Worst cases: Difference between revisions

161 bytes added ,  7 November 2003
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 44: Line 44:
Of course, their version of [[Consumerium]] does not rely on any trustworthy [[styles of capital]] analysis, but instead, deliberately leaves ambiguous the most important facts about [[deforestation]] and [[arms trade]].  As a result, conflict in the world ''increases'' as a ''direct result'' of them now having our wonderful work to build propaganda fronts with.  They can claim approval of all kinds of great looking front groups and show projects they have done, that a serious analysis show is just cosmetic.
Of course, their version of [[Consumerium]] does not rely on any trustworthy [[styles of capital]] analysis, but instead, deliberately leaves ambiguous the most important facts about [[deforestation]] and [[arms trade]].  As a result, conflict in the world ''increases'' as a ''direct result'' of them now having our wonderful work to build propaganda fronts with.  They can claim approval of all kinds of great looking front groups and show projects they have done, that a serious analysis show is just cosmetic.


We are forced to take up arms, ourselves, just to stop them...
We are forced to take up arms, ourselves, just to stop them... Ironically, by refusing to discriminate against them or their customers, we have ''become'' their customers... They are of course wildly happy with this result.
Anonymous user