Monday, April 17, 2006
# Posted 3:00 PM by Patrick Porter
Pitt, 42, and Jolie, who co-starred in the 2005 film "Mr. & Mrs. Smith," have rented all 14 rooms and suites at the Burning Shores resort, a luxury boutique hotel on Long Beach north of Walvis Bay and near the famous dunes of the Namibian desert.
But there is another way of looking at it, on a purely utilitarian calculus. If such luxuries make mega-rich stars want to justify their wealth by donating more money to good causes, its probably not such a bad thing.
But then again, its a bit much to denounce inequality while propagating it so ostentatiously.
Well, Patrick, aren't you reading just a little too much People Magazine?
Perhaps you can write a similar post about Condie's penchant for shoe shopping or skin tight workout clothes.
As is evidenced, clearly, by the previous posts on Krauthammer, CND and nationalism.
Mind you, don't you think credit should go to anonymous for raising the intellectual bar with a phatic of such awe-inspiring rigour? So great are the faultlines exposed in Mr. Porter's writing by analysis of this kind (and so brilliantly are they exploited to imply bankruptcy of every virtue of decent men everywhere) that I feel the tremors of imploding intellectual self-esteem from over here on the other side of the pond. Doesn't one feel privileged to enter discourse on this level?
Not really. Whoever said Pitt and Jolie lived a life 'fighting for the wretched of the earth' anyway? Surely you are not getting that solely from the fact that Jolie has adopted a couple of kids from Africa and Columbia?
Seems to me the touting after pseudo-progressive straw men in academia and the media has reached obsessive, even worryingly delusion proportions on this blog.
its not a straw man.
Angelina has publicly identified herself with various causes on behalf of the downtrodden, such as fighting poverty, equality and the plight of the Third World.
Here are some examples:
As I said, these are good causes and in some ways its probably a good thing that some stars feel that they should give something back, given their wealth etc.
But there's just something in me that doesn't like getting humanist appeals to equality from the super-rich.
Better to make $140K per day and not even pretend to care about the third world?
no, probably not better. But it doesn't exactly refute my point, that living a life of ostentatious luxury sits oddly with those who identify with the idea of material equality for all.
"its a bit much to denounce inequality while propagating it so ostentatiously."Post a Comment
How is spending money (rather than hoarding it) "propagating" inequality? If anything they are helping to support local hotel staff.
Perhaps they should have stayed home and donated the equivalent amount of money to Oxfam or Unicef; this could have helped feed the hotel staff after they are laid off due to vacancies...
That said, limousine liberalism/champagne socialism is pathetic.