BRANDISHING SIX MILLION

The difference between Russell Brand and his detractors. By that I mean the people who call him a shill and THIRTYTHREE tattoo brandisher is that Russell is a lot funnier than the uninvited mullahs of mediocrity.

Experimenting with different voices is not something that can be done exclusively in the head, as posited in this post about 15 year old Hildegard of Bingen (the anchorite but not the only anchoress in that particular anchorhold) completely silent in her dungeon cell, writing plainchant music widely regarded as seminal in its original form.

I guess a mimic has to practice new voices. It's not perfect saying them out loud because the resonance is different than from any bystanders perspective? Bing ai Chat says the acoustical differences between the speaker of words and the listener but not the hearer are related to the "vocal-tract-size differences that result in formant-frequency variation across speakers". Bing ai then goes on to suggest 'Therefore, a listener has to adjust his/her perceptual system to the acoustic characteristics of a particular speaker' and then posts some mickey mouse footnotes and links in the metadata. That's for me you wont experience that. I'll write about it separately as it's fascinating and worth sharing.

That's Bing. Bing has complex care issues, somewhat self evident from the output depending on who you are. I popped over to Microsoft's Chat investment in Generative Pretrained Transformer land and asked a really easy trick question.

Elon Musk is currently hosting a live spaces event with special guest Ron DeSantis. Please write an essay of no more than 2000 words from a Continental philosophy angle as opposed to the Analytical point of view on whether the world's richest man (and entrepreneur) should or should not host political events? 

Essay Emboldened for Speed Readers

Title: Elon Musk Hosting Political Events: A Continental Philosophy Perspective

Introduction:

The intersection of wealth, entrepreneurship, and politics has become increasingly prominent in contemporary society. As the world's richest man and a renowned entrepreneur, Elon Musk's decision to host political events raises important questions about the role of individuals in shaping political discourse. In this essay, we will explore this issue from a continental philosophy angle, contrasting it with the analytical perspective, and examine the ethical implications of Musk's involvement in political activities.

I. The Role of the Individual in Politics:

From a continental philosophy standpoint, the individual holds a significant place in shaping the political landscape. Thinkers like Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger emphasized the importance of individual agency in challenging existing power structures. For Nietzsche, the "will to power" embodied the individual's ability to shape reality according to their own values and ideals. Heidegger, on the other hand, highlighted the concept of authenticity, encouraging individuals to take responsibility for their own existence and engage in meaningful action.

Elon Musk's decision to host political events can be seen as an embodiment of Nietzschean and Heideggerian ideals. By leveraging his wealth and influence, Musk exercises his individual agency to actively participate in shaping the political discourse. From this perspective, his involvement can be seen as a way of challenging the existing political order and offering alternative visions for the future.

II. Critiquing Analytical Perspectives:

Analytical philosophy tends to prioritize objective analysis, detached from personal biases and individual subjectivity. It often emphasizes the separation of public and private spheres, viewing political engagement by individuals as potentially biased and detrimental to rational decision-making. However, from a continental perspective, this analytical detachment can be seen as problematic and disconnected from the lived experiences and values that shape political realities.

Continental philosophers, such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Michel Foucault, critique the notion of an objective observer and highlight the inherent biases and power dynamics that underpin knowledge production. They argue that individuals cannot separate themselves from their social, historical, and political contexts when engaging in any form of analysis or decision-making.

Applying this critique to the analytical perspective, we can question the assumption that individuals should abstain from political engagement due to their wealth or entrepreneurial status. By actively hosting political events, Musk embraces his subjectivity and acknowledges his role in the broader societal landscape, rather than pretending to be a neutral observer. This self-awareness aligns with the continental philosophy emphasis on recognizing and engaging with one's own situatedness within power structures.

III. Ethical Considerations:

Hosting political events as the world's richest man raises important ethical considerations. Critics argue that Musk's involvement can lead to the amplification of his own personal interests and potentially distort democratic processes. Moreover, his immense wealth and influence may grant him disproportionate power, undermining the principle of equal representation and participation.

From a continental perspective, ethical concerns are rooted in a broader understanding of social responsibility. Thinkers like Emmanuel Levinas and Simone de Beauvoir stress the importance of recognizing the other and considering the implications of one's actions on the well-being and freedom of others.

Applying this perspective, Musk should approach his political engagements with a sense of ethical responsibility. He should be cognizant of the potential consequences of his actions, ensuring that his involvement does not perpetuate unjust power dynamics or suppress the voices of marginalized groups. By recognizing the alterity of others and promoting inclusive and equitable dialogues, Musk can align his political activities with continental ethics.

Conclusion:

From a continental philosophy perspective, Elon Musk's decision to host political events represents an exercise of individual agency and an active engagement with the political realm. Contrasting with the analytical viewpoint, continental philosophy emphasizes the situatedness and subjectivity of individuals, calling for a recognition of personal values and interests in political engagement.

While ethical concerns surrounding Musk's involvement exist, they can be addressed by adopting a continental ethics framework that emphasizes social responsibility and the recognition of others. By being mindful of the potential consequences of his actions and promoting inclusive dialogues, Musk can navigate the political landscape responsibly and contribute to the broader discourse in a manner that respects the principles of democracy and social justice.

In evaluating the appropriateness of the world's richest man hosting political events, a continental philosophy perspective encourages us to consider the potential transformative power of individual agency and the ethical responsibilities that come with it.

That's how I learned ELON MUSK has invited all presidential candidates onto the Twitter platform he owns and Linda Yaccarino allegedly runs, and regardless of my own biases, it's self evident that the legacy media are unable to provide that level of engagement or complexity, in real time.

All Presidential candidates are most welcome on this platform

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 24, 2023

This is why we need more not less voices from Russell.

Is Advertising Immoral or Unethical?

The short answer you know anyway but that wont change anything. A blog post is unlikely to prompt a vendor of materialism into questioning their value set.

Let me start with an apology. At one point a couple of years ago I was flying between Shanghai and Hong Kong as the Global Account Planning Director on a piece of Coca-cola business. I was in the air so much that one week I ate more airline food than terrestrial meals. The hard work paid off. The creative was all over the show at the first meeting, and as everyone else was too busy I managed to rewire the creative script/animation and of course presented with unusual pride and conviction and sold the ad to the client. She's now head of Coca Cola marketing and is Rob's client. Lucky for him she's no-nonsense solid Gold and a bit of thinker too. We both held similar radical Maoist ideas that I don't hold today but was shocked to hear my client echo. 

I did not come up with the idea. I only rewired it to make sense. That ad went on to increase the RTD beverage sales of that drink 73% year on year. No small volume in the fastest growing and largest market in the world. That's a fuck load of sugared water. That's a lot of apologies to Chinese kids.

Was I responsible for that? I doubt it. The idea was cute, my timing was great, resources were thin and I had total licence to make it how I thought it should be made. It was Chinese New Year (but then it was Year on Year sales) and things came together.

But I can't claim to be innocent in the entire enterprise. If I'm honest with myself it was my presentation skills that nailed a quick sign off. The lovely account manager who handed me the reigns was actually cute enough to say I was "fantastic" when we presented. I wasn't, but then it would look OKish from someone who had a ton more experience around the world at a global level, and so I was happy to do it. She was happy not to get bogged down in endless back and forth which is a serious problem with Asian clients and junior Asian account handlers. She also tipped me off that my mediocre Japanese boss was losing face around me and that I wasn't to trust him. That advice alone put 10 000 bucks in my pocket when he eventually fired me. I spent it on a watch that was subsequently stolen in that taxi back in Hong Kong. So that's Karma for you. Easy come easy go.

So I'm just as guilty as you but I have given great consideration to how brands can be part of our future. 

The answer to whether it's immoral or unethical? 

Mostly immoral and largely unethical always (as with anything) contextual. Generally speaking for a planet that is groaning at the seams ecologically it's no different than selling arms to Libya before bombing them.

It's not like I'm suggesting I'm any better than you. I'm not. But I don't mind talking about it. So how exactly do you feel?