In the US, actually, companies ARE legally “people”. Yes, really. And that’s something those very companies wanted oh-so-badly…at first. Turns out there’s problems with that for them, too, not just us “actual” people. And they can just suck on that lemon, now can’t they?
Of note, whether or not companies have a legal obligation in this matter, they damn well have moral and societal obligations, hence angry protests at their door. “Legality” <> “morality”, not even close.
Last, yes, the US has its own dire issues re: racism, fascism, and authoritarianism. That doesn’t mean Joe/Jane Citizen needs to be numb to the rest of the world, or that they personally are guilty of such things.
My first reaction was ‘oh that’s good, they apologized!’ but I’m rapidly agreeing with everyone else here - a good apology starts by acknowledging what you did and that it was wrong, and they totally didn’t bother here. 
Corporations lobby the government to prevent any changes to corporate law, so progress on that front will be incredibly slow and painful, at best. The only thing anyone can do in the short term is to apply external pressure until Activision/Blizzard (or whoever) gets worried enough about their bottom line to do the right thing.
What isn’t helpful is excusing corporate bad behavior by arguing about legal obligations. Corporations aren’t your friends. They will never thank you for your apologia. They will never love you. They are utterly amoral (it’s why sociopaths make such great CEOs), leaving it up to other people to act in place of a missing conscience.
I’m an anti-corporate socialist. It’s obvious what they did was wrong, and I’m not excusing them. I’m stating that he’d be breaking the law if he said something he thought would lose the company money.
Yes, changes like this need to happen one step at a time, starting with things like limiting corporate lobbying and political donations. Not pointing out the errors in our system that are difficult to change would be a mistake.
The idea of “voting with your dollars” by not purchasing from certain companies, is problematic and extremely capitalist when you think about it. It means those with more money have more say, which is exactly what got us where we are.
It might force corporations to examine if one issue at a time is causing them to lose money or not, but the only way to get real change is to change the laws, so they don’t have to be psychopaths to comply.
I’m stating out that he’d be breaking the law if he said something he thought would lose the company money.
He has no idea what the cost of that non-apology will be, positive or negative. Maybe it will fool enough people angry at the Blitzchung ban into continuing to buy Blizzard games. Maybe it won’t, and Blizzard will lose a lot more money by alienating the rest of the world, then it gains by being able to stay in the Chinese market.
The idea of “voting with your dollars” by not purchasing from certain companies, is problematic and extremely capitalist when you think about it. It means those with more money have more say, which is exactly what got us where we are.
The point is to get a company to change a policy by acting in a way that endangers its profits. It’s literally the only way to get it to do anything quickly. This can mean both refusing to buy certain products (fairly easy to do in this case; video games are inessential) and exerting whatever influence you have to promote punitive political measures.
None of this will solve the problem in the long run, but to a corporation doing nothing equates to tacit agreement.
Turns out if Activision/Blizzard is intent on being judged by their actions, they’re still fucking it up.
WAY off topic…
I see this styling - Initial - Middle name - Family-Name more and more often - mostly from USA-ians.
Is it just that they really hate their first name but don’t want the hassle of changing it legally?
Or something else?
This. I prefer to think of it as a method of “economic deplatforming.”
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
