Capitalism vs. Progressivism

TFW you are a ultra liberal organization but also an ultra capitalistic corporation and have a moment in your film where the two main characters are suppose to kiss but you can't let it happen because Asian audiences openly reject interracial romance and you have to make them awkwardly hug instead. Bravo Disney!

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=nRp1CK_X_Yw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I don't know Disney's end-game. They push all this progressive cancer in all their films but are also hyper-capitalistic. Is this the age of the progressive capitalists? I know liberals in general are more focused on WHITE PATRIARCHY than corporations fucking them in the ass.

>I know liberals in general are more focused on WHITE PATRIARCHY than corporations fucking them in the ass.
And that's why corporations have embraced progressivism. It's simple supply and demand. I know Sup Forums likes to meme about the liberal jew marxist agenda and all, but corporations are amoral, they love money. They're not pushing an agenda as much as pandering to demographics.

does it really trigger you whiteys to see your women pick us over you?

it triggers my dick tbqh

shut the fuck up nigger

she'll get blacked out in the next film.

If they pandered to demographics, they wouldn't have chosen a nignog that killed merchandise sales and Asian box-office.

Whatever this agenda is, it's obvious they are willing to take some losses to promote it.

>I don't know Disney's end-game.
Money

In Dr Strange (shit movie don't watch it), they replaced a Mongolian monk with a bald feminist icon. They are shrewd as fuck. They are wary as fuck of pissing off the Chinese but have no qualms in pushing a feminist agenda.

It just goes to show that whoever wins is the one who is most intolerant.

>they replaced a Mongolian monk with a bald feminist icon.
This is how you play white progressives. If it wasn't the Mongol being turned into a bald feminist, all hell would break loose in accusations of whitewashing. Now everyone just calmly accepted it because it still pandered to them.

>Part of it, finally, is that diversity programs coupled with the international focus of our major educational institutions have created a superstructure, partially global that on the surface seems to be inclusive, but in reality is the reverse of inclusive. Every racial and ethnic group has wildly successful people at the very top and desperately poor people at the bottom. Using vague labels about race, ethnicity, might satisfy the quotas of government programs, but they have very little to do with reality. Whether it’s blacks in West Baltimore, who have been ignored and left behind, or whites in the hollows of West Virginia.

>Behind the veneer of diversity there is an interlocking elite that has melded business, media, and politics in a way we never could before imagine. Many of these people also hold a false belief that they understand a society with which they have very little contact. Nothing has so clearly shown how wrong they are than the recent election of Donald Trump.

They tried to hide Finn from all marketing in Asian territories. See if you can spot a difference in these two posters

>Cast nig nog as one of the main characters for diversity money in the US
>Make him smaller on the Asian poster to try and gain some traction in that market
>Focus merchandising on cool Sith lord with mask and lightsaber, make lower production run of the nig nog figure
Of course there's always gonna be some losses, it's all a matter of mitigating them, but the US market is still more important because whatever money they make in China, a bigger portion of it is gonna stay there. Also, what loss exactly is it they took? Killed merchandise sales? The movie itself grossed two billion dollars and they made three more off merchandising.

See, now if Disney's goal was solely to make money, why would they make the poster boy black when they can't even show him on the posters?

Their motivation goes beyond simple money. Their agenda is to marginalize white men. The Rogue One writers were even more clear about this.

this, especially disney and marvel

>>See, now if Disney's goal was solely to make money, why would they make the poster boy black when they can't even show him on the posters?
precisely to earn money. if they did only want to be progressive, they would have let the black on the poster.
with their solution, thye win on both side

>Hiding Chewie
Those BASTARDS!

>They're not pushing an agenda
lol

Nobody likes the nignog and Rey has been turned into a meme by the Internet. Disney fucked up pushing their agenda so far down our throats. It became transparent.

And they make the robot bigger because they know chinks love robots. HAHAHA

>Tweets from a writer
>Youtube video featuring actors
These are people employed by the corporation, not the corporation itself. Of course, I shouldn't expect a Sup Forumstard to understand that nuance since it goes beyond JEWS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING BAD.

>supply and demand
More like they don't want progressive SJW critics bad mouthing their movies. If there was actual demand movies like Ghostbusters etc. wouldn't have bombed at the box office.

it's pretty interesting that in America get out the vote campaigns are considered political propaganda

The video explicitly promoted Shillary though.

No surprise considering she wanted to pass TPP that would give Disney even more power than it already has.

>Everything that happens on Sup Forums is relevant
The nignog got black people and white guilt liberals in theater seats. Rey got women in theater seats. Disney fucked up nothing, they have the third highest grossing film of all time and plenty of merchandising money. Sup Forums making a few memes about bypassing character development and photoshopping Finn to look like an African tribesman means literally nothing.

Why are you so desperate to defend this shitty movie? How much is Disney paying you?

embed the video then idiot

>These are people employed by the corporation, not the corporation itself.

Oh, well then, there's no agenda involved.

You've completely debunked it.

My favorite was when China banned Ghostbusters (2016) and there was an uproar by liberal media asking "DID YOU BAN GHOSTBUSTERS BECAUSE ITS ALL WOMEN!!!!???"

Turned out Chinese people are superstitious about disrespecting ghosts. Yes, they believe ghosts are real.

Yeah thanks for taking the 3-5 fatties off our hands we really appreciate it. The pornstars they pay to fuck you on screen notwithstanding.

>get btfo
>s-shill!

You are completely pulling shit out of your ass to justify Disney. How much are they paying you?

Ghostbusters bombed because it was a Apatow-style comedy film with an effects film big budget that got marketed like a romcom. They completely alienated their core audience, the male segment of the population, and a significant portion of the female population that does not identify as feminist or identifies as a fan of the original franchise.

>the free market is great!
>e-except when the demand is from people i dont like

how do we get china into interracial?

>Yes, they believe ghosts are real
Are you suggesting that people don't believe in ghosts outside of chinkland?

1. 74% of Americans polled stated they believe in God. This was down from 82% in 2005, 2007, and 2009.

2. At the same time, belief in ghosts, UFOs, and reincarnation are up.

3. Americans are far more likely to say that they believe others have had encounters with ghosts than they are to say they believe in ghosts themselves.

4. 61% of the population says that they believe that other people have “experienced ghosts.”

5. By comparison, only 42% of Americans will say that they themselves believe in ghosts.

Keep moving those goalposts faggot.

Just export degenerate liberal ideas, that should do the trick

Didn't answer the question

>atheist communist country
>legislates on the basis of not offending ghosts

>I work for McDonalds
>I post a video on Facebook saying fuck drumpf and fuck white people
>McDonalds has an anti-Trump agenda
Irrefutable.

More than whatever NEETbux benefits you get for your crippling autism.

atheism is something the chink government tries to force onto the country
it doesn't work obviously

So you're the butthurt liberal in other threads? Makes sense that it's a Disney shill who wants to control narrative.

>NEETbux
This is the exact same post format as the political threads. Disney shills are here.

>Everyone I don't like is a liberal shill! The emotional child's guide to political discussion.jpg

>same faggot keeps playing the victim card in every Star Wars thread
Give it a break. None of what was written in that jpeg was even touched upon in the movie. That was an obvious publicity stunt to trigger butthurt manchildren into giving them free advertisement for their new movie and if worked. You fell right into the trap.

This is the only thread I'm currently posting in, but yeah, whatever, I'm paid by Disney because I disagreed with you on the internet, you can keep believing that if that makes you feel better about having your butt completely devastated and BTFO.

they have muslims in china? Did not know

And yet you never hear about Chinese Muslim terrorists. Truly the religion of peace.

I've actually met a atheist who believes in ghost and hates ice cream. Some people are just weird man

that video wasn't made by disney or marvel though

Give me a break.
A Starwars movie only made money because finn and rey? Plz GTFO.

Even the prequels made a shit ton of money and they are garbage.

The truth is there are very few things disney can do to fuck this up.
Nobody cares about the characters or story as long as you give fanboys lasers and ships going pew pew.

>yes, bourgeois, believe the Marxist indoctrinated guy in your diversity consulting firm that said appealing to anti-racism, feminism and LGBT issues help you gain money, at the same time he writes essays according to Ernesto Laclau thesis on cultural hegemony and radical democracy which ties all these movements to anti-capitalist revolutionary communism

These corporations are as stupid as Germany sending Lenin in a sealed train to Russia, or the guys in the State Department who helped Mao win because they thought he wasn't really a communist.

Idk man.
Like do anybody honestly believe if they had put a white man as a protagonist, fucking star wars wouldnt have made the same or more money?.

I think thats the key question.

Like in what the fuck would you base that.

If they were worried about pleasing "Asian audiences," they wouldn't have had a black guy play the role period.

I agree 100%, the Star Wars name is enough to guarantee a profit, but I was talking about maximizing profit, making sure you hit all your demographics(especially those who have notoriously been alienated from your franchise, ie blacks, women, etc.). You can either figure that logically, that's probably what Disney was doing, or you can think it's because of whatever this retarded says:

Southeast and East Asia make up about half of Islam and Muslim Chinese are recognised as one of the founding peoples of Republican China.
Islamic terrorism is usually conflated with Uyghur nationalism and separatism. Nonetheless China has still found occasion to hand over separatists to the US to be imprisoned in Guantanamo/resettled in Guam :^)

If McDonalds saw that post and continued to employ him, yes they do.

Got you fampie

youtube.com/watch?v=nRp1CK_X_Yw

Stop complaining about lack of interracial fucking you cuck

>implying progressivism isn't the dominant ideology of the capitalist class
>implying progressivism isn't another identitarian tool to divide workers into teams for the oppression olympics

oh no they would only make 1.9 billion instead of 2.1 billion...the horror the horror

This.

It's in the interest of big corporations like Disney to promote liberalism so Democrat Presidents import more spics and the like to dump wages and turn every worker in America into corporate bitches.

They have testing and estimations done for every possibility. If they don't cast a black character that is more than just a token one/couple of lines, than they will have a backlash that taints the release and reduces their potential earnings. If they go full on and have inter race everything, than they also lose out on the large audience that just isn't comfortable with that shit. So they instead play it safe, which is to make the main protagonist a white female that isn't a gorgeous blonde, and they fill out their supporting protagonist cast with other races (black, asian, mexican, etc).

I can't wait for the SJW cult to start catching on to this and getting upset when it's too obvious. I mean, what's worse from an SJW perspective, having them do the bare minimum to make it seem progressive, or just casting based on who suits the role the best/is a good actor? With the former, sure, you get some pandering points, but with the latter you get an actual deccent movie free of artificial progression that is only there for tricking those same SJWs into spending their money on the movie/merchandise.

I get that these SJWs might be too stupid to understand that a large corp like Disney will never be truely progressive, and that they should look into smaller/indy organizations for that kind of thing, but at some point they have to see just how bad/obvious this "playing both sides and still winning" is getting, right?

Wow you're sad

The issue is that with Hollywood opening their movies up to the world, they're trying to please too many audiences. Maybe people in Brooklyn and San Francisco want to see a genderqueer Afro-Latinx Disney princess who also is paraplegic, but millions and millions of people in China don't really care to see that.

At some point, the big studios will have to choose whether they want to appeal to the pc liberal class in the biggest US cities, or to the much more conservative rest of the world in places like China and India.

TFW I can tell you're a newshit redditor

You'd think it would be obvious that corporations are not democratic organisations and are only interested in profit. If you don't buy from them, they will not aknowledge your existence. If you do buy from them, that still doesn't give you any power over them. Identifying as a consumer is placing oneself in a lower, passive position in capitalist hierarchy.