[ SECRET POST #5886 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5886 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.
[Stargate SG-1]



__________________________________________________






























09. [SPOILERS for Treasure Planet]




__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for discussion of incest]

[Vampire Game]



__________________________________________________



11. [WARNING for possible discussion of transphobia (JK Rowling related)]




__________________________________________________



12. [WARNING for discussion of transphobia, other bigotry, suicide]
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #842.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

There is absolutely no sense in which this situation is what the phrase "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" is talking about. That is categorically wrong. The kind of moral critique that people are making about the Harry Potter game - whether you agree with them or disagree with them - is a fundamentally different critique from the one that people have in mind when they say that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism.

When people say that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, they mean that all economic activities that take place in a capitalist society are fundamentally unethical because capitalism is fundamentally exploitative and unethical. But there's nothing you can do to get around that because the unethical part is just inherent in the system and in every product of the system.

If you wanted to apply that to the Harry Potter game, it would basically be saying that the workers who made the game, and who made the computer systems to play the game, etc were all being exploited. But they're being exploited in the same way everyone in capitalism is being exploited. So it doesn't make sense to single out the Harry Potter game for that. There's no consumer choices you can make that will avoid implicating you in that specific kind of exploitation.

But that's not the argument that people are making about the Harry Potter game. When it comes to the Harry Potter game, the argument that people are making is much more straightforward. It is that JK Rowling is an outspoken public bigot, and so you should not give her money or support products that she is responsible for. That's *not* something that's inherent in all forms of economic interaction under capitalism. And it *is* possible to make consumer choices that will avoid buying things that are directly connected with outspoken public bigots.

Also - you keep jumping between two really different questions here. "Is it right or wrong to buy the game" and "is it right to harass people who buy the game" are totally different things! It's possible to think that people shouldn't buy the game, and also not harass people.