Permanently Deleted

      • Quimby [any, any]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        SodaStream is a bad example, afaik. My understanding is that the owner tried to get visas for all the Arab employees and publicly called Israel an "apartheid state" when the visas were denied.

        As a business owner, there are still all the normal criticisms about theft of labor value, etc.

        But my understanding is that SodaStream is just "capitalist business" bad and not "Nestlé bad", so to speak.

        Edit: actually, it looks like SodaStream is owned by Pepsi now. So idek.

        But I do think that previously SodaStream became an "easy" target based on misinformation and everyone sort of just jumped on it.

          • Quimby [any, any]
            ·
            3 years ago

            of course. and I also could be misinformed. I don't want to discount that possibility!

            I think this article seems to capture the facts around it either way? https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/03/27/471885452/when-500-palestinians-lose-their-jobs-at-sodastream-whos-to-blame

            I think the question is whether SodaStream is evidence of apartheid vs a perpetrator of apartheid, if that makes sense?

            Not that it matters THAT much anyway.