Is it too early in the morning to start in on the "hating stupid people" part of the day?

[tzikeh]

Google hates freedom, say conservative websites and blogs.

Google Inc. occasionally features light-hearted doodles on its colorful home-page logo to commemorate special occasions. But now they are drawing criticism from conservatives for not being more patriotic. [Google] bathes its logo in stars and stripes every Independence Day, but last week's decision to honor the 50th anniversary of the Sputnik launch -- the second "g" in Google was replaced with a drawing of the Soviet satellite -- is being blasted by some conservatives. Not only did Google honor an achievement by a totalitarian regime that was our Cold War enemy, they griped, but it did so without having ever altered its logo to commemorate U.S. military personnel on Memorial Day or Veterans Day....

"I have no problem with Google commemorating obscure holidays or some of the trivial anniversaries that they note," [a conservative website's owner who chose to remain anonymous] said via e-mail, "just so long as they also make special logos for the more significant holidays."

You don't mind if they do things you don't care about, just so long as they do what you would do if you were in charge of their corporation which doesn't belong to you, Mister Conservative Man? I wonder if you could sound more hypocritical and self-important.

I'm thinking yeah, sadly, you probably could.

Damn that Godless Pinko Sputnik! It didn't fire up American scientific ingenuity leading to astounding developments in a variety of areas and culminating with a human being walking on the moon or anything, anyway! THE VOYAGER MISSION IS FOR LOSERS!

Comments

[nestra.livejournal.com]

They should definitely go after NPR, then, who did at least two stories about the Sputnik anniversary.

[cereta.livejournal.com]

That may be the dumbest thing I've read today, and given my usual day, that's saying something.

[elance.livejournal.com]

I went to a sf convention called Satellite 1 last weekend that was basically a "Yay for Sputnik!" time. It ruled. Ken McLeod was the guest of honour. He was awesome.

So basically I'm just going to thumb my nose at the conservatives raining on the parade of Google. If they don't like it, they can bloody well develop a fantastic search engine too.

[danceswithwords.livejournal.com]

Oh for fuck's sake. Those assholes are always complaining that the Google doodles are insufficiently America-centric/not honoring their favorite holiday/causing us to lose the War on Terror/whatever. Because, clearly, the drawing on a search portal is that important.

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

It's like mainstream American conservatism has printed out the Wikipedia article on fascism and is using it as a to-do list.

[greywingnut.livejournal.com]

Quote. Of. The. Day!

Kudos...

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

*takes a bow*

On the Google doodles . . .

[(Anonymous)]

I wrote a column about this today on The Skinny, CBS News.com's daily news round-up. Check it out: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/09/the_skinny/main3346895.shtml

[klia.livejournal.com]

Oh, for... *bangs head*

And if they're bitching about this year, Veteran's Day is still a month away, which makes them look like even bigger idiots.

[jackiekjono.livejournal.com]

I am trying to understand your argument here. I realize that it is a fairly minor issue to critique but, are you actually saying that people shouldn't criticize a large corporation if they don't own it?

*is confused*

I think that people should be able to criticize those with power. I also think customers have every right state their opinions about aspects of the service they receive. Doing so does not make them fascist - even if you don't agree with their complaints.

[lydiabell.livejournal.com]

I think everyone in that article just needs to take a step backwards and realize that other people have priorities that don't include proving how ultra-patriotic they are at all times.

[tzikeh.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not saying that they shouldn't criticize something they don't own; I'm saying that arguing against a search engine using a doodle of a satellite because the same corporation doesn't doodle enough doodles that scream "U.S.A.!!!" enough, as far as the arguer concerned, makes said arguer look like an idiot.

Sometimes the people at Google like to decorate their logo to commemorate some holidays, some artist's birthdays, some esoteric anniversaries. Here is someone who says "It doesn't bother me if they want to decorate their logo as long as they make sure they include what I think is important about the United States." Google is not a standard-bearer for the United States. It's a search engine.

And I have to wonder how this self-proclaimed conservative (let's pretend he owns a series of canning factories) would react if a liberal blogger wrote a piece saying that it's fine if Complainy Canning Company wants to have fun with their logo on their website, as long as they make sure they include what I think is important about the United States." Complainy Canning Company is not a standard-bearer for the United States. It's a search engine.

Also - I don't see anyone complaining about service - it's not like suddenly Google blocked all searches for "Veteran's Day" -- and I *certainly* never called anyone a fascist.

[tzikeh.livejournal.com]

Complainy Canning Company is not a standard-bearer for the United States. It's a search engine.

Of course, what I meant to type there is: "It's a canning company." Chalk that one up to copy/paste stupidity. (Though I suppose you could search through all the cans for an American flag....)

[tzikeh.livejournal.com]

I think everyone in that article the United States just needs to take a step backwards and realize that other people have priorities that don't include proving how ultra-patriotic they are at all times.

Fixed that for you! :D

[jackiekjono.livejournal.com]

I still love you. It's just that "You don't mind if they do things you don't care about, just so long as they do what you would do if you were in charge of their corporation which doesn't belong to you, Mister Conservative Man?" looked like a weird sentence.

I think the arguement they are making is somewhat silly because google is not really an "American" corporation as most of their customers are in different countries.

And no - you didn't use the word fascist.

[montanaharper]

It's like mainstream American conservatism has printed out the Wikipedia article on fascism and is using it as a to-do list.

Mind if I quote you in the "Words of Wisdom" on my userinfo page?

[montanaharper]

It's never too early in the morning. The stupid happens 24/7, sadly.

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

By all means. (How flattering!)

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

I did, though. And I'll stand by it.

Wiki-P: "Fascists seek to forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, or racial attributes." It also lists the following as integral parts of the ideology: nationalism, statism, militarism, anti-communism, and "opposition to economic and political liberalism"—all of which are on display here. It also mentions totalitarianism, corporatism, and populism, all of which are on display by the current American regime and its supporters; I think I'm pretty justified in saying there's a fascist movement in the United States right now that has a lot of steam behind it.

The people writing this article may not be fascist rulers—which is to say, they're not the actual boot stamping on the human face forever—but they're certainly fans of fascism—the face under the boot grinning with orgasmic glee.

Re: On the Google doodles . . .

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

It has received about 250 entries, including ones that replace the secont "o" with a Purple Heart medal and the "l" with the flagpole in the Iwo Jima flag-raising.

I find both of those in astonishingly poor taste.

Great article; thank you.

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

"Remember that here in 21st-century America, the definition, substance, function and purpose of patriotism entails questioning the patriotism of others." (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2007/09/patriot-day.html)

[lydiabell.livejournal.com]

Fred is a great blogger.

[jackiekjono.livejournal.com]

Insignificant bloggers no one has ever heard of say that they think it would be nice if the great big mega-corporation did something nice about Memorial Day.

Yep. Looks like fascism. Mussolini himself must have risen from the dead to pull off this one.

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

[jackiekjono.livejournal.com]

I can’t access Wikipedia from work but from what you are quoting, Wikipedia seems to be trying to give fascism some credit for being a coherent political agenda. It isn’t a coherent political agenda. Nazis, for example, never talked about things they were for. They would just blather endlessly about the things they were against as a way to get power. It’s not so much about getting and using power to promulgate a philosophy or an agenda. It’s about getting and using power because you can. Wikipedia’s list of things fascists are for simply includes all of the different modes of power plus a hatred of Communism.

In order for something to be labeled “fascist” by the authoritative Encyclopedia of Jackie, it would have to be characterized by a willingness to use power/force to impose some sort of orthodoxy. The closest think I can see to “force” mentioned in the article is sponsoring a contest to come up with a good Google logo for Memorial Day.

Before I would be willing to pull out a word like “fascist,” I would – at the very least - need to see some literal or figurative brick through Google’s window.

There is a real problem with pulling out the 50 point words to describe everyone you disagree with. It really cheapens that 50 point word.

[cleversimon.livejournal.com]

Well, in the future, I'll run all my one-off quips by you to make sure they're acceptable vis-à-vis your personal philosophies and standards of language use, mmkay?

Look, Ma! It's in there.

[jackiekjono.livejournal.com]

Let's see - where I said, "from what you are quoting, Wikipedia seems to be trying to give fascism some credit for being a coherent political agenda. It isn’t a coherent political agenda."

Wikipedia says, “Historians, political scientists, and other scholars have engaged in long and furious debates concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets.”

You know, if that many scholars can't even come to a concensus about the basic core ideas, I don't think I am too far off when I say there were no clear ideas.

Where I say, " It’s not so much about getting and using power to promulgate a philosophy or an agenda. It’s about getting and using power because you can."

Wikipedia says, "“Fascists embraced nationalism and mysticism, advancing ideals of strength and power as means of legitimacy.”

Eh, good enough for government work.

Where I say, "In order for something to be labeled “fascist” by the authoritative Encyclopedia of Jackie, it would have to be characterized by a willingness to use power/force to impose some sort of orthodoxy."

Wikipedia says, "“Fascism is also typified by totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic, by way of a strong, single-party government for enacting laws and a strong, sometimes brutal militia or police force for enforcing them.”

Apparently, Wikipedia thinks I was stretching the definition by saying a brick through the window would be sufficient. They clearly do *not* think a fascist is anyone who gets a little overenthusiastic about Memorial Day.

And you don't have to check with me. Feel free to make an ass of yourself whenever you feel the need.