this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
448 points (94.3% liked)

Antiwork

8369 readers
1 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago

Frantically attempting to spin this in favour of predatory finance capitalism.

[–] coolusername@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 days ago

cia media gonna cia

Why wouldn't they be? The glamorizing of murderers, rapists, and other criminals in biopic miniseries seems to be a growing point of discussion over the past year or so.

[–] JayObey711@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

I mean this is nothing new. Pretty white women have been treated favourably in court and by the public forever. There is a somewhat popular twitter account all about hot criminals. It's a thing and it always has been.

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago

That had never been a problem before

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 117 points 1 week ago (4 children)

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.

[–] dsilverz@thelemmy.club 54 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

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.

[–] reverendz@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’ve been hoping it won’t be the last CEO to get deposed.

[–] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

That's what the NYT and others are afraid of. Copycats making this a trend and then the whole situation spiraling into French Revolutiom 2.0, or heavens forbid, October Revolution 2.0

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 81 points 1 week ago (10 children)

NYT is as corpo as media can get. We must remember what side they are on. Journalism is dead.

[–] bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 74 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Corporate media is going to protect their advertisers by shotgunning bullshit articles trying to change the narrative

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 24 points 1 week ago

"For the love of God, please stop looking up!" —Corporate Media

[–] Godnroc@lemmy.world 71 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 46 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 18 points 1 week ago

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....

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 58 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Not a criminal until a guilty verdict...

[–] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Guilty until proven innocent is nonsense. We are beyond that already.

Just a patsy

Using the term criminal is just demonizing a random guy.

The State and it's officers are just illusionists. They can't present evidence or be witnesses. Cuz they are unbelievable.

So far that is all they got. So when anyone uses the term criminal, i jump straight to innocent and civil suit

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (5 children)

It's also not a crime to eradicate a parasite.

[–] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Depends on how it's eradicated.

If the actual assassin, not the patsy, really wanted to make sure. He might be capable of making really really sure.

Dropping a tank on it or destroying a city block might not be beyond his pay grade.

A BB gun is not making sure. Just a bit cleaner and quieter.

[–] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 week ago (8 children)

I mean it’s a “crime” technically but that doesn’t mean we can’t nullify it!

[–] logging_strict@lemmy.ml -1 points 6 days ago

Not a crime against society, so possibly not a crime.

The word, crime, is subjective. Much like the word, value.

Really what is wanted is play court and feel special.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee 50 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 44 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 36 points 1 week ago (5 children)

The greatest trick the Times ever pulled was convincing the world it had a left-leaning bias[1].

[–] dethedrus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

Pro-war on all the wrong sides (Germany in WWII, US in Iraq, Israel at any time), Jewish owned but somehow simultaneously against Jews, especially if poor and foreign.

Their Berlin correspondent wrote about how Hitler was no danger to German Jewry while it was already well documented how terrible they were being treated in 1939.

Absolutely fucking monstrous rag.

[–] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Noam Chomsky talked about how self-serving it is to the powerful to portray the mainstream media as left-leaning. If people think that the NYT is pushing left, then anything further left of that is seen as being so far off that it must be uttered by loony radicals who spend 17 hrs a day buried in leftist theory.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 26 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It's NYT. If you can't defend Thompson as being worth keeping alive, may as well play the woke race card and say we only like him because he's an attractive white male.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago

Anything to distract from the class war.

[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

His crime is one of the reasons we find him attractive. It's not being overshadowed it's being celebrated.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Tens of millions of lives ruined by "just good business" is the headline.

Stop worshipping profit or everything will get worse, even if there are no violent responses.

Everybody talking about anything else in this case is lying by omission.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 1 week ago

Hey NYT. Suck it.

load more comments
view more: next ›