• 2 Posts
  • 35 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle







  • Methylman@lemmy.worldtoFormula 1@lemmy.worldBrundle knows sarcasm
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely - the whole thing makes this celebrity look like they were brought in as window dressing.

    Doubling down and blaming the “F1 representative” (as if the FIA shows up on race day wearing Alfa Romeo shirts) came off as insincere and just made me think they believed themselves to be too important for us watching on tv


  • Was curious about that dynamic - does the team hire a celebrity so they can get the team on socials or does the celebrity’s PR team look for opportunities?

    If the teams are reaching out then I guess you can’t blame the celebrity for not wanting to look like an idiot (although my point still stands - don’t show up). OTOH if the celebrity is reaching out then they should really do more consideration about what they are getting themselves into



  • Methylman@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThink about it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Think back to the moment you learned that copying was considered theft

    Well copying is very broad… Plagiarism’s treatment as being both technically and morally wrong imo always makes sense. Plagiarism goes beyond copyright infringement though, since infringement only requires “use” of the material whereas plagiarism is passing it off as your own.




  • I think what you say is fair if not true - one difference (and I’m sure there are more) is these weren’t lands acquired by conquest/military subjugation, but rather by agreement with the landholding populations to live in peace. What actually happened was the indigenous populations were lied to in one way or another such that the European nations never held up their side of the bargains because of ambiguity in the agreements in addition to Europeans plainly lying about what was being agreed to.

    I think this is evident in the ways the Canadian Reconciliation Calls to Action use language such as “call upon the Government of Canada…to jointly develop with Aboriginal peoples a Royal Proclamation of Reconciliation…[which] would build on the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the Treaty of Niagara of 1764, and reaffirm the nation-to-nation relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown

    Essentially these lands were never legally taken which is why the indigenous groups can/should lay claim to them. That makes this scenario different than a group being displaced by military conquest (which is technically recognized as a legal, albeit cruel, mechanism for displacing people).