Sort of, but not really?
If people boycott because of your sponsors then of course you’ll have better chances with different sponsors.
I doored a venue where they closed the entire lot and built the stage only for it to sit empty for two days because every artist cancelled over the sponsors.
Yeah this was a PR nightmare for them. If they didn't do this they'd be accused of doubling down and it'd only get worse. It's telling that they even took the sponsors to begin with, and I assumed they must have gotten huge $$ that they really needed.
Probably someone didn't do much thinking about it. "Oh, sure, the army is giving us money to set up a booth to recruit kids because of their tech? Ok whatever." They saw money and didn't think musicians would care that much.
The Raytheon/etc stuff actually isn't that surprising, and I bet if the actual army/navy/USAF/space force/etc hadn't been there, a lot of people wouldn't have even noticed it or cared quite as much. It's a tech conference, these contractors do a ton of different kinds of tech because of consolidation, most of which isn't about directly killing people (Lockheed Martin makes fusion reactors and quantum computers, just as an example), and a lot of these guys have a footprint in Austin and have had one for a long, long time (Northrop Grumman has an office building near Bdubs of 183, Lockheed has an office right next to the Driskill, etc).
But once the army's there, people are going to pay attention and not care that Rayethon is pushing their PR friendly "plowshare capable" tech instead of their "our sick missile that you use to assassinate ONE person on a balcony from 400 miles away" tech.
My thought process is largely on the fact that it's not like a lot of the still present SXSW people don't make shit for the military. [Microsoft is going to be there.](https://schedule.sxsw.com/2022/events/OE42180)
EDIT: fixed grammar issue.
Not likely. When you finally get gov/mil financial support, it's like a cash cow: pretty hard to lose and quite a bit of money. Easy money. The government doesn't pull out of things very easily, because it makes politicians look bad.
wow, it's like anything is better than admitting that ethics matter and boycotting is effective, huh... the idea of that kind of society just scares the absolute shit out of people
Every act, whether it was major artist or a local band we saw mentioned it at the start of a set, about how it was too late for them to boycott or how confused it made them feel to be there. Whatever you feel about it outside of the event, it began to give bad vibes to the whole thing. I doubt even the ones who came would come back.
i think it is more like we mainly deal with creatives as employees, vendors (musicians), and probably most of the audience. They absolutely hate what the military does, especially the israeli attacks on Gaza.
It is in our best interest to eliminate any backlash by removing them as sponsors.
Replying to Fergi...
The [Army has a Software Factory](https://www.ausa.org/articles/software-factory-direct-program-brings-cutting-edge-technology-soldiers) in Austin and their software development teams were a good fit to attend the Interactive track at SXSW along with the other tech attendees. It probably made sense to sponsor this track.
The Music track has a different set of attendees than the Interactive track though, and here we are.
Sunbird was indeed cool but even if C3 was paying attention to it that would be irrelevant here since C3 is not behind SXSW. SXSW is equally owned by Penske Media Corporation and itself.
I'll never stop bragging about the time I talked my way past a bouncer (no badge!) and skipped a long line to get into an event with an open bar during SXSW, saw Ze Frank do a live show, and then had drinks with a guy who said he invented something called "twitter" while I politely smiled and tried not to laugh at what a failure it was going to be.
You forgot explaining to your out of town coworkers that Rainey isn’t a “historic” district or why you spent your entire per diem in Four Horsemen playing pinball.
Seems reasonable for people to refuse to participate in events sponsored by organizations they really dislike, especially if they are a public figure and want their opposition to that thing to be understood by the public.
10 years ago you couldn’t ride an elevator downtown without hearing someone practicing their “elevator pitch”.
And they were all variations of the phrases crowd-sourced, coupons, internet, smartphone, and distributed.
Hell yeah. Where all you smug fucks talking shit like “I’ve never even heard of your band! Who cares?! Cya!”
We all know yall haven’t listened to anything besides Garth brooks in the last 30 years. How’s it feel to be eating crow??
Recognizing the need for a military, and supporting the military having a marketing budget going towards sponsoring a music/film/etc. festival are two different things.
Why would it have to be that binary? Or is there really no middle ground between the U.S. military's roughly $1B yearly advertising budget and a draft?
No other Nato countries spend as much money on advertising (relative to their total defense spending) compared to the U.S., but they still have volunteer militaries.
Do you think that there is any other NATO army remotely comparable to the US Army? We have bases all over the world defending the US and our allies interest around the globe.
A $1 billion marketing budget is not even large when you consider the scale of the army. Compared against the marketing of a corporation. For example, Hyundai spends 50% more than the US Army. Hyundai has a market cap of $50 billion and spends over $1.5B annually on marketing. The annual budget of the army is almost 4 times the entire market cap of Hyundai.
The army needs to recruit. They need to recruit young people. Marketing at events like SXSW makes perfect logical sense.
Enjoy your unearned freedoms.
Of course the scope of the US military is a lot larger than other NATO countries. But I wasn't talking about how much total they spend -- just what relative amount is spent on marketing.
Why would the U.S. need a proportionately larger marketing budget (again, compared to their respective total spending) versus another country? Unless the U.S. military is simply worse at it?
And not for nothing, but you just compared Hyundai's product advertising to marketing for recruiting purposes. No shit Hyundai spends a lot on advertising, because they charge money for their products and want people to buy them. Go check how much Hyundai's budget it for hiring/recruiting-specific marketing and see if it's remotely comparable.
Most of the viable big sponsors are dirty money. If anything artists should be stoked to take some of it and put it to good use.
I'm pretty liberal myself, but I find this whole thing disingenuous.
When I was active duty and would stop off somewhere before I got home while still in uniform, there were dozens of times I'd get nasty comments and heckled by people. The worst once was some dipshits in Waterloo Records who refused to sell me an album then proceeded to call me names and ridicule my uniform and rank. Haven't been back since. I know how this city treats vets and it's appalling. Most are way too ignorant in their vitriol to even respond back but I've kept receipts. Cancel culture is a two way street for me and this topic
What do we need the army for exactly?
We can evolve past war. I'd rather see my tax dollars going towards education and healthcare at home instead of being used to bomb people around the world.
There’s no way you said this with a straight face when the US defense budget is still between 2 and 4% of US GDP
Maybe you should google your own facts my guy
Here’s the thing. Tons of companies featured in the interactive-tech week of SXSW have government contracts. It’s one thing to say ‘weapons manufactures’ but warfare these days is software, AI, specialized test equipment, housing to escape to when we bomb our enemies. Three Austin ‘darlings’ that have been featured front and center in recent years better not show their face this year.. all have large military contracts: Jasper AI, National Instruments, ICON 3D homes.
My point being.. the interactive part of SXSW is pretty much DUST going forward with this announcement.
The world is a dangerous place and there are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences, and would love to impose their values on us.
Given the reality of the world we live in, instead of boycotting, we should all show some gratitude to those protecting us.
Maybe the army should spend that money on improving the conditions for “those protecting us,” instead of spending it on advertising at a left-leaning music and tech conference.
>The world is a dangerous place and there are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences
Like the United States?
>Bombing for gay rights?
Odd strawman.
No, in a world where human rights are not respected in powerful countries, a strong military presence among those powerful countries that do, is a good thing.
> here are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences
are we bombing them for that? are those regimes trying to cross our borders?
I'm as against that stuff as anyone, but that's not what our military is working on right now, and that's not the reason we've ever deployed them.
>are we bombing them for that?
No. Odd strawman.
>are those regimes trying to cross our borders?
No. Another odd strawman.
If you have a security system at home, is it because you are going to bomb your neighbors? Do people with security systems in their home all have people trying to break into their homes?
The world is a dangerous place. Friends of mine around the world in places like Sweden and other countries near bad actors have expressed how grateful they are for the US military presence. We also live under the US military protection and should be grateful for that.
> No. Odd strawman.
Out of curiosity, what do you think a strawman is?
I'm pointing out that our military is not, has not, and is not expected to, do a single damn thing to defend the global rights of women or those of non-traditional sexual preferences.
So if you want to show gratitude to the troops, go for it. But you're not showing gratitude for stopping any of the regime activities that YOU listed in YOUR comment, because it was weird for you to bring that up in the context of the military.
>a strawman is?
https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-straw-man/
>But you're not showing gratitude for stopping any of the regime activities... because it was weird for you
No. It's not only not weird, but human rights are incredibly important, and they continue to be violated and threatened.
> https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-straw-man/
Nifty! That's what I think it means too. How did my questions to you constitute two straw man fallacies?
> but human rights are incredibly important, and they continue to be violated and threatened.
Yeah, they sure are important, and sure are threatened!
What does that have to do with the way the US chooses to deploy the US military?
What a silly answer and silly criteria.
Instead:
World Economic Forum 2024 Global Risk: Russia, Iran, and North Korea are bigger threats.
Also, common sense.
You're clearly young so you're in your rebellious "America BAD!" stage but as you get older you'll learn to appreciate the relative stability our massive defense spending affords us. It's very hard for Americans to understand just how good our country has had it since the end of WW2 which is why we bitch as much as we do over relatively minor things.
Trust me: you don't want to live in a world where Russia/China are the ones playing world police
I'm neither young, nor did I grow up in America. The reason you think my comments are outlandish is because your brains have been rotted by a lifetime of exposure to U.S. media. I don't blame you for this, and I realize that my comments on reddit will never change the minds of those whose comments I respond to. The constant inundation of cultural, economic, and military hegemony coupled with a concerted effort to destroy U.S. school systems have left the vast majority of Americans with no ability for critical thinking whatsoever. But if even one person who stumbles across any of my comments and decides to look further into anti-imperialism and anti-capitalism, I consider that a win.
>The constant inundation of cultural, economic, and military hegemony coupled with a concerted effort to destroy U.S. school systems have left the vast majority of Americans with no ability for critical thinking whatsoever.
You say I've been rotted by media exposure but this is just another generic by-the-numbers "America BAD" sentiment that you got from whatever media you consume. Does America have problems? Of course. Every country does. But like everything in life it's not a clear-cut black-and-white dichotomy. If it's one thing with regards to foreign policy so far in the 20th century to take away, it's: if you don't do it, someone else will. As I said in my previous post: you don't want to live in a world where Russia/China has the hegemonic position that the US currently has.
Not on their list specifically but they did tweet support for the bands that were boycotting:
https://x.com/BDSmovement/status/1767652485986980037?t=9Jkg6K7SeHANWnr8fYXAYg&s=19
The military industrial complex you learned about in school (probably only in the context of Ike's speech) has been dead since "The Last Supper" in 1993, when Les Aspin and William Perry (who has done superb Reddit AMAs as u/SecDef19) hosted a dinner to inform the Pentagon's top suppliers that their post-Cold War budget cuts would be accelerated. Since then, there has been significant consolidation in the defense industry amid reduced profit. U.S. military expenditure as a portion of GDP is ~1/3rd of what it was during Ike's speech.
There are generally two types of people who throw the term "military industrial complex" around these days:
1) People who think it's catchy and makes them sound informed.
2) Those absolutely gagging on Russian propaganda, such as Tulsi Gabbard. Check out talks by her and her peers on how we're all MIC stooges for supporting Ukraine and why that's *so* bad.
Good. Hey! Enlist in the military for a “job”! Yeaaaaaah, pass. Weird place to recruit from too, those lazy cashed up drunk hipsters wouldn’t make it through basic.
Probably more like, "We reviewed the contracts and think we can probably make more money from other sponsors."
Sort of, but not really? If people boycott because of your sponsors then of course you’ll have better chances with different sponsors. I doored a venue where they closed the entire lot and built the stage only for it to sit empty for two days because every artist cancelled over the sponsors.
Yeah this was a PR nightmare for them. If they didn't do this they'd be accused of doubling down and it'd only get worse. It's telling that they even took the sponsors to begin with, and I assumed they must have gotten huge $$ that they really needed.
Also it’s just fucking weird to have a concert sponsored Lockeed Martin
I gave up when cottonelle was a headline sponsor
That just sounds shitty.
Probably someone didn't do much thinking about it. "Oh, sure, the army is giving us money to set up a booth to recruit kids because of their tech? Ok whatever." They saw money and didn't think musicians would care that much. The Raytheon/etc stuff actually isn't that surprising, and I bet if the actual army/navy/USAF/space force/etc hadn't been there, a lot of people wouldn't have even noticed it or cared quite as much. It's a tech conference, these contractors do a ton of different kinds of tech because of consolidation, most of which isn't about directly killing people (Lockheed Martin makes fusion reactors and quantum computers, just as an example), and a lot of these guys have a footprint in Austin and have had one for a long, long time (Northrop Grumman has an office building near Bdubs of 183, Lockheed has an office right next to the Driskill, etc). But once the army's there, people are going to pay attention and not care that Rayethon is pushing their PR friendly "plowshare capable" tech instead of their "our sick missile that you use to assassinate ONE person on a balcony from 400 miles away" tech. My thought process is largely on the fact that it's not like a lot of the still present SXSW people don't make shit for the military. [Microsoft is going to be there.](https://schedule.sxsw.com/2022/events/OE42180) EDIT: fixed grammar issue.
Exactly. MOST of the still present SXSW sell shit to the military.
Probably one reason they survived through covid
[удалено]
They did have this problem.
Not likely. When you finally get gov/mil financial support, it's like a cash cow: pretty hard to lose and quite a bit of money. Easy money. The government doesn't pull out of things very easily, because it makes politicians look bad.
Maybe they can compromise and make every panel start with the national anthem like football games.
Make all participants learn the Texas Pledge of Allegiance and recite it from memory.
wow, it's like anything is better than admitting that ethics matter and boycotting is effective, huh... the idea of that kind of society just scares the absolute shit out of people
Every act, whether it was major artist or a local band we saw mentioned it at the start of a set, about how it was too late for them to boycott or how confused it made them feel to be there. Whatever you feel about it outside of the event, it began to give bad vibes to the whole thing. I doubt even the ones who came would come back.
They’re going with the bid from Boko Haram
You're saying we aren't selling large volumes of it to the jews in Boca Raton?
i think it is more like we mainly deal with creatives as employees, vendors (musicians), and probably most of the audience. They absolutely hate what the military does, especially the israeli attacks on Gaza. It is in our best interest to eliminate any backlash by removing them as sponsors.
Replying to Fergi... The [Army has a Software Factory](https://www.ausa.org/articles/software-factory-direct-program-brings-cutting-edge-technology-soldiers) in Austin and their software development teams were a good fit to attend the Interactive track at SXSW along with the other tech attendees. It probably made sense to sponsor this track. The Music track has a different set of attendees than the Interactive track though, and here we are.
More like "Artists won't perform if we have this sponsor. They'll take less pay!"
Yes, inarguably, excluding a wealthy group from potential sponsorship is the best way to maximize sponsorship revenues.
Happy Cake Day!
Austinites will cry about the Army sponsoring SXSW like Austin isn’t home to Army Futures Command and the Software foundry
That's a huge win for the creative class. Sunbird Fest was cooler than SXSW. That may have given C3 pause. Good job.
Sunbird was indeed cool but even if C3 was paying attention to it that would be irrelevant here since C3 is not behind SXSW. SXSW is equally owned by Penske Media Corporation and itself.
lol sunbird had less live music in total than sxsw had on a single stage. It’s literally less than 2% the size. But sure it was cooler.
SXSW isn’t about music, film, or tech, it’s about feeding the smug superiority of the participants
I thought SXSW was about going to random tech panels on AI in order to raid all their free food and drinks.
You get it
I'll never stop bragging about the time I talked my way past a bouncer (no badge!) and skipped a long line to get into an event with an open bar during SXSW, saw Ze Frank do a live show, and then had drinks with a guy who said he invented something called "twitter" while I politely smiled and tried not to laugh at what a failure it was going to be.
You forgot explaining to your out of town coworkers that Rainey isn’t a “historic” district or why you spent your entire per diem in Four Horsemen playing pinball.
Seems reasonable for people to refuse to participate in events sponsored by organizations they really dislike, especially if they are a public figure and want their opposition to that thing to be understood by the public.
Don’t worry, they’ll be back as soon as society gets angry at another thing not involving war.
Peace breaking out in the Mideast seems unlikely, and look at all the shit we're up in arms over (on both sides, as nuance is dead) as it stands!
SXSW is just a circle jerk for influencers now anyways. It’s not like it was years ago…fun.
10 years ago you couldn’t ride an elevator downtown without hearing someone practicing their “elevator pitch”. And they were all variations of the phrases crowd-sourced, coupons, internet, smartphone, and distributed.
As much as I would like to believe this is an altruistic move, it's not.
That’s cool, but I still have no hope for SXSW.
Hell yeah. Where all you smug fucks talking shit like “I’ve never even heard of your band! Who cares?! Cya!” We all know yall haven’t listened to anything besides Garth brooks in the last 30 years. How’s it feel to be eating crow??
So?
Weak
If they sponsor enough money for free concerts, people will not care.
Congrats to the boycotters.
Uhh people know we need the Army right? I get Austin is liberal but come on
Recognizing the need for a military, and supporting the military having a marketing budget going towards sponsoring a music/film/etc. festival are two different things.
Recruitment is way down. Having a marketing budget is required in a voluntary Army. Or do you suppose the draft be reinstated?
Why would it have to be that binary? Or is there really no middle ground between the U.S. military's roughly $1B yearly advertising budget and a draft? No other Nato countries spend as much money on advertising (relative to their total defense spending) compared to the U.S., but they still have volunteer militaries.
Do you think that there is any other NATO army remotely comparable to the US Army? We have bases all over the world defending the US and our allies interest around the globe. A $1 billion marketing budget is not even large when you consider the scale of the army. Compared against the marketing of a corporation. For example, Hyundai spends 50% more than the US Army. Hyundai has a market cap of $50 billion and spends over $1.5B annually on marketing. The annual budget of the army is almost 4 times the entire market cap of Hyundai. The army needs to recruit. They need to recruit young people. Marketing at events like SXSW makes perfect logical sense. Enjoy your unearned freedoms.
Of course the scope of the US military is a lot larger than other NATO countries. But I wasn't talking about how much total they spend -- just what relative amount is spent on marketing. Why would the U.S. need a proportionately larger marketing budget (again, compared to their respective total spending) versus another country? Unless the U.S. military is simply worse at it? And not for nothing, but you just compared Hyundai's product advertising to marketing for recruiting purposes. No shit Hyundai spends a lot on advertising, because they charge money for their products and want people to buy them. Go check how much Hyundai's budget it for hiring/recruiting-specific marketing and see if it's remotely comparable.
Exactly - who else is going to kill 1m+ innocent Iraqis under the false premise of WMDs?!?
Most of the viable big sponsors are dirty money. If anything artists should be stoked to take some of it and put it to good use. I'm pretty liberal myself, but I find this whole thing disingenuous.
When I was active duty and would stop off somewhere before I got home while still in uniform, there were dozens of times I'd get nasty comments and heckled by people. The worst once was some dipshits in Waterloo Records who refused to sell me an album then proceeded to call me names and ridicule my uniform and rank. Haven't been back since. I know how this city treats vets and it's appalling. Most are way too ignorant in their vitriol to even respond back but I've kept receipts. Cancel culture is a two way street for me and this topic
What do we need the army for exactly? We can evolve past war. I'd rather see my tax dollars going towards education and healthcare at home instead of being used to bomb people around the world.
China and Russia have an army so I'd prefer we have one as well.
Don’t worry moon flower, our hip vibes will melt their guns and their hearts.
Ah the ol "international boogie man" You should really look up the military spending per capita of all 3 countries
There’s no way you said this with a straight face when the US defense budget is still between 2 and 4% of US GDP Maybe you should google your own facts my guy
I dropped SXSW a long time ago!
Now to dump all the political-pandering panels, and SXSW will be safe to attend again.
Amazing as SXSW sure seems to need the money/free volunteer labor these days.
Bout damn time
[удалено]
I can't tell if this is satire.
Here’s the thing. Tons of companies featured in the interactive-tech week of SXSW have government contracts. It’s one thing to say ‘weapons manufactures’ but warfare these days is software, AI, specialized test equipment, housing to escape to when we bomb our enemies. Three Austin ‘darlings’ that have been featured front and center in recent years better not show their face this year.. all have large military contracts: Jasper AI, National Instruments, ICON 3D homes. My point being.. the interactive part of SXSW is pretty much DUST going forward with this announcement.
The world is a dangerous place and there are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences, and would love to impose their values on us. Given the reality of the world we live in, instead of boycotting, we should all show some gratitude to those protecting us.
> we should all show some gratitude to those protecting us. By... uhh ... taking money from them and sticking their logos on the stage at SXSW!
One of many ways, yes.
Maybe the army should spend that money on improving the conditions for “those protecting us,” instead of spending it on advertising at a left-leaning music and tech conference.
No, they should spend their money on their mission, a big part of which is recruiting, and advertising is part of that.
Hi have you ever been to Texas!? Lol
Born here. Why?
>The world is a dangerous place and there are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences Like the United States?
No, like Iran
Fuck outta here with your "The U.S. Military is Here to Protect Marginalized Folx!!" bullshit.
Bombing for gay rights! The number of people who have never opened a book on here is tragic.
>Bombing for gay rights? Odd strawman. No, in a world where human rights are not respected in powerful countries, a strong military presence among those powerful countries that do, is a good thing.
Nuke the gay baby whales for Jesus!
Odd strawman. No, more like do not forget the lessons of World War 2.
> here are several regimes that do not respect the rights of women and those with non-traditional sexual preferences are we bombing them for that? are those regimes trying to cross our borders? I'm as against that stuff as anyone, but that's not what our military is working on right now, and that's not the reason we've ever deployed them.
>are we bombing them for that? No. Odd strawman. >are those regimes trying to cross our borders? No. Another odd strawman. If you have a security system at home, is it because you are going to bomb your neighbors? Do people with security systems in their home all have people trying to break into their homes? The world is a dangerous place. Friends of mine around the world in places like Sweden and other countries near bad actors have expressed how grateful they are for the US military presence. We also live under the US military protection and should be grateful for that.
> No. Odd strawman. Out of curiosity, what do you think a strawman is? I'm pointing out that our military is not, has not, and is not expected to, do a single damn thing to defend the global rights of women or those of non-traditional sexual preferences. So if you want to show gratitude to the troops, go for it. But you're not showing gratitude for stopping any of the regime activities that YOU listed in YOUR comment, because it was weird for you to bring that up in the context of the military.
>a strawman is? https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-straw-man/ >But you're not showing gratitude for stopping any of the regime activities... because it was weird for you No. It's not only not weird, but human rights are incredibly important, and they continue to be violated and threatened.
> https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-straw-man/ Nifty! That's what I think it means too. How did my questions to you constitute two straw man fallacies? > but human rights are incredibly important, and they continue to be violated and threatened. Yeah, they sure are important, and sure are threatened! What does that have to do with the way the US chooses to deploy the US military?
LMAO. What an absolutely cooked take. The U.S. military industrial complex is the greatest destabilizing force in the entire world.
More than Russia and Iran? Tell me you're naive without saying you're naive.
[Yes](https://x.com/SprinterFamily/status/1688237285194575872), quantifiably and demonstrably. What a silly question.
What a silly answer and silly criteria. Instead: World Economic Forum 2024 Global Risk: Russia, Iran, and North Korea are bigger threats. Also, common sense.
Oh please. Tell me you're naive without saying you're naive.
You already said that.
Truth that bears repeating.
You're clearly young so you're in your rebellious "America BAD!" stage but as you get older you'll learn to appreciate the relative stability our massive defense spending affords us. It's very hard for Americans to understand just how good our country has had it since the end of WW2 which is why we bitch as much as we do over relatively minor things. Trust me: you don't want to live in a world where Russia/China are the ones playing world police
I'm neither young, nor did I grow up in America. The reason you think my comments are outlandish is because your brains have been rotted by a lifetime of exposure to U.S. media. I don't blame you for this, and I realize that my comments on reddit will never change the minds of those whose comments I respond to. The constant inundation of cultural, economic, and military hegemony coupled with a concerted effort to destroy U.S. school systems have left the vast majority of Americans with no ability for critical thinking whatsoever. But if even one person who stumbles across any of my comments and decides to look further into anti-imperialism and anti-capitalism, I consider that a win.
>The constant inundation of cultural, economic, and military hegemony coupled with a concerted effort to destroy U.S. school systems have left the vast majority of Americans with no ability for critical thinking whatsoever. You say I've been rotted by media exposure but this is just another generic by-the-numbers "America BAD" sentiment that you got from whatever media you consume. Does America have problems? Of course. Every country does. But like everything in life it's not a clear-cut black-and-white dichotomy. If it's one thing with regards to foreign policy so far in the 20th century to take away, it's: if you don't do it, someone else will. As I said in my previous post: you don't want to live in a world where Russia/China has the hegemonic position that the US currently has.
"Trust me, bro. You don't want somebody else to do the things that I do to you, it'll be so much worse." Classic abuser language. 🤣
SXSW should also boycott police and security. Don't allow them at any events, they are so oppressive.
Don't rope event security in with cops.
You sound mad.
Oh no! That will stop 'em and create world peace!
No one should ever do anything.
This just in… SXSW cancelled for 2025.
Mr. Abbott, please switch to your official account before commenting.
It’s pretty much toast after this announcement. By by SXSW.
And ppl r saying bds isnt doing anything !!
is sxsw on the bds list?
Not on their list specifically but they did tweet support for the bands that were boycotting: https://x.com/BDSmovement/status/1767652485986980037?t=9Jkg6K7SeHANWnr8fYXAYg&s=19
why would this question get downvotes? y’all are nuts
Stop crying about fake internet points
idc about the points i’m just confused why i would get downvoted for asking a question???
So you specifically do care
I'm not sure you understand what "I don't care" means.
i don’t care about the points. i do care about why asking a question is considered bad. reading comp, bub!
> i do care about why asking a question is considered bad. Some people tend to downvote lazy questions. There's also people who just don't like you.
Great, so we can move on with our lives now? Who gives a shit about sponsorship anymore??
Fantastic. Resistance is fertile. Who thought mingling with the military industrial complex was cool anyway?
The military industrial complex you learned about in school (probably only in the context of Ike's speech) has been dead since "The Last Supper" in 1993, when Les Aspin and William Perry (who has done superb Reddit AMAs as u/SecDef19) hosted a dinner to inform the Pentagon's top suppliers that their post-Cold War budget cuts would be accelerated. Since then, there has been significant consolidation in the defense industry amid reduced profit. U.S. military expenditure as a portion of GDP is ~1/3rd of what it was during Ike's speech. There are generally two types of people who throw the term "military industrial complex" around these days: 1) People who think it's catchy and makes them sound informed. 2) Those absolutely gagging on Russian propaganda, such as Tulsi Gabbard. Check out talks by her and her peers on how we're all MIC stooges for supporting Ukraine and why that's *so* bad.
3) people that say fertile instead of futile
This is a real GDI move
Good. Hey! Enlist in the military for a “job”! Yeaaaaaah, pass. Weird place to recruit from too, those lazy cashed up drunk hipsters wouldn’t make it through basic.
[удалено]
The military offers a ton of opportunity to young people. Many young men would find the appeal of infantry over being a barista.