The parent company that owns Dove also owns Ben & Jerry, Klondike, Magnum, and many other dessert brands. Ordinarily, this wouldn’t be relevant beyond articles about corporate centralization but Dove has gone out of its way to push and rep for the Fat Liberation movement on its social media pages. While it may be the case that those who work at a shampoo and conditioner company just happen to feel very strongly about body positivity, when we consider the economic incentives at play, it’s more likely that the parent company understands the wide reach of Dove’s media presence and wants to promote more reckless diets in the consumers of its other brands’ products. While we can end the article right here with this example, we’re going to dig further into why corporate liberalism normalizes and promotes unhealthy behaviors.
The short and quick answer behind why these unhealthy behaviors are promoted: because there’s money in it. When corporations have such outsized power in what makes it to the news, this push towards normalizing degenerative lifestyle choices naturally conflicts with what the American people think and know to be true. While conservatives and non-voters often aren’t sufficiently demoralized to fall for these encouragements to consume more, many liberals are very susceptible to falling for pro-consumption propaganda because it ties in with their ideology of maximizing freedoms. While liberalism initially began as the fight to ensure that merchants had a say in their own governance, it’s gradually evolved over time to uplift more and more people out of the margins of society as the simple ideology’s list of successes has only grown over time as it’s eroded more and more of society’s foundations. While many milestones were achieved by liberalism that only helped to better society, this was more a happy byproduct of the ideology’s processes than any mark of goodwill.
This is because liberalism needs continually new territories to conquer, as it’s supporters care not for the status quo nor even the state of society but rather for the new and trendy moral panics that continually emerge. What was cool a decade ago is passé today, because by the time that liberals have achieved their dopamine-inducing victory of hammering new rights into law, they’ve moved onto their next group. For the average progressive, to be a liberal is to engage in a superfluous activity of always pushing for change, because it brings atomized urbanites together and creates a common goal in their otherwise meaningless lives. The change in question is irrelevant, because it’s the momentum and process that liberals are actually drawn like moths to a flame by.
Even though the Fat Liberation movement is completely and apparently retarded, it’s still relevant because progressives see it as just another mountain to summit and fat people see it as a way to avoid taking responsibility. Like the food that the obese eat, the Fat Liberation movement’s messages feel good and dopamine is about the only thing that it’s supporters value anyways. For the obese, the Fat Liberation movement promises freedom from judgment and the censoring of any talk about consequences, while for those progressives who care not for the effects but for the outcome, struggles to normalize disfigurements like obesity and transgenderism promise Forever Wars that they can continue to wrap their identities around and gnaw at for the rest of their miserable lives. For those who only care to virtue signal, these more controversial and blatantly offensive issues, which invariably experience pushback from far-greater portions of society, offer what amounts to a season-proof trendiness for the liberals that endorse them. More than that though, the victories to come from these crusades against normality will be savored even more because it’ll be contentious even afterwards and will make the corporate-sponsored rebels feel even more avant-garde within their own circles.
As the nation grows fatter and more socially isolated, it is natural that the Fat Acceptance movement will continue to increase in popularity as it draws in more vulnerable people and builds up momentum among the liberal trend-chasers. As with all things that corporations and liberals champion, push will inevitably come to shove as another wall of standards and decency is ground down by continual assault. Will the trend die down when fat people become a protected class and talks about healthy living are constrained by state-mandated political correctness? It’s unknowable but not out of the question that such laws and social taboos will be stamped into being, because that is analogous to what happened with transgenderism. The motley collection of autogynephiliacs and transvestite pedophiles were given privileges and protections in society, while discourse about biological realities have all but been censored in many academic, corporate, and government institutions after the liberal crusading on behalf of them finally accomplished its goals.
As corporations continue to push the Fat Acceptance movement in order to increase the sales of their unhealthy products, the Forever War will continue to be funded by capitalists and fought by their liberal foot soldiers. Conservatives will continue to fall into the trap of arguing with the liberals, who do not wage a war of arguments for or against anything in the first place, and more people will be needlessly harmed as the tidal forces of corporate money and liberal politicians band together to stamp into place new laws that protect and encourage a new class of consumers. While the idea of the government encouraging obesity may seem patently absurd, already we’ve seen laws put into place to force parents to recognize their children’s new fake genders, we’ve seen schools withhold information from parents on these developments, and we’ve seen the government even step in to take custody away from parents who don’t go along with these lies.
If the insanity of liberals is such that they’ll happily mutilate the genitals of children and take away custody from parents that complain, is it out of the question that they’ll push unhealthy dietary choices onto children as well out of a sense of fat liberation? Corporations make far more money off of producing these fake foods than they do peddling nutritious options, so it stands to reason that as the Fat Liberation movement grows in support, pushes will be felt in government to change cafeteria menus, to change USDA guidelines, and to further refine the food pyramid to appeal to corporate interests. The problem with these new unnatural developments is that as they arise and are stamped into law, society becomes innately more toxic to the individual in the process as it continues to peddle and encourage more dangerous lifestyles and choices.
A common line of thought repeated by liberals is that the groups they champion are powerless to alter their fates. For the fat person, their genes have just doomed them to being naturally too fat to ever bother being fit and healthy. For the addict, their bodies have just been infected with a dangerous disease that they’re powerless to stop. For the transgender, their souls were just born in the wrong body and their bodies must be changed to accommodate their true selfs. In all of these cases, there is a sense of hopelessness impressed into these arguments, that these people without the help of liberals are helpless to help themselves. Gratuitous use of pseudoscience is used to augment the liberals’ arguments that external help is needed, not in terms of providing evidence or support but rather for providing surface-level ornamentation. This academic ornamentation is not built to fool you but to validate the liberals’ own vapid beliefs, as they continue to fight on in the interest of shareholders to help people feel comfortable with their deficiencies and push for society to rearrange itself in order to accomoddate these marginalized communities.
In conclusion, what emerges as a problem is a capitalist society can be purposefully inflamed by the market actors and taken up as moral causes by different political groups. This results in a naturally-occurring accelerationism, in which capitalism inexorably loses credibility as the state grows more focused on inane corporate-sponsored issues while the workers become increasingly neglected. This is very problematic for the longevity of capitalism and this process of liberalization inevitably turns any nation into a merely updated likeness of the Weimar Republic. In a society run by liberals, that mirrors the infamous failed German republic in so many ways, National Socialism cannot be any scarier than it is because it champions fitness, unbridled scientific pursuit, and the internment or purging of troubled individuals. While the methods and theories behind such an ideology may not be perfect or even comprehensive, it arises out of the proletarians’ rejection of the toxicity and lies that liberals inevitably introduce into society. Unlike the conservatives of yore, the National Socialists that emerge in any failing liberal society understand there is no point in arguing with the demoralized liberals. Unlike the conservatives’ placid whining and pointless arguing, the National Socialists take action.
For all the talk about conservative reactionaries, the liberals fail to consider that the bulk of humanity eventually reacts against them not out of ignorance but out of disgust. While some in DMSG hope for a more nuanced alternative to National Socialism and National Communism arising out of America’s political landscape, I am of the opinion that it doesn’t matter because the liberal charades will end either with society grinding itself into dust or with proletarians grinding their leaders into dust. As long as these times are recorded, as long as the systems of the future carry different incentives, and as long as the conditions that caused these calamities can be learned from, how the ending of liberal capitalism occurs might not necessarily matter just as long as it ends.