I typically write about genocide around the world, debt that could bankrupt the West, or the level of control Google and Facebook have over our lives. Last week I decided to write on the very serious issue of the pigmentation of an imaginary fish creature. Low and behold, the new 007 character would usurp last week’s article.
The comments to the article last week had an interesting trend. Half of them were readers claiming to have never seen anyone on the right actually complain about this. The other half were people on the right actually complaining about this.
The right who complain about the new Bond actress or Ariel’s new melanin levels are being useful idiots for Hollywood. Hollywood is already a cesspool for leftist ideology. If their protestations had any impact, it would have been accomplished long ago. They aren’t boycotting the new Bond movie; they’re promoting it.
Their business model is simple. I was thoroughly unaware there is a new Mermaid movie in the works, and that a new 007 movie is on its way. This is free advertising. People on the right generally have friends and family who disagree with them politically. Their social media rants only further drive the left to the cinema.
Being Libertarian grows with protestation. An article that has 1,000 likes doesn’t get nearly the same number of views as an article with 300 angry comments. The 300 angry comments, assuming the commenters have 200 friends on average with social media, translates into 60,000 newsfeed presentations to people who might disagree with the protesters.
Bad news travels faster than good news. Moral outrage sparks comments and posts far more than positive movie reviews. On the contrapositive, virtue signaling of the left will also generate free advertising.
The right’s reaction to this is rooted in a serious problem the left has. The issue is that of virtue signaling. These are fake feminists, who do nothing to help victims of sex-trafficking, who do nothing to help victims of domestic abuse but are excited about the representation a woman gets in Hollywood.
The deepest concern about the left that I have held for years is the presence of optics over substance. They are infatuated with the idea that a woman is represented but that Hillary Clinton partnered with sex-traffickers in Libya is of little consequence to them. Justin Trudeau has a gender-balanced cabinet and backroom deals with Saudi Arabia – a country that punishes women for having been sexually assaulted.
As they go about their excitement over powerful women and their neglect over disenfranchised women I shall go about my extreme skepticism of their movement. As the right goes about their skepticism of powerful women I shall go about my extreme skepticism of their movement. In the interim period, Hollywood stands to make profits while the rest are useful idiots engaging in witless prattle.
The content that’s presented to us is for the profit of others. Hollywood is no different. These decisions weren’t made the way the left believes them to have been made: “Wouldn’t it be a great sign if a woman were 007?”
These decisions weren’t made in the manner the right envisions, “Wouldn’t be great to supplant male patriarchy”.
These decisions were knowing the left would be endlessly posting vacuous nonsense while the right stood in protest of nothing at all and they profit.
Latest posts by Brandon Kirby (see all)
- Can Men Speak on Abortion – Freedom Philosophy? - October 11, 2019
- Virtue Signalling: What Is It? – Freedom Philosophy - October 2, 2019
- Free Speech and Freedom – Freedom Philosophy - September 18, 2019