Edit: Jesus Christ, people. If you buy a $150 Thinkpad made by slave labor instead of a $1,200 MacBook made by slave labor, you’re still supporting a capitalist economy based on slave labor. We all do. We have no choice. The number of smug liberals in the comments saying “well I buy a cheap used laptop” or “well I buy coffee beans and make my own coffee” are completely missing the fucking point.
Don’t tell yourself your consumption is moral. All of us make unethical choices every day because there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Accept your shame and guilt and let it drive you to do better.
This is really daft.
It’s possible to participate in society in such a way as to uphold our beliefs about how society ought to be.
If you want to complain about Apple’s abuse of employees, don’t buy their stuff.
If you want to abolish slavery, don’t own any slaves.
If you want to smash capitalism, buy a used thinkpad.
Sure, there are some instances where this just isn’t possible in a complete and absolute sense. For example, I despise google, have invested a lot of effort in degoogling, but there remain some google components I rely on.
However, the existence of these instances does not mean we don’t need to invest any effort in supporting the changes we want to see.
I agree, that comic is bullshit. Acknowledging that the world we live in isn’t the one we want but that we can make a garbage system less garbage is absolutely valid. There are initiatives like Right to Repair that bring us closer to our goals while also actively making the existing system suck less, so why not take the money you would have spent on Apple products and put it towards the cause instead?
Nope sorry, there are many much less capitalistically aggressive alternatives to starbucks and apple. Slaves on the other hand literally (and not figuratively as in here) needed to keep slaving to stay alive. I would seriously feel cramps in my stomach if I walked into a starbucks with that sticker.
apple and Starbucks are capitalists. Using their products and services is not “capitalism” but “consumerism”
spending a wage you earned is the opposite of capitalism
I mean not exactly. I am not sayin the person in the photo is but excessive consumerism is what capitalism needs to stand on.
well of course not “exactly.” To get to “exactly” we would both have to write hundreds of thousands of words.
My point is that a lot of people who are proponents of capitalism aren’t actually leveraging their capital as an investment to further expand it.
For example, I just bought a house. I “leveraged” 5% of the property price from my savings (earned by a wage, by the way, not by leveraging other capital) and the bank carried the rest (which it does by leveraging capital). It’s the banks’ house for the next 30 years. I can leverage my equity in the house as that equity grows (which would be a bad idea), but even when the house is paid off, I now have an asset, not capital. Were I to sell the house - now I have capital - but I can’t do anything with, really, practically, except buy another house, again from which lawyers, banks, realtors, etc will all extract capital but I will not.
The second point is that - you need a phone and laptop to survive in modern society, just like you needed a horse in days gone. People love to gloat that people who say “those who do no work but own methods of extracting wealth from those who do should profit less” are then buying something unavoidable from those who extract capital, and point out that they should have budgeted for a slightly lower price point in order to give the wealth extractors slightly less.
And honestly, they are welcome to that opinion. It doesn’t change my opinions at all. We just disagree. They believe people (often other than themselves) are entitled to more of a share in the profit they generated than I believe they should be, either for myself or for anyone.
Anyone is welcome to disagree I just don’t understand why they want to give up their own money. Especially as such people are usually desperately against taxation, which is the same mechanism except it benefits many instead of the few.
Sure, but it’s the fact that out of any other choice to pick, she chose to still give her money to the most aggressively capitalist companies. You can say it’s consumerism, but what point is she even making then? She sat down at a Starbucks to get her overpriced coffee, on a $1200 Macbook with a sticker on it that says “SMASH CAPITALISM”, it’s blatantly hyprocritcal.
maybe she’s there with a gift card she got given and a laptop that was also a gift?
Also my work computer is a Mac, now, and was also when I worked for a print and design company years ago.
maybe she’s an artist and Macs are often considered de rigueur for image and movie editing
maybe she’s not very technical, grew up using a Mac and is sticking to what she knows, who are we to criticise someone for not being skilled at tech, when we are not skilled at javelin throwing, or glass blowing or pointilism or whatever.
Buying a used Thinkpad doesn’t change the fact that it was made by slave labor. It might make you feel better to buy one, but it changes absolutely nothing. You still bought an item made in part by slaves or near-slaves. And you’re keeping the market alive for that to continue.
If you buy used, the manufacturer makes zero profit. It’s a pretty substantial difference ethically.
All your options are “capitalistically aggressive”. It’s a sign of immaturity to me that people think they’re above it all while still being totally and utterly dependent on capitalist economics. Acting like buying a fair phone makes you better than others is just laughable. It’s a drop in the bucket compared to all your other unavoidable contributions to capitalists.
Not to mention that many of these “better” options are only available to people with money, which makes the entire claim even more ironic. Many of us going this “alternate” less aggressive route can only do so because we benefit from inequality in the first place.
Your argument in no way refutes the point the comic makes.
nope, there is for instance a ton of difference between someone who buys a used phone and uses it for 5 years vs someone who buys a new phone each time a new model comes out. Similarly there is a difference to how much you enable or enhance this system when you make conscious choices about which brands to use (ones that are a part of it or ones that actively redefine and make things worse).
I would agree however that it really makes no sense to of course try to infer all of these from a single photo, maybe this person is super anti consumerism in all other aspects, maybe she is repairing someone else’s computer etc. Nevertheless apple is the last brand you should be using if you want to put a smash capitalism sticker on your laptop, you can at least show the will to have your os open source. Otherwise it is like going to a steak house to eat steak with a “stop animal slaughter” shirt. It is the exact definition for me of acting like you are above it all without showing the effort to be.
Apple is a dumb choice always, but theres no fucking replacement for starbucks and you cannot convince me otherwise.
I would think the exact opposite. Apple’s monopoly practices (you notice they just got mega sued by the USG for antitrust violations, right?) mean if you want to effectively collaborate with people inside the Apple ecosystem you need to use Apple products.
On the other hand, Starbucks is easily replaceable, unless you’re in some sort of food desert urban wasteland, there are local coffee shops everywhere.
Fuck people in the apple ecosystem. Coffee in diners don’t replace the dessert frappuccinos.
I… do you really think Starbucks sells good… anything? I mean, serious question. Do you think their drinks taste good?
Please tell me how I can build ios apps, test multiple browsers (including safari), and test on any iPhone without mac? I don’t want to use a mac but it’s not “always a dumb choice”. Sometimes (by design) there is no choice.
Here is an idea for you, don’t build iOS Apps. If iOS users want to use regular apps or browsers then they’ll have to jailbreak their devices or stop using devices that intentionally limit them. Enabling their poor decisions doesn’t help them.
As a bonus it removes your apple developer fees as well as cuts your development costs by maybe half or even more.
Here I am being more judgey about Starbucks.
I’m no Apple fan but I’m no hater either. They’re overpriced but most people who have them are buying them for the style/aesthetic/image…and while that may indeed be shallow, if that’s what they want and the apple stuff delivers it for them and makes them happy, I suppose it’s money well spent (to them).
The coffee on the other hand, if they’re in any city or suburb of any decent size, there’s probably a small local option that’s at the very least as good as Starbucks coffee and likely significantly better.
Exactly, one of the main complaints about macs (being so proprietary and locked down is one of the main selling points. They’re the king of “just works” because they don’t allow a damn thing that might make it not.
I like to tinker so obv that’s garbo, but if you want to get your grandma something and not have to come around once a month to “fix,” Mac might be the answer. 🤷
Alright but if you’re driving 6 hours across the USA you can get consistently good starbucks in every other town you pass by, but yes I’m sure there might better tasting gourmet options for similar price range in the most populous cities in the nation.
Apple is still a detriment to the end users, though, so I don’t care if it gives them momentary happiness.
Starbucks along with McDonald’s has the most throat ripping base coffee of any chain in the UK.
If I have use a chain I’ll go to Costa but I’d rather use a local trader.
Im not judging her because of any hypocrisy. Im judging her because she’s a mac user.
Then they would be a femboy with striped socks, and drinking a home made coffee in their basement
low key, this comment has done more to make me want to try linux than like 95% of the comments here advocating in favor of it. GJ.
I also get annoyed when people criticize when wealthy people support leftist causes. Like, yeah, Bernie Sanders (or whoever) has a lot of money, so the fact that he isn’t blinded to injustice by his own privilege is a good thing.
I forget who said it, but…
“When I was poor and talked about greed and poverty, they said I was jealous, now that I’m rich and talk about greed and poverty, they call me a hypocrite… I’m starting to think they just don’t want to talk about it.”
The difference is Bernie doesn’t wear a large diamond encrusted gold necklace spelling out “Socialism” in large letters.
A Macbook and Starbucks are fashion statements.
It’s because they aren’t using a used ThinkPad
Asus > Lenovo
They’re very similar, but you get to support Taiwan with Asus. You don’t have a pointing stick, though; if that’s something you care about. The hardware is also similar, but Lenovo generally has better cases/ outershells, but Asus also outperforms them on price point and internal hardware and software.
Are there Asus laptops out there that support the same level of reparability/upgradability as ThinkPads?
Yes! Here’s one example: https://www.asus.com/us/laptops/for-students/br-series/asus-br1402c/
Like I said, they don’t offer as many external accessories, but they’re pretty close.
This is coming from someone who grew up using thinkpads. If I were to buy a used laptop for something personal, I’d go with a thinkpad. If I have to buy something new, it’s Asus.
