This looks like a generated image that someone tried to mask with a pixel filter

What can I say, we love our narratives wherein an Original Sin is absolved through sacrifice. I wonder where that comes from?

Tech companies (like most companies) want people reliant on their products, of course they’re ok with this

To fascists, liberalism is communism

Yup, let’s let the industry monolith that’s trying to sell you larger, more expensive vehicles than necessary set rules on what vehicles are legal to sell. Oh, they’ve effectively banned smaller vehicles? They’ve also put in place Byzantine rules and approval processes only a large corporation can navigate without going bankrupt? I’m shocked.

Everyone has their own personal 100 room temp that exists on a spectrum

reddit 🤢

No our systems are perfect the only issue is enforcing every facet of it onto the proles with an 18-karat boot

Politics aside, naming places after someone who’s still alive is gross

Because Microsoft knows if it can sell the product to your manager, that’s all that really matters

Individuals are relentlessly marketed to by targeted ads psychologically designed to get them to purchase disposable, useless slop, but sure let’s just say it’s their fault for falling for it.

Make sure you turn off the Internet box when you’re not using it too! It fires out those microwave radiations faster than you can whatchamacallit

Karl D. Marx

Back in the day they would also be angry though, these men at least seem polite enough to leave a thank-you card

If you drop-in replace “x does not consent” with “x is being exploited” (making necessary grammatical adjustments), I feel like I’m still basically saying the same thing with the same takeaways

Consent violation and exploitation are fairly intertwined concepts, but exploitation generally sells better as a term to highlight injustice. For that reason perhaps it would have been better to use that term instead, but I’ve already spent enough time on my writing half-baked analysis on a 20 second clip from regular show

As the core of veganism is consent, there are several elements to consider:

1. Consent of the substance’s sentient source: The coffee bean seems more than willing to give this up… almost too willing. I don’t think there’s a direct issue here, but definitely warrants further consideration when other parties are involved.
2. Consent of the substance’s consumers: neither Mordecai nor Rigby seem to want what’s going on. While Rigby signed the contract, and could be held to its terms under ideal circumstances, it’s a rather predatory situation since it’s presented in a language he doesn’t understand. Mordecai didn’t sign anything, did not consent even on paper, and is a complete victim here.
3. While mostly related to point #2, contracts are often wielded as a tool of the powerful against the weak, and in an inequitable exchange ends up being little more than a justification to continue a coercive arrangement one party would back out of if given the choice.

So I’d say while the events depicted are not vegan, but the coffee itself as a substance is most likely vegan. It’s a little hard to say for certain without more context tho, for instance if the bean is also coerced to act this way by outside forces.

They plan to collect it in the form of El Salvador concentration camp labor, compensated at like five cents an hour.

I dunno, when did you stop beating your wife?

In the article it seems they’re equating the two and… want both forms banned.

When I say advertising, I also mean propaganda. Propaganda is advertising for the state, and advertising is propaganda for the private. Same thing.

Charge said countries a regular “user fee” for membership inside this new order.

Literally trying to implement big tech enshittification but with international trade policy… What could possibly go wrong??