Forum Post: Brad Pitt is the latest filthy disgusting rich fake humanitarian celebrity pig to make a carefully planned statement giving the illusion of support when in fact, he is another overpaid juggernaut representative of big business. DON'T FALL FOR IT!
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 20, 2011, 6:41 a.m. EST by ModestCapitalist
(2342)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The rich and famous do not want to be seen as 'pigs' or go down in history as 'villains'. They want to be seen as 'heros' and go down in history as 'humanitarians'. The market for their product has become global. The fan base has become global. Therefore, the 'humanitarian' effort and 'good will' PR machine has gone global. These 'humanitarian' efforts and 'good deeds' are not chosen to address the greatest need or injustice. They are chosen almost exclusively to appeal to the largest demographic for their respective commercial products. The largest fan base. Efficiency or effect is of little or no concern. Its all about PR, marketing, image, and fame.
This is why the rich and famous have all taken up 'philanthropy' or 'good will' around the world. This is why so many have 'schools' or 'foundations' in their name. This is why so many play golf or appear on a TV game show for 'charity'. This is why so many sign motorcycles, other merchandise, or auction off their own 'personal effects' for 'charity'. This is why so many have TV shows with a 'charitable' gimmick. This is why so many arrange photo ops with wounded veterans, firefighters, or sick children. This is why so many have adopted children from around the world (Which they always pay others to care for full time. The hired professionals are sworn by legal contract to confidentiality. Not allowed to discuss or appear in public with the children they care for. Those 'photo' and 'interview' opportunities are reserved exclusively for the rich and famous 'adoptive' parents.). This is why every 'humanitarian' effort and 'good deed' is plastered all over the media worldwide. Its not about 'humanity' or 'good will'. Its all about marketing, image, fame, and PROFIT. This is why we are so often reminded of their respective 'good deeds' or 'humanitarian' efforts shortly before or after the release of their latest commercial product.
Charitywatch.org and Charitynavigator.org are both non-profit charity watchdogs. Of all the well rated charities (about 1500) only three are closely affiliated with celebrities. Michael J Fox (not the primary donor), Tiger Woods (not the primary donor), and Bill Clinton (not the primary donor). That's three well rated celebrity foundations out of 1500. In general, celebrity foundations run like crap because they blow half the money on private jet rides, five star accommodations, and PR crews.
The fans have been terribly misled. For example:
Virtually every penny 'donated' by Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt to date has come from repeated sales of baby photos. With each sale, the baby money goes to the 'Jolie-Pitt' foundation. A foundation which has never done anything but shelter funds. The 'donation' is immediately publicized worldwide.
When Jolie or Pitt have a new movie to promote, a portion is then donated from their own 'foundation' to a legitimate charity. This leaves their ignorant fans under the impression that 'another' donation has been made. When in fact, its the same baby money being transferred again and again. Another portion is blown on private jet rides, super-exclusive accommodations, photo ops, and PR crap. This saves Jolie and Pitt millions in travel/stay expenses and their respective studios tens of millions in advertising. It's all very calculated.
Of course, Jolie and Pitt could simply endorse any of the 1500 most efficient and effective charities. Of course, the baby money would go much further and do far more good if it were donated to such charities to begin with.
But that would be too boring.
The 'Make it Right' Foundation took in over $12,000,000 the first year alone. Tens of millions overall. Brad Pitt has never been the primary donor, planner, or designer. He is a figurehead and salesman with a position on the board of advisors. Nothing more. Still, he has been showered with glorious praise by fellow celebrities and media outlets around the world. Again, the fans have been terribly misled.
In order to move into a 'green' home, the innocent victims of Katrina are required to provide a property deed, meet a number of financial requirements, and pay an average of $75,000 UP FRONT. The difference is offered in cheap loans or on occasion (according to the website) forgiven. To date, only a few dozen former home owners have qualified.
The 'Make it Right' foundation was never intended to help the lower income residents of New Orleans reclaim anything lost in Katrina. In fact, 'Make it Right' is part of a calculated effort to rebuild the Lower Ninth Ward without them. Part of a calculated effort to raise property values in the area by displacing the poor. They are by design, excluded. Unable to qualify. Of course, Brad Pitt could have simply endorsed 'Habitat For Humanity'. A well known, proven, and efficient home building operation. Of course, the tens of millions in funding would have gone MUCH further.
But that would be too boring. Big name celebrities have no desire to make the world a better place.
Their primary goal is to appear as if they do.
It's a sham. Good will has become big business.
Thank you so much to the writer of this post for FINALLY calling these hypocrits out. You might want to add that the media is along for the ride, particularly with Pitt/Jolie, in terms of playing up this (false) humanitarian image. The entertainment (and even some mainstream) media has helped facilitate this image of them as a "global power couple and humanitarians" because it feeds interest, which feeds site hits and ad revenue. Because of this it is very hard to get the truth out there. The hypocrisy of Make It Right is infuriating if you do any research into it, and it is only matched by the hypocrisy of the Jolie-Pitt Foundation. Don't forget too that these two have also set up other fraudations in the names of their innocent children that also shelter funds and provide tax write-offs for them, while offering little in the way of actual help. It's about time that the mainstream media starts calling them and other similar celebs out on this behavior.
Thanks for the support. I wish the media would get real. When I saw the Madonna Malawi segment on CNN (Celebrity News Network) in December of '09', I felt like throwing the TV through the window. Her 'Raising Malawi' sham was an obvious train wreck. I was a regular on the RM website. All their statements were misleading from day one. The progress reports were incredibly vague. Nothing was itemized. The whole damn site was little more than a Madonna/affiliate shrine. The entire operation was an obvious train wreck waiting to happen. I don't expect 'Make it Right' to crash and burn like 'Raising Malawi' did. But it's a terribly inefficient operation. 'Habitat for Humanity' literally makes twice as much progress 'dollar for dollar'. Still, MIR gets $12,000,000 in one year because of a stinking fake humanitarian celebrity pig and HFH gets well under half that. MIR is actually competing for donations with HFH and getting far less work done 'dollar for dollar'. It makes me sick. I am going to write one hell of a scathing essay on this MIR crap and flood the web with it over the winter. I'm going to inform as many residents of New Orleans as possible. I'm fed up to my eyeballs with fake humanitarians and their fake humanitarian crap. Right up to my eyeballs. Pitt better call his PR crew in for some overtime and whip up a new load of PR crap. They are going to need it.
Division Troll
True. Fail troll is fail. Fail thread is fail.
Fail OP is fail. R.I.P OP
It's about time someone had the balls to write about what we all know, the celebs are overpaid phonies taking up our time. Jolie Pitt are two of the worst, the fakest, lousy parents who put their children last on the list while boasting they are first. We all know how much sacrifice good parents make for their kids, and yeah, life is boring when you are putting someone else first!
Make it right is a scam, scam, scam. Making money and nobody gets any charity, MIR gets millions and what does the poor get? Nada!
Finally people are speaking the truth about the phony humanitarian celebs. The information is out there if you research it and Pitt/Jolie are not the only ones doing this for selfish reasons. They learned it from other, bigger celebs as this article shows: http://jmox.yuku.com/topic/448/--bought-Chateau-Miravel---Curious-Case---Missing-Millions
I am going to write a new essay going into more detail of corruption with 'Make it right' including it's for profit affiliation with Hyatt, Holmes on Homes, Ellen Degeneres, Lowes, and other for profit entities. I will make the true motives of all public figures and entities crystal clear and flood the web with copies all winter long. I will inform as many residents of New Orleans as possible. I want it to be a slam dunk so I have some more research to do. When it's ready, I will post it here in honor of my Pitt loving critics. That's a promise.
Hey Pitt! You think this page is incriminating? You ain't seen nothin yet!
Modest Capitalist is right, for better understanding of this, google and watch the documentary: 'StarSuckers", (most people are, since they have been indoctrinated to idolize stars and celebrities via TV and Hollywodd movies) you will understand how it all works.
This post will be a little sloppy for starters. I will clean it up and repost a better essay later. I just want to get the discussion started on how actors and executives use the illusion of 'good will' to maximize their own profits. It's a complicated web of affiliation.
How do modern era celebrities get so incredibly rich? It's not as simple as making movies and selling tickets anymore. Major studios and TV networks are now owned by giant corporations which also own entities within other industries. Their strategies to maximize profits are more calculated than ever.
For example, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have had a special relationship with NBC for years. Countrywide and other banking entities have been sponsors. Not to mention Lowes, Home Depot, and Electrolux. But it's not as simple as selling ad space anymore. NBC is owned by GE. GE also owns at least one major production studeo and entities within the banking industry.
Giant corporations have been working together for years with major media outlets to increase profits. Part of their strategy has been to cross-market their products and services. Also to affiliate with celebrities and create the illusion of 'good will'. When in fact, the idea is to increase awareness and demand for every product and service provided within the umbrella of parent companies and corporate sponsors. New Orleans is known worldwide for it's unique culture. Tourism has been big business in the area for decades. Make it Right is now affiliated with Hyatt Regency. A high end hotel right next to the New Orleans Stadium. There is already a giant dual promotion planned for next spring. Ellen Degeneres (NBC juggernaut) is going to play a major role in this dual promotion. Housing, the related financing and home improvements have also been big business for decades.
If the Lower Ninth Ward is redeveloped with fewer poor people, property values will be increased along with profits made by all those affiliated with Make it Right. The web of affiliation with Pitt, NBC, GE, Hyatt, Lowes, Home Depot, and the banking industry is sprawling to say the least. The operation has also been used to promote at least one 'home improvement' TV show that I know of. Holmes on Homes. I don't recall the network but the show is designed to sell more high end home improvements. It's all very calculated.
I'm telling you that good will has become big business.
If any of you have some more shady details, I'd like to read them.
Don't bother cleaning it up it's TLDR anyway!
If any of you want more dirt on Jolie and Pitt, do the research. They have been dumbing down their own fans with one lie after another.
For example: For over 6 years now, Angelina Jolie has been telling her ignorant fans that she intends to take a long break from movies to spend more time with her kids. It's been nothing but PR crap from day one.
For over 6 years now, she has been doing the exact opposite. Movie after movie after movie after movie. Nanny after nanny after nanny after nanny. As usual, the nannies are sworn to confidentiality. Not even allowed to take the kids out in public. Those photo and interview opportunities are reserved (by contract) for Jolie and Pitt. The idea is to give the illusion that Jolie and Pitt are full time parents. They are not. They are full time celebrities and part time parents.
Hey Rocky! Is this the effect you were hoping for? Shall I post some more dirt on the fake humanitarian part time parent full time celebrity pigs?
I'll be happy to.
Who gives a poop about the Pitts? I care more about Paris Hilton, she's the real actress & she doesn't get any credit! I am tired of her little dog getting all the attention too! And what about Jennifer Aniston? She didn't have a chance to hold on to Brad because she's only cute & Jolie is beautiful! Plus she has a weird chin. Its really long & kind of pointy! BTW you really should be posting on Popeater or Hollywood Insider!
You do. Otherwise you wouldn't be trying so hard to divert attention from their repeated lies and bogus PR stunts.
It won't work. In fact, I'm posting a new page dedicated to Jolie/Pitt greed tomorrow morning. In the meantime, consider this:
If Angelina Jolie is such a humanitarian role model, why didn’t she do anything to fix things in Cambodia, where her corrupt adoption of Maddox took place? Because of Angelina and the corrupt agency she used, it is next to impossible to adopt in Cambodia.
And this: You would think that being a homewrecker and serial adoption advocate would be enough for Angelina Jolie to keep herself in the headlines. However, it appears that the woman who uses her own kids as publicity pawns for media coverage just won’t stop. Now, the desperate mother of six has written a laughable article for Time Magazine on how we need to end the Dafur crisis. It reads as if it was written by a twelve-year-old.
“The evidence the prosecutor has presented is clear and compelling," Jolie writes, pointing out that millions of people have been displaced and hundreds of thousands have been killed. Really? Thanks a lot, Ms. Jolie, but we already knew that and if we needed to know more, we certainly wouldn’t consult a homewrecker who adopted a child from Cambodia under very questionable circumstances.
And this: I find it so strange that she loves going to tour the world for these photo ops where she is front and center (even in costume!) and yet when the women who were concerned about her Bosnian rapelove war romance asked her to come see the site of the camps and visit with them, she blew them off and said it was just "one person with a gripe". Would she not jump at the chance to get the publicity for herself? Not when somebody is telling her what to do...and not when it's not the right time to use them to promote herself. Mark my words...she will meet with them eventually...when it's time to promote the film. She's a user and a fake.
That's enough for now. I will post a new page tomorrow.
In your honor of course.
LMAO! TLTR! Please repost on Popeater or Hollywood Insider!
Maybe I will from the public library. But I won't stop posting here. No way.
Okay you're so cute please let me buy you a lollipop!
Buy this:
Two examples of rotten disgusting immoral behavior involving five very well known filthy disgusting rich multi-hundred-millionaire fake humanitarian celebrity pigs.
The ugly truth about the housing market, Countrywide, predatory lending, and the endorsements of Oprah Winfrey, Ellen Degeneres, and Dr Phil. Ch'Ching!
The first subprime loans were issued in 1994. It was a gimmick to sell more homes, artificially inflate the market, sell more homes at higher profits, foreclose on those who could not pay when the ARM rates readjusted, take their homes leaving them with nothing to show for their payments, resell the homes at a higher profit and so on. It was a cruel and calculated plan to sell more homes and artificially inflate the market. Those loans were incredibly profitable for well over a decade before the house of cards finally collapsed. In the meantime, bankers got richer along with the richest one percent who made off with higher dividends. It was a sham.
The biggest player in the game was Countrywide. Endorsed by Oprah Winfrey, Ellen Degeneres, and Dr Phil. If you have their shows from '04' to '06' on tape, watch them again. All three were paid millions specifically to endorse Countrywide by name. The biggest subprime player in the game. They issued more ARM loans than anyone else. Foreclosing on those who could not make their monthy payments when the rates suddenly went through the roof. It was a cruel and calculated plan to sell more homes, artificially inflate the market, foreclose, and resell for a higher profit. The sham worked like a charm for 12 years before the house of cards finally fell in.
At this approximate time, the worthless paper was sold to unsuspecting investors.
Oprah, Ellen, and Dr Phil were paid millions for their endorsements. Ch'Ching!
They have always had their ignorant love-sick fans eating right out of their hands. This alone is irresponsible. But to stand there and tell their ignorant love-sick fans to run out and get a loan from the biggest rat in the industry. That's just sick.
These three pigs are not naive little uninformed twits like Paris Hilton. They are educated, informed, and extremely savvy mass media juggernauts. They knew damn well about predatory lending. It was a common phrase by then. Still, they stood there and endorsed the biggest subprime rat in the industry. They did so with a big fat FAKE smile on their face. Unfortunately, public figures are not legally required to be straight with their ignorant fans.
But they God damn well should be.
Bono is no humanitarian. In fact, he made millions from a shady deal with Live Nation in which other investors were made to subsidize his multi-million dollar stock options regardless of market value. The stock tanked, Bono unloaded, and those 'other' investors did in fact take giant losses in part, so the filthy disgusting rich multi-hundred-millionaire 'humanitarian' Bono would not have to.
Ch'Ching!
Just another rotten immoral disgusting trick perpetrated in the name of greed.
Madonna secured a similar deal with Live Nation.
I've said it many times and I will say it many more.
There is no such thing as a multi-millionaire humanitarian.
TLDR has now changed to TLWNR, which is, Too Long Will Never Read!
Translation: Oh, no, for god's sake don't link up with likeminded people! Then we might really be in trouble!
In the case of celebrities like Pitt, Jolie, Madonna, Shakira, and many others, they are like minded fake humanitarian fake environmentalist hypocrite pigs.
I know of a man who got so sick and tired of the business surrounding charity organisations; he hopped on a plane, went to an impoverished area and helped out. He donated his time and expertise. He funded his own trip. He gives money each year to the community because he trusts them to do the right thing with it. Like provide learning material for the children...that sort of stuff. Each dollar he gives, goes to the people who need it the most. It doesn't fund 5 star hotels, private jets and Evian water. It isn't used for "appearance" fees. As someone said, if they [the small number of very rich] were willing to let go of their money and share it around, it would solve all the issues we have with poverty displacement and social injustices. However, isn't it easier to control the masses when they are unbalanced and fearful?
BRAVO!!! I have watched for years in disgust while these two exploited the needy to further their own publicity and manipulated the public into thinking they are saints. Finally someone is exposing them for the frauds they are. Keep up the good work and don't let up - you have just began to scratch the surface!!
The Empire of Illusion, by Christopher Hedges... if you agree with the OP, you will find this book VERY enlightening!
Contrived and controlled media, spectacle and its entertainment factor is like the gladiators of Rome... there to distract and appease
"Charity Fixer to the Stars" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/fashion/05TREVORNEILSON.html
I believe jolie/pitt are represented by the Endeavor Group, Global Philanthropy industry
Who cares about movie stars? What's this, People Magazine?
You do. Otherwise, you would have skipped this page.
maybe in some ways it is - nothing necessarily wrong with that.
Really, ModestCapitalist? You are starting a discussion by a personal attack on someone, who may be doing the best they can with their life ? You are posting slurs (celebrity pig) for what reason? What kind of peaceful movement or a discussion is started by verbal violence, when you you simply disagree with someone's life choices? How well would you look, if your life and all your actions were scrutinized and displayed for everyone to judge? Don't you not think there would be a few perspectives that could make an awesome case for you being insencere and not aligned with your own principles? Violence - verbal or otherwise - will only bread more violence. Reconsider your approach, it is damaging to the movement.
They are doing the best they can to dumb down their own fans and get even richer in the process. They reap 500 times the pay of a firefighter, 'give back' a tiny fraction, publicize the transaction to coincide with their own commercial promotions and bask in the glory. Diverting attention from real life heroes and manipulating the media to do their own bidding. Saving their respective studios millions and increasing their own marketability. That's not noble by any stretch of the imagination. It's deceiving at best.
I don't hate celebrities for their petty faults. We all have them. I hate them for their Earth shattering greed and profound hypocrisy.
Words can't pass for verbal violence unless they promote violence. Damn right I hate celebrities. But hate alone is not violent. I will not filter my anger and disgust anymore than I already have. If you want to plant flowers, that's great. But someone has to call out the bad guys. Otherwise, those flowers will get buried under a pile of crap.
By the way, what I've posted so far is only the tip of the iceberg. There will be a lot more to come in the coming weeks and years. If these celebrity pigs insist on dumbing down their own fans in an attempt to divert attention from their own Earth shattering greed, then I will keep calling them out for it. I won't stop as long as I live.
I once wrote an article comparing shows like Everybody Loves Raymond with the latest Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie movie. The biggest difference was guns.
Some of our top actors get there and stay there by promoting gun violence. Others produce thoughtful, programming that can be watched more than once.
The gunslingers seem to get paid the most, unfortunately.
[Removed]
It would have been much easier to simply type, "I hate Brad Pitt", then type a period.
You got the bonus plan.
Next.
I never liked him anyway.. he's not a very good actor.. And I never thought he was that good looking.
Why is this back as a new post?
Can't you people come up with anything original?
Next.
celebrity political opinions are good for their sales
wtf - off topic much - ? I really don't give a flying ass crap about celebrities - they're an oddity in our society and not representative of any particular sort of group or Wall Street - this isn't even worthy of discussion - they're people that followed a very particular niche path to wealth - they have nothing to do with the current economic war - if they want to lend PR what difference does it make ? weirdo
Next.
Brad Pitt rocks!
Rocks that hypocrisy.
A great point was made on another thread about Brad’s ecological footprint. Going by what we have seen him do I bet his personal ecological footprint is 100 times greater than you or I.
Lets just take a look at what we know:
He has several cars and rides motorbikes for pleasure. He flies private planes purely for pleasure. Has travelled extensively by plane over the last year. I would hate to even calculate his travel use alone. Uses private jets regularly for his personal comfort and pleasure. He plays around on jet skies and ATV’s to amuse himself. Has more than 1 home.
Here are some factors that reduce the Ecological Footprint of mobility:
•Walking and biking have the lightest Footprint of all. •Buses and trains use far fewer resources than cars. •Using buses, trucks and cars with higher fuel efficiency can greatly diminish Footprint size and reduce the amount of toxic exhaust fumes. •Cars and airplanes are the most energy intensive forms of transportation. Limiting their use is critical to reducing Footprint size.
It seems as long as Brad wants to enjoy his luxurious lifestyle and entertain himself with his toys and travel then the environment can go the hell.
Practice what you preach Brad and don’t expect the rest of the world be environmentally aware and conserve energy when your lifestyle and consumption clearly abuses the environment.
None of us are perfect, but you've got to be a pretty uptight person to believe, without even knowing Brad Pitt, that he isn't someone you can work with.
If you want to support any legitimate charity, then do so directly. Never support any celebrity foundation. Don't be fooled by the sale of baby photos, lies about percentage of income donated, or praise from other well known public figures. Celebrity foundations are CRAP. They spend most of their funding on PR campaigns, exotic travel, and super high end accomodations for themselves. Thats right. Filthy rich public figures have been jet-setting the world in the name of 'humanity' for years. Riding in personal jets, staying in super-exclusive resorts, and living it up in exotic locations around the world the likes of which most people could never afford even if their lives depended on it. They bring along agents, advisors, publicists, hair, make-up, wardrobe, lighting, and photo crews who are also in it for themselves. They are paid six or seven figures for their part to schedule, manage, document, showcase, praise, and publicize the 'good will' of said public figures and their respective industries. Every possible expense is passed of as 'incidental' or 'necessary' and billed right back to some 'foundation' named after said public figure and/or respective industry. Every possible tax deduction is claimed. Which are incredibly vague and diverse thanks to our sold-out government. Deals are cut with major networks who agree to praise the 'good will' or 'humanitarian' effort of said public figures and plug their latest commercial project around the same time. Others from around the world pick up the story and save these industries billions in advertising every year. Resulting in higher profits and paychecks for the 1% club. When its all said and done more wealth is transfered from poor to rich. NOT the other way around. So don't support any charity named after a living celebrity. Don't be fooled or inspired by any photo you see in a magazine, any clip on TV, any affiliation, or any short term short sighted progress report. Instead, go to Charitywatch.org and look up a top rated charity to support your favorite cause. Its all there. For example: 'Habitat For Humanity' is a top rated charity. They have been for many years. They operate with a low overhead, volunteer workforce, and donated materials. They have built homes for the less fortunate in nearly every city nationwide. Including New Orleans. They do so as we speak. No similar effort can match their progress hour for hour or dollar for dollar. So there is no legitimate reason to support a slower, less efficient effort represented by a filthy rich Hollywood actor who flies in on a personal jet, takes most of the credit, and makes a deal with a major network for plugs just days before the premier of his latest film or DVD release. By doing so, you support not only the inefficient effort, but also the filthy rich actor. Concentrating more wealth and dumbing down our society further in the process. Instead, support 'Habitat For Humanity'. Its not perfect. It is affiliated with some big business. However, it is MUCH more efficient, effective, and less corrupt than 'Make It Right'. The difference is profound.
Like I wrote before, you've got to be a pretty uptight person to believe, without even knowing Brad Pitt, that he isn't someone you can work with or like for that matter.
Like I've said many times, you've got to be a pretty naive person to believe, without even knowing Brad Pitt, that he is a true humanitarian, a true environmentalist, a true supporter of OWS, or someone you can work with or like for that matter.
Say, that reminds me:
Eco power lists: The fame, extreme wealth and disproportionate influence celebrated by such lists are completely at odds with the values of the green movement.
Is there anything the Sunday papers can't turn into a fatuous celeb-fest? Two days ago, the Observer published its "eco power list". It will come as no surprise that it featured Brad Pitt – which list doesn't? It was more surprising to find Jay Leno there, on the grounds that he has made the, er, 240 cars he runs "as green as possible". And the chief executive of Ford, because he has just unveiled an electric Ford Focus (sadly he didn't simultaneously veil the gas guzzlers he continues to market). Much of the list was a catalogue of rich and powerful people who have now added green – or some nebulous semblance of green – to their portfolios.
But I'm less concerned about the contents of these lists than the principle. To me, eco and power occupy different spheres. The environmentalism I recognise is a challenge to power. It confronts a system which allows a handful of people to dominate our lives and capture our resources. The fame, the extreme wealth, the disproportionate influence celebrated by power lists stand in opposition to the values and principles that green thinking espouses.
But that's not the only problem with these lists. They are invidious. They extract a few characters from a vast collective effort: generally those who are skilled at taking credit for other people's work.
An eco-power list is even worse. First, it reinforces the story, endlessly told by those who hate environmentalism, that it is the preserve of toffs and princes (Prince Charles, inevitably, features on the Observer's list). It is true that some of its most prominent spokespeople are rich and famous. But they are prominent only because this tiny, unrepresentative sample is celebrated and fawned over by the media, while the millions of other people in the movement are ignored.
It also encourages the superman myth: that a few powerful people can save the planet. In reality, only big social movements, emphasising solidarity and collective effort, are likely to be effective. Those who are rich and powerful already will frame their environmentalism in terms that reinforce their wealth and power, ensuring that the system which has rewarded them so lavishly remains unchallenged. I doubt that anyone who works for the Observer believes the superman myth, but they pretend to do so, because power lists – like every other species of celebrity trivia – are popular and easy to read.
Worst of all, it represents yet another attempt to tame and package this movement. As Paul Kingsnorth puts it:
"Capitalism, always so effective at absorbing and defanging dissenters, is transforming an existential challenge into yet another opportunity for shopping." Environmentalism is one of the last hold-outs against celebrity culture. It's not untainted by this plague, but more resistant to it than any other sector. If the papers have their way, they will trivialise and capture us, just as they have done to everything else that once had substance.
Copied from Guardian.co.uk
Dude, lighten up. It's Brad Pitt, not God, for goodness sake.
The answer is 'no'. Tell that fake humanitarian fake environmentalist fake OWS supporter to stop trying to upstage real humanitarians, real environmentalists, real OWS supporters, and real heroes. No?
That's what I thought.
I wouldn't call him a pig. He seems like he's in good shape. There's also nothing wrong with him making money either.
I wasn't referring to his gut. I was referring to his greedy pig line of work, his greedy pig paychecks, his greedy pig PR stunts, his greedy pig fake humanitarian crap, and his greedy pig life sustaining resource squandering lifestyle.
There is no 'making money' unless you're the Federal Reserve or a counterfeiter. There is only transferring of funds from one party to another. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
The ugly truth. America's wealth is STILL being concentrated. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer. These latest figures prove it. AGAIN.
According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 99 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively. The sobering numbers were a far cry from what was going on for the richest one percent of Americans.
The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion. In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009. Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.
Another word about the first Great Depression. It really was a perfect storm. Caused almost entirely by greed. First, there was unprecedented economic growth. There was a massive building spree. There was a growing sense of optimism and materialism. There was a growing obsession for celebrities. The American people became spoiled, foolish, naive, brainwashed, and love-sick. They were bombarded with ads for one product or service after another. Encouraged to spend all of their money as if it were going out of style. Obscene profits were hoarded at the top. In 1928, the rich were already way ahead. Still, they were given huge tax breaks. All of this represented a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from poor to rich. Executives, entrepreneurs, developers, celebrities, and share holders. By 1929, America's wealthiest 1 percent had accumulated 44 percent of all United States wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes were left to share the rest. When the lower majority finally ran low on money to spend, profits declined and the stock market crashed.
Of course, the rich threw a fit and started cutting jobs. They would stop at nothing to maintain their disgusting profit margins and ill-gotten obscene levels of wealth as long as possible. The small business owners did what they felt necessary to survive. They cut more jobs. The losses were felt primarily by the little guy. This created a domino effect. The middle class shrunk drastically and the lower class expanded. With less wealth in reserve and active circulation, banks failed by the hundreds. More jobs were cut. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933. The worst year of the Great Depression. Those who were employed had to settle for much lower wages. Millions went cold and hungry. The recovery involved a massive infusion of new currency, a World War, and higher taxes on the rich. With so many men in the service, so many women on the production line, and those higher taxes to help pay for it, some US wealth was gradually transferred back down to the majority. This redistribution of wealth continued until the mid seventies. By 1976, the richest 1 percent held less than 20 percent. The lower majority held the rest. This was the recovery. A partial redistribution of wealth.
Then it began to concentrate all over again. Here we are 35 years later. The richest one percent now own over 40 percent of all US wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes are sharing the rest. This is true even after taxes, welfare, financial aid, and charity. It is the underlying cause. No redistribution. No recovery.
The government won't step in and do what's necessary. Not this time. It's up to us. Support small business more and big business less. Support the little guy more and the big guy less. It's tricky but not impossible.
For the good of society, stop giving so much of your money to rich people. Stop concentrating the wealth. This may be our last chance to prevent the worst economic depression in world history. No redistribution. No recovery.
Those of you who agree on these major issues are welcome to summarize this post, copy it, link to it, save it, show a friend, or spread the word in any fashion. Most major cities have daily call-in talk radio shows. You can reach thousands of people at once. They should know the ugly truth. Be sure to quote the figures which prove that America's wealth is still being concentrated. I don't care who takes the credit. We are up against a tiny but very powerful minority. They have the means to reach millions at once with outrageous political and commercial propaganda. Those of us who speak the ugly truth must work incredibly hard just to be heard.
I honestly only read a few lines in but... "There is no 'making money' unless you're the Federal Reserve or a counterfeiter. There is only transferring of funds from one party to another."
...summed up your economic intelligence to me. You make money by being more productive. Brad Pitt has provided his high quality service of acting for a sum that both he (the supplier) and the producers (the demanders) have agreed on. It's fair, trust me.
There is a growing income gap that can be fixed over time with restructuring the income tax policy.
It's not that simple. No. I won't trust you. Not when a firefighter gets paid $50,000 and an actor gets paid $15,000,000. I've explained in detail why I persecute big name celebrities.
That's great. The demand for exceptional actors is different than firefighters.
It actually is that simple. The markets are different.
"The income gap between the rich and the rest of the US population has become so wide and is growing so fast, that it might eventually threaten the stability of democratic capitalism itself." Allen Greenspan testifying before congress spring of '05'.
If that's not good enough, look up what Albert Einstein and Mariner Eccles had to say about the first Great Depression.
Like I said, it's not that simple.
The economy isn't simple but the reason Brad Pitt gets paid more than a firefighter is.
You're taking specific examples of Microeconomics and trying to apply it to the Macro scale.
No I'm not. I'm looking at the big picture. The world's wealth is too concentrated. Period. No excuses. $200,000,000 for one man is too damn much. Way too damn much.
Read the post. Pitt's income isn't that simple either.
Do you buy fair trade coffee to try and disperse the wealth?
No. But I have voluntarily refused multiple raises. I also put a cap on my own wages 5 years ago. I still do the work but I practice what I preach.
WOW! I am talking to an idiot. You realize someone else got that instead of you.
If you would have gotten the raise, you would be paying more taxes. If you really practiced what you preached, you would have taken the raise and not written anything off on your tax returns.
Holy shit. You gotta be kidding me! I can't believe that. Why do you even work?
It's porn isn't it. You're a low budget porn star. That's the only thing I can think of. You didn't try to get into other positions because you didn't want to get too big, I get it. People would recognize you.
I expected something like that from you. I got the same response on talk radio once. Your response like the last is a pathetic and desperate attempt to put a negative spin on a modest act.
It's very simple. My contribution to society is an important one. But I don't feel it's anywhere near as important, difficult, or dangerous as that of a firefighter. I capped my own wages in order to keep my own level of compensation well below that of a firefighter.
You must really hate Peace Corp volunteers. They don't just work cheap. They work free. But it's noble for them and stupid for me right? Of course, you will claim some BS like that. If you don't, I will have another question for you. One which will expose your incredible hypocrisy.
Peacecorps workers help people in developing countries with things like education and health. You're an American worker who limited his capacity to earn out of some belief that it affected the greater good. Wake up! It only helped the person who was behind you in line for the raise.
That's great you think you're contribution is less important that a firefighters but people are wealthy because of producing a good or service. In an ideal world, we don't need firefighters. In an ideal world, we still need people to produce goods and services.
You are seriously an idiot though. Do you know how insulting that is to poor people? You had this opportunity, that everybody strives for, multiple times to have an increase in wage and you said no because you didn't fuckin feel like it. it's insulting. People kill for that shit and you just took a shit on it.
if I were your boss I'd actually fire you if you refused to have raises multiple times. I don't give a shit. That's back-talk and a sign you don't know what money is.
I'll check the video when I get a chance but I will never take the word of one man or woman as gospel. I also won't disregard what I can see with my own two eyes. Never. I live modestly. I have enough money. I don't want anymore. That's not why I'm here.
Make myself feel better. That's a good one. How can I feel better when I'm trapped in this fucking nightmare? It's not really bad yet. But it will be. I knew it damn well and put it in writing over 6 years ago. This is only the beginning of this crisis. There will be no resolution. I have zero hope for the future. ZERO. I will die knowing that I devoted myself to a cause which was lost from day one. I will probably die with tears in my eyes remembering the good old days when only 80 percent of the world lived in poverty. When unemployment in America was only 9 percent. When it wasn't necessary to pack a gun when checking your own God damn mail.
You people amaze me. Everything keeps getting worse. Nothing is getting better. There is not one shred of evidence to suggest that we will ever have anything remotely resembling world peace or prosperity. There is a mountain of evidence to indicate further decline worldwide.
We already know that major civilizations have fallen into total chaos. We are still subject to environmental factors as we have always been. That's easy. Basic human nature.
Still, you fly around in some sort of modern society fantasy land convinced that it can't happen again. Refusing to acknowledge any link whatsoever between distribution of existing wealth and social stability. Instead, you stay as shallow as necessary to avoid the ugly truth. As shallow as necessary to discredit those of us who see it.
Here to make myself feel better. That's a good one.
Conditions are constantly improving, just look at the data. I used to think like you until I saw this documentary...
Cool It
It's about Bjorn Lomberg, an environmental economist. It's about global warming and solutions for it but it goes into other issue like world hunger. it's truly very good and it opened me up to a different way of thinking. The world isn't in the shitter like people think it is. It will get worse but we'll end up stronger than before.
It's also you're fault if you don't have enough money since you passed up those raises. Don't go blaming anyone else.
Again. A desperate attempt to put a negative spin on a modest act. I see right through it as I did the last time. You're not pissed off that I chose to pass that opportunity to the next guy. After all, if I don't want more money, who the hell are you to tell me what I should be paid (Sound familiar bitch?)? But it's not my intelligence you doubt. That's just a cheap cover. I see right through it. I know damn well what you're thinking.
HOW DARE YOU SET SUCH AN EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF US TO FOLLOW? HOW DARE YOU PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH?
Like I said. I see right through it.
Soup kitchen volunteers. Noble or stupid? Volunteer firemen. Noble or stupid? Volunteer builders. Noble or stupid? Guardian Angels. Noble or stupid? Volunteer work for the disabled. Noble or stupid?
It's all noble right? Of course it is. But I'm stupid because I choose to keep my own level of compensation low enough so that ordinary people and those with lower incomes can afford my work. In other words, I choose to make an honest and modest living. And this makes me stupid?
Like I said. You can say whatever you want. I won't be phased by it because I know it's just a desperate attempt to put a negative spin on a modest act.
The only credit I can give you is that you're not a hypocrite, which I appreciate. But it's a "modest act" that you chose out of some greater calling of self-righteousness that doesn't exist. I'm not telling you how much you should get paid but the market will and going against the market is kind of stupid. You could use that extra money for something greater but instead, your principals prevented you from doing something that actually helped. But who gives a shit because you feel better about yourself and that's what this whole fuckin thing is about.
Here's the news, this isn't supposed to be about how someone feels. I'm sorry people are pissed off about being poor too because I am poor. I'm a person you're trying to fight for. And I'm telling you that you are simply wrong because this isn't a question about emotions nor is it even a social problem, its economic and political.
PS Volunteering isn't a career though. There's a difference between helping a cause and being productive in the economy.
good info. I've always hated to see celebs (Jolie and Pitt included) importing exotic pets (they call it child adoption) for PR purposes. When doing so, these idiotic celebs -- brainwashed by the (zionist) multicults – make sure of one thing: the kids have to be NON-white! Quite a disgrace …
Celebrities do prefer to wear third world children like fashion accessories. But it's not out of hatred for the white race. It's just the latest trend among celebrities. They don't even raise their own children. They are so rich, they could retire tomorrow and raise those kids full time. Instead, they hire live in nannies, swear them (by contract) to confidentiality and run off jet-setting this mostly poor but beautiful world. Meanwhile, the kids spend most of their time cooped up with hired professionals because Jolie, Pitt and others like them don't want their kids (fashion accessories) photographed with anyone but them. Otherwise, their ignorant fans would quickly see them for what they truly are. Part time parents. Full time pigs.
Pitt married a jew and is under her full control. They adopt packs of niglets and promote that as the "new normal". Like all jews that have only one goal "Eliminate The White Race Any Way They Can!"
Although I hate Jolie and Pitt, I won't side with just any wacko spouting racism and anti-semitic crap. Of course, they are pigs. But as far as I can tell, they are motivated by greed. Not by a desire to "Eliminate the white race".
I'm not even falling for your tricks. I've noticed way too many to fall for one as obvious as yours. You're not really here to promote racism or anti-semitism. You're here in an attempt to discredit my entire page by posting such outrageous anti-semitic and racist crap.
Maybe, you thought I would let it slide out of hatred for Jolie and Pitt. I won't. Again, Jolie and Pitt are motivated by greed. Not by a desire to "eliminate the white race".
Next.