destroying anything. Jews aren't responsible. We are.

We have all the power to change things and remove jews from our societies. Globally.

It is on us. The earth is in our care. The world is in our care. We are responsible, because we have agency and free will. Nonwhites don't. Jews don't. White women and white men have been propagandized into making the wrong decisions based on false information.
It is on us to change things and to inform people, so that we can do the right things.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Do men control anything in the US?

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If you just wanna make it specifically jewish men, yeah. Men generally, not so much.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

    [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    On the other hand, companies openly championing LGBT rights are reaping the benefits. LGBT "costumers" (customers? lol) are among the most loyal: they reward companies who have got their back, even if this means spending more on their shopping basket. A big basket, if you consider that in the US alone, the spending power of the LGBT community is calculated in the region of $800 billion a year.

    Yes exactly this. I didn't mention it in my previous comment (you should check it) but LGBT people obviously have higher time preference too which is why LGBT stuff is pushed so heavily to children. The capitalists push high time preference lifestyles on people as well as transitioning the economy to a subsription-based and instant gratification model in order to condition the population into being as high time preference as possible.

    The LGBT is literally the perfect consumer, they don't buy assets because they have no one to inherit them their lives revolve around short term pleasure. Not only this but they're fiercely loyal to the libtard system because they know without it society would reject them, they have gratitude to the institutions for protecting them from 'homophobia' and the like whilst giving them an extremely leisured lifestyle they've done nothing to earn. Something something bioleninism.

    Along with the gay stuff you have the massive promotion of metrosexuality to straight men and even males wearing makeup, the purpose of this? Makeup is extremely profitable, it's a consumer purchase that is essentially subscription based. If they can normalise males wearing makeup through popularising Kpop, youtubers etc to children and teenagers within the next 5 years or so the boys coming of age will be wearing makeup as the norm. I'm already seeing a few of these types but they're still considered weird at the moment. However, wearing nail varnish as a man has become normalised already. It won't be long until makeup is fully normalised and then the makeup industry is looking at potentially doubling in size in their endless money printer.

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    You bring up a good point that a lot of the leftist agenda is just social engineering to change habits to send money to certain industries. Sugar consumption is a big one. Look who runs beat sugar plants and look who runs the industries that make sugary products and look who runs the marketing companies the push sugary food. There are literally thousands of examples of this. Some are obvious and other not so obvious. I was reading yesterday that even the grass seed industry was corrupted by removing clover and a particular flower from the mix. Now that clover is out of lawns other weeds come in and you need chemicals to put on your lawn. Boom the chemical industry is now making billions where there was no market. Jews break stuff just to offer you a Jew solution. It's really fucking evil.

    I grew up very close with a Jew family and one thing they had in common with a lot of quality two parent white families I know is that everything in their home was a durable consumer good. Knives and chopping boards built for life. Kirby vacuum cleaner. Tile floor. Quality built home. Honda civic. Air dry clothes. Bulk food purchases. Leather shoes. Etc. etc. Normal white people and Jews make shitty consumers because they make long term ownership oriented consumer decisions. I think you're really onto something with your other comment that the financial system is hardcore being shifted to cater to women and non whites.

    [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    All of the libtard/leftoid agenda is just capitalist economic policy rationalised into social policy language. Also yeah for all kinds of things those examples exist, it's horrendous. They poison us to sell us the 'cure' that isn't a cure, but a lifelong subscription.

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    They poison us to sell us the 'cure' that isn't a cure, but a lifelong subscription.

    That's something I'm definitely going to keep an eye on more closely. If the 'cure' is subscription based then there's probably a Jew behind it.

    I'm not sure if you've noticed but media has gone this way too (food too!). I thought it was fishy ten years ago the powers that be were allowing a lot of 'cord cutting' in the form of people getting rid of cable. Now you have to have hundreds of dollars of subscriptions to get any type of real content that had previously been inside of your old cable package. I'm still glad I cut the cord but I see people spending 2 or 3 three times their previous cable bill on all these media subscriptions. (And many of them won't let you cancel without a fight on the phone!).

    [–]MarkimusNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yep, they're literally all cooperating too, they will have specific popular tv shows and movies on the different platforms. Then you have spotify and whatever streaming music. All subscription based, I never bought CD and films in the first place but at least you actually had the media. When you're banned for being a bad goy you can no longer stream, or when the servers go down etc etc.

    If you're a dissident and you have Spotify, Netflix etc return to piracy and reallocate that money to something politically productive, or at the very least spend it in small businesses owned by white people.

    [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    This is 100% a top-down ideology. This is not grassroots.

    [–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Capitalism is inherently going to shift towards liberalism and progressivism because uncontrolled capitalists will always want more profits. Appeasing shlomo means big kickbacks and all your customers being gay consoomer addicts means easy marketing and you can collude with other sectors of industry to maximize profits for everyone while making expenses practically disappear with cheap, imported labor and corrupt business practices.

    This is why Third Positionist ideologies are always so successful economically: They retain, to some degree or another, the idea of mostly free enterprise and a competitive market system, but with a powerful State that can lay down the law and keep corporations in line (not to mention controlling Unions or simialr entities to further corral companies while also shutting down a major area of Marxist subversion)

    [–]Brewdabier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    And soon those corporations will change there minds when they see this happening

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]Brewdabier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      I doubt san francisco is subsidized but the it's been 30 yeas since I visited the sanctuary city.

      [–]Fiyanggu 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Institutionalized welfare is now taking the place of meritocracy. It's hilarious that Americans are hating on China. The Chinese don't do any of this woke shit that is hobbling the US. Let's see where woke takes us in the next 20 years.