your honor my client was innovating and being an entrepreneur when he found a way to overclock the sadism dial on philanthropy
Mr. Beast moves to Argentina and teams up with their libertarian president to create IRL Fortnite that has legal murder.
”MrBeast is doing a Fortnite x Squid Game crossover!”
”You mean in the game?”Nah, real life AnCaps never do any of the actually cool dystopian shit, they just like make it legal to sell spoiled milk or cigarettes outside of schools. We never get death arenas cyberpunk body mods.
Who did he piss off? Mr Beast has been a shady character for years, but the bad press has only started recently.
His fanbase and the alt right overlap a lot The ava kris situation caused them to turn against him
Fuck mr beast the guy came off as creepy before I knew anything about him. I’ve never trusted “charitable” people
Yeah I mean you don’t want to be too cynical, some people actually are very nice and giving, but on the other hand I hear once in a while “oh Americans are such a sweet people, they give soooooo much to charity every year” and I’m like
Philanthropy is a multi billion dollar industry. Americans do give a lot. They’re just dumb enough to think their money goes anywhere meaningful instead of in the pockets of peodphiles and politicians and churches.
It’s a tax break if it weren’t most people wouldn’t be giving to charity.
Age old communist critic of philanthropy etc.
It’s so funny seeing the phrase “you can help by making a tax deductible donation to us” on charity websites and brochures lol
It’s just modern day indulgences for the most part
Yeah sorry I think the message of my post was sloppy. I agree that American give a lot, I just doubt that their generosity really tells you much about their character. Partly because of your point, that they’re enriching an industry more than the supposed targets of the philanthropy, and also because there’s so much excess in the US that it’s easy to give.
Yeah Americans clap like seals with Bezos and Musk and Zuckerberg and Gates give away “billions.” But poor and working people helping each other rarely get attention unless it’s fetishizing poverty and the act of charity without further analysis or advocacy for change. It’s the old bible adage of the one with nothing doing the giving has given away more than the rich man with everything doing the giving. But here in the US, the poor man sees the rich man as inspirational lol
Engels on philanthropy:
Let no one believe, however, that the “cultivated” Englishman openly brags with his egotism. On the contrary, he conceals it under the vilest hypocrisy. What? The wealthy English fail to remember the poor? They who have founded philanthropic institutions, such as no other country can boast of! Philanthropic institutions forsooth! As though you rendered the proletarians a service in first sucking out their very life-blood and then practising your self-complacent, Pharisaic philanthropy upon them, placing yourselves before the world as mighty benefactors of humanity when you give back to the plundered victims the hundredth part of what belongs to them! Charity which degrades him who gives more than him who takes; charity which treads the downtrodden still deeper in the dust, which demands that the degraded, the pariah cast out by society, shall first surrender the last that remains to him, his very claim to manhood, shall first beg for mercy before your mercy deigns to press, in the shape of an alms, the brand of degradation upon his brow. But let us hear the English bourgeoisie’s own words. It is not yet a year since I read in the Manchester Guardian the following letter to the editor, which was published without comment as a perfectly natural, reasonable thing:
"MR. EDITOR,– For some time past our main streets are haunted by swarms of beggars, who try to awaken the pity of the passers-by in a most shameless and annoying manner, by exposing their tattered clothing, sickly aspect, and disgusting wounds and deformities. I should think that when one not only pays the poor-rate, but also contributes largely to the charitable institutions, one had done enough to earn a right to be spared such disagreeable and impertinent molestations. And why else do we pay such high rates for the maintenance of the municipal police, if they do not even protect us so far as to make it possible to go to or out of town in peace? I hope the publication of these lines in your widely- circulated paper may induce the authorities to remove this nuisance; and I remain,– Your obedient servant, “A Lady.”
There you have it! The English bourgeoisie is charitable out of self-interest; it gives nothing outright, but regards its gifts as a business matter, makes a bargain with the poor, saying: “If I spend this much upon benevolent institutions, I thereby purchase the right not to be troubled any further, and you are bound thereby to stay in your dusky holes and not to irritate my tender nerves by exposing your misery. You shall despair as before, but you shall despair unseen, this I require, this I purchase with my subscription of twenty pounds for the infirmary!” It is infamous, this charity of a Christian bourgeois! And so writes “A Lady”; she does well to sign herself such, well that she has lost the courage to call herself a woman! But if the “Ladies” are such as this, what must the “Gentlemen” be? It will be said that this is a single case; but no, the foregoing letter expresses the temper of the great majority of the English bourgeoisie, or the editor would not have accepted it, and some reply would have been made to it, which I watched for in vain in the succeeding numbers. And as to the efficiency of this philanthropy, Canon Parkinson himself says that the poor are relieved much more by the poor than by the bourgeoisie; and such relief given by an honest proletarian who knows himself what it is to be hungry, for whom sharing his scanty meal is really a sacrifice, but a sacrifice borne with pleasure, such help has a wholly different ring to it from the carelessly-tossed alms of the luxurious bourgeois.
Source: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch13.htm
Fuck me Engels could post.
If you rat on the Parade of Hope, you’ll be lucky to find your toenails. These guys are the roughest of all the charities.you’ll be lucky to find your toenails
Haha what?
From a long-forgotten DeVito-directed Robin Williams film
when the jimmy beast empire finally crumbles, we’re going to see some intense psychological breakdown i bet
I get sam bankman-fried vibes from beastboy. I can only hope he collapses as precipitously as the crypto gang
mr beast really missed the point of squid games didn’t he?
I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise.
Something I was thinking on yesterday:
David Dobrik’s big thing on youtube was how “generous” he was. His vlogs would frequently feature him dropping large gifts of houses, cars, electronics, and cash on his “vlog squad” usually, but also giveaways to strangers. He used that gift giving to charity wash a lot of the wrong he was doing, and his supporters would defend him through his “charitable acts.” Dobrik made millions off his channel thanks in large part to his vlog squad, and none of them made a cent off being monetized by him. Their compensation was largely tied to those gifts.
Mr. Beast is similar in a lot of ways, but most notably also employing charity washing.
When dobrik quit youtube, he also quit all of his “charity” work, lmao. No more large gifts to his friends, despite his defense prior being “I’m just a generous person and love gift giving.” So one could make the argument, “dobrik you’re still rich, why are not still donating and giving gifts?” We all know the answer there.
What’s interesting to me is that Mr. Beast seems to have learned from that and insulated himself from that kind of criticism by tying in the viewers mind (like 80% are literal children) that the money he donates through various videos only consists of the money he made through previous videos, and that he himself is minimalist and doesn’t take an extravagant salary. That ignores the fact that he lives in an 80million dollar flat and drives exotic cars, but it really seems to have insulated him a little from the same type of criticism that dobrik would get.
If he indeed does have political aspirations he could jettison the beast channel, stop any type of donations and gifts, and have a defense for it.
Just a ramble, not sure where I was going with that.
