Soup in Teapot Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Welp, as a monster you know damn well she is such this kind of person.
Kimi Posted February 29 Posted February 29 well duh, all of them are capitalists. there would be no haus labs if she was socialist. american pop culture is shaped by capitalism, always was.
Aethereal Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Actions speak louder than words. She may have said it unlike others but she's no different from most or all of our faves. They are all hyper capitalist praticators.
Kimi Posted February 29 Posted February 29 8 hours ago, qurl said: Stefani has not done a complete 180 turn from the person she used to be. and i truly believe she used to believe in the things she used to say but extreme wealth she has changed her surroundings and that changed who she is nowwealth changes people, we all know this. 2
Leptine Posted February 29 Posted February 29 9 hours ago, qurl said: I'm sure she still feels and thinks this way occasionally, but that is part of the game of being a popstar in that business and she perfectly knows that, there are downsides like in all the work situations and things you're obligated to do, including sponsorships or having to shake hands to people you don't like or care, if you're going to apply what she says in that video, you can't simply be a popstar, moviestar or working in the entertaining business. Fame comes to downsides, she made a whole album to that argument. When it comes to HL specifically, just because she didn't like selling perfumes back in the day, it deosn't mean that she can't be passionate about make up and that stuff and venturing in that business, people can also change their mind and see things differently after years, with her networth it's just not realistic not investing money in business activities.
AvadaKedavra Posted February 29 Posted February 29 (edited) The truth about Gaga is...........Hollywood Changed her she's friend with all those hollywood actors now and theyre so shallow. Just compare the Grammys and The Oscars and the different vibes of those awards. Art Provocateurs to People pretending theyre some sort of olympic gods. She turned from irreverent Ny chanteuse only caring about pushin boundaries to classy movie star. Hope releasing new music bring her back to a place of humbleness. She's been too reclusive in her hollywood bubble and losin sight of things. Things like her lack of support to the LGBTI community when she was so outspoken in the past. All the oversaturated beauty promo. She needs to connect more with people and the fans Sometimes i resent her movie career a lot cause it has morphed her into a different person Edited February 29 by AvadaKedavra 3
Kimi Posted February 29 Posted February 29 8 hours ago, wastedpotential said: Oh Gaga, this was a hornets nest... Hide contents In the time since the Industrial Revolution (which destroyed the class of aristocrats who had nothing better to do with their time but make art), the only consumable art (at a level above, say, folk songs and fairytales, many of which date back centuries anyway) has come through capitalism. In a world without a large number of people who can spend their life making art without ever having to worry about feeding themselves (and since you can't buy artistic talent, output quality really is improved by increasing the number of people able to partake), the only way that art can be made is either as a hobby or in some way that extracts value from the art to provide for the creator. Today, capital systems profit off of art, which can only be financed by the capital system in the first place, so it's an ouroboros of profitability and financing. Now, the profit structures are broken and most commercially viable art (especially big-budget film) is rotten to the core, but the alternative would probably be zero art, so I'll take what I can get Tsarist-era Russian literary tradition (which was used as a method of coping during the many challenging times) is widely regarded as producing some of the strongest literary works of all time (Crime and Punishment, Anna Karenina, Dead Souls, Fathers and Sons; Pushkin, Lermontov, Tsvaetva, etc.), and yet the number of renowned Russian poets or authors in 1910 was astronomically higher than the number in 1930. The Interbellum USSR was an incredibly hard place to live (which one would think would lead to the production of more art), but other than those making propaganda posters and films, those in charge of producing busts of Lenin and then Stalin (I think these are the same people responsible for those metro stations Tucker Carlson was raving about), or those dancing in the Bolshoi for the Politburo to enjoy, there wasn't much art, and what little was made didn't withstand time. Obviously the USSR isn't the only alternative to capitalism (it's just a convenient example since I'm not as familiar with pre-1911 Chinese art), but until we devise an economic system where basic needs can be met for all, that can also sustain a sizable forever-unemployed artisan class of the population, humans are going to have to pick between making art, working to make a profit, or making art for profit. Literally the only feasible exception I can think of is religious art funded by the Church (or by independent mosques/synagogues/temples etc.), but we aren't seeing much of that these days either. what are you talking about, in the countries controlled by ussr like Poland art was thriving, sure with censorship but artists they were able to navigate around it and make challenging art, often times symbolic to hide messaging. once capitalism kicked is when the quality dropped, that is common a sentiment in those places. it wasn’t just propaganda, especially in later decades. The alternative to capitalism is not zero art, it’s actually less commercial art which would be great for everyone. 2
Thin White Duke Posted February 29 Posted February 29 I can't seem to find a whole clip/video of her talking about this, so I don't want to comment too heavily on it. But the quote itself.. I don't see what the problem is? At this point words like "capitalism" and "socialism" seem to be nothing more then trigger words that send everyone into a fit but nobody knows what they fully mean. We all reap the benefits that capitalism brings us, as well as the negatives. To say otherwise is naive. Also this is the point she was trying to make with ARTPOP too a few years back, condensed. Today's pop music is literally capitalist-based and y'all are acting like it's some sort of a sell out new ideology of hers is 3
Jay07 Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Rich people reap the benefits of capitalism, us office drones are underpaid, overworked and generating income for the billion dollar corporations we work for. Also, capitalism only favors art that is mass produced and mass consumed like Marvel and Taylor Swift. Capitalism is a death knell for creativity and originality. 8 1
Velvet Night Posted February 29 Posted February 29 For someone who likes capitalism so much she sure doesn’t release products (music) that her audience wants to spend money on lol 1
Raspberries Posted February 29 Posted February 29 (edited) 1 hour ago, Communion said: Sis, you arguing that someone dating a recent divorcee is as harmful as a politician materially supporting the genocide of 2M Palestinians proves my point. And why the idea of engaging with "you think for-profit healthcare is bad yet consume pop music - gotcha" levels of contrarian that populate these kinds of threads is not worth the effort. It's not normal to make every interaction you have rooted in how you imagine a user perceives Taylor Swift and that every post is a secret jab against her. "You consume [x]'s music passively for $0.005 per stream and YET if it was TAYLOR making that'd money, suddenly she'd be a v--" SSRIs, immediately. Where did I make any mention of Palestine or Israel? You have a long history of dragging political figures and celebrities for trivial **** LOVE the lie mention of "recent divorcee" as if Ariana isn't the reason for said divorce Edited February 29 by Raspberries
Raspberries Posted February 29 Posted February 29 (edited) 1 hour ago, State of Grace. said: 0 points were made. You're out here equating Ariana being a homewrecker to.....Joe Biden (and other politicians Communion criticizes) being a terrible politician and a war criminal. Braindead stans logic. Can you please point to where I mentioned Joe Biden specifically? I can't find it. Thanks! Edited February 29 by Raspberries
qurl Posted February 29 Posted February 29 this was just two years ago mind you … bemoaning how capitalism influences women to *checks notes* …… use makeup as a temporary bandaid to hide their pain 4
Communion Posted February 29 Posted February 29 8 minutes ago, Raspberries said: Can you please point to where I mentioned Joe Biden specifically? I can't find it. Thanks! Sister, I can guarantee you any politician you find worth "stanning" () is 100% a war criminal. I even want you to name names so we can see how obscene this off topic ranting of yours is. The irony being no one has said pop stars are beyond criticism, let alone for participating in wealth hoarding. But 1) who someone is dating is not the same thing as being a problematic bigot or wealth hoarder to where THAT is what you're mad about and 2) that pop stars and politicians are already on different levels of material impact that it being a pop star's personal life you're mad at is...?? "You stan someone who blew up a home!!!" And you stan someone who blows up countries with the signing of a pen?? Huh? 1 1
Domination Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Acknowledging the reality of capitalism and the fact that good art can and often does exist within it is not a co-sign of its inherent ability to exploit. In other words, spilled 1
Jay07 Posted February 29 Posted February 29 23 minutes ago, Domination said: Acknowledging the reality of capitalism and the fact that good art can and often does exist within it is not a co-sign of its inherent ability to exploit. In other words, spilled Can you co sign an aspect of evil without cosigning the entirety of it? Maybe fascists had some right ideas.
perfillusion Posted February 29 Posted February 29 12 minutes ago, Jay07 said: Can you co sign an aspect of evil without cosigning the entirety of it? Maybe fascists had some right ideas. Co-signing evil like when Britney told Americans "we need to support Bush and trust in everything that he does" during his war crimes that resulted in the deaths of almost 1 million civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan alone?
AMIT Posted February 29 Posted February 29 2 hours ago, Thin White Duke said: We all reap the benefits that capitalism brings us, as well as the negatives. To say otherwise is naive. Capitalists control everything we want and need and then sell that to us to make a profit for themselves, 100% of the time at the expense of the people doing all the work. Capitalist realism is so, well, real that we have people in here and so many other places singing praises for it when they're never really going to benefit from it in anyway. You do not own property. You will never retire. Your ''rights'' only exist on paper. Slavery is still a thing. Child labor is still a thing and coming back on some other places. Wars are still happening all around the world. Climate change is killing us every day and it will only get worse. All of the above are direct effects of capitalism. You think capitalism is just a ''trigger word'' because you've been so conditioned to think it's ''normal'' that you can't imagine living in any other way so you think it's weird when people brought it and its effects up. What's naive is thinking any problem created by capitalism is going to be solved by a ''softer'' version of capitalism. That has been tried with numerous reforms and things only keep getting worse. 5 5
AMIT Posted February 29 Posted February 29 1 hour ago, Darkgalord said: people still using this kind of ''argument'' stans try to not defend everything their fave says and does challenge! 5 4 2
Recommended Posts