Cool Capitalism

Here is a perfect illustration to Jim McGuigan’s point about neoliberalism coopting and monetizing dissent:

People are trained, like Pavlov’s doggies, to experience an immediate rush of gratifying emotions when they see the words “white supremacy, intersectionality, racial, and queer.” After that, all you need is to sprinkle the words in no particular order in an ad, and that’s how you sell product.

4 thoughts on “Cool Capitalism”

  1. Or rather, this is another example of niche marketing for a product that is otherwise indistinguishable from a large number of competitors. Americans don’t have a refined palate. (Do I need to say that??) Not by a long shot. A beer survey reported earlier this week showed that there is no beer that is even liked by more than 50% of Americans who drink beer, and the vast majority of brands have no measurable awareness. (The Brazilians tried to capitalize on this lack of taste, and have instead managed to tank both Budweiser and Stella Artois in the US. Sheer ineptitude.) So this product, of which I had not heard prior to your post, manages to garner enough in sales to allow the owners to sell the company to one of the big dinosaurs in the beer market. Is that actually getting anyone to confront anything?


  2. Human Contact Is Now a Luxury Good
    Screens used to be for the elite. Now avoiding them is a status symbol.

    The joy — at least at first — of the internet revolution was its democratic nature. Facebook is the same Facebook whether you are rich or poor. Gmail is the same Gmail. And it’s all free. There is something mass market and unappealing about that. And as studies show that time on these advertisement-support platforms is unhealthy, it all starts to seem déclassé, like drinking soda or smoking cigarettes, which wealthy people do less than poor people.

    The wealthy can afford to opt out of having their data and their attention sold as a product. The poor and middle class don’t have the same kind of resources to make that happen.

    Screen exposure starts young. And children who spent more than two hours a day looking at a screen got lower scores on thinking and language tests, according to early results of a landmark study on brain development of more than 11,000 children that the National Institutes of Health is supporting. Most disturbingly, the study is finding that the brains of children who spend a lot of time on screens are different. For some kids, there is premature thinning of their cerebral cortex. In adults, one study found an association between screen time and depression.


    1. That’s precisely what I keep saying about the formation of the cognitive elite. People aren’t listening at their own risk.

      A child’s capacity to have normal – not exceptional, normal – linguistic skills is directly dependent on the age that child first held a phone. And it’s a lot more than that. It’s children’s theater instead of movies. It’s the absence of the very concept of “screen time.”

      We are wrangling over adversity scores while a whole huge class of people who are intellectually… not all there, to put it nicely, is being formed.

      Once again, we are solving problems from a world that doesn’t exist anymore.


  3. Getting inebriated in the name of “racial equality”?
    If pulled over for DUI is that going to be their explanation? “Hey, you shouldn’t really arrest me, you know. Like, I got drunk for a good cause, you see …”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.