#businessethics

Analysis of Hinobi’s Crimes in Glitch Techs

Negligent Endangerment and Failure to Disclose Product Risks

Details: Hinobi knows its products (e.g., consoles) spawn dangerous glitches but continues sales without warning, using Glitch Techs to hide the issue.

Impact: Threats to safety and property; widespread unreported harm.

Implications: Violates product liability and consumer protection laws; breaches duty of care.

Evidence: Pages 1, 4-5 (PLixel side effects, Tech secrecy).

Illegal Memory Manipulation and Erasure

Details: Uses Gauntlet wipes to erase glitch memories, adjustable with potential harm from overuse (e.g., Phil, Mitch).

Impact: Violates autonomy; risks identity loss.

Implications: Breaches privacy laws; unethical dystopian control.

Evidence: Pages 1, 3, 10 (wipe mechanics, Mitch’s abuse).

Unlawful Employment Practices and Coercion

Details: Employs minors like Miko and Five in hazardous roles, using XP as incentives.

Impact: Life-threatening risks without protection.

Implications: Violates child labor laws; exploits enthusiasm.

Evidence: Pages 1, 4, 7, 9 (Tech roles, RPG mechanics).

Corporate Espionage and Data Manipulation

Details: Gauntlets record all Tech actions; Mitch hoards data.

Impact: Invades privacy; enables blackmail.

Implications: Violates surveillance laws; unethical distrust.

Evidence: Pages 3, 10 (recording, Phil wipe).

Environmental and Property Damage Cover-Up

Details: Restores damage via “system restore,” hiding glitch effects.

Impact: Masks ecological and structural harm.

Implications: Breaches environmental laws; unethical liability avoidance.

Evidence: Pages 1, 4 (restoration process).

Potential Conspiracy with Government or Law Enforcement

Details: May collaborate with regulators, using wipes on officials.

Impact: Undermines oversight; exposes civilians to risk.

Implications: Violates anti-corruption laws; betrays trust.

Evidence: Pages 4-5 (government regulation hint).

Broader Motives

Pattern: Greed-driven monopoly (Page 6) with “shinobi” secrecy (Page 3).

When the Market Sanctions Ideology: Tesla's Collapse and the Political Drift of Billionaires

Source: El Manifesto, February 6, 2025 edition, article by Annaflavia Merluzzi.

According to an investigation published in El Manifesto, Tesla sales are plummeting across Europe, with dramatic declines in Germany (-59%), France (-63%), and Norway (-38%). While these figures reflect a broader slowdown in the electric vehicle market, they also reveal a political dynamic: the growing rejection of Elon Musk and his ideological alignment with the far right.

This collapse is not merely an economic sanction—it raises a larger question: can capitalism exist independently of democracy, or will democracy ultimately reassert control?

Reactionary Capital: When the Market Sanctions Ideology

Tesla’s downfall in Germany and across Europe is more than just an economic issue. It highlights a broader phenomenon: the rejection of a capitalism that no longer limits itself to production but seeks to impose a political vision on the world.

Traditionally, the far right has been hostile to both environmentalism and technological progress. At first glance, this makes it a paradoxical ally for a billionaire leading an electric vehicle company. However, Elon Musk’s financial backing of Alice Weidel and the German far-right party AfD reveals another dimension of this alliance: a rejection of ecological transition when framed within a democratic and social context.

A Capitalism That No Longer Hides

Musk embodies a shift in contemporary capitalism: wealth is no longer just about accumulation—it is now a tool for financing reactionary political movements that oppose environmental regulations, social rights, and inclusive policies.

This trend reflects a broader phenomenon in which certain billionaires, rather than remaining neutral market players, become direct political actors. Their strategy aligns with an old fantasy of elite secession: controlling a captive market, securing an electorate aligned with their vision, and developing technologies that ensure their total autonomy from the rest of society.

The Market as a Battleground

But this project faces a fundamental paradox: if billionaires attempt to shape politics, consumers, in turn, can politicize their consumption. The European boycott of Tesla illustrates how the market itself can become an ideological battlefield. Consumers, far from being passive economic participants, are expressing a rejection of a corporate model where ideology takes precedence over innovation.

The philosopher Karl Polanyi identified this tension in the 20th century: the free market only functions as long as society accepts it. When a company oversteps its role and becomes a tool of ideological domination, it risks being rejected by society. The market, far from being an autonomous entity, is always embedded within a moral and political framework.

A New Form of Resistance?

The Tesla case reminds us that in a world where billionaires seek to shape public policy while bypassing democratic processes, citizens can respond economically. When voting appears ineffective against the influence of wealth in politics, boycotting becomes a powerful tool of resistance.

We may be witnessing the emergence of an inverted ethical capitalism: one not dictated by corporate promises of sustainability, but by consumers sanctioning ideological deviations among the ultra-wealthy. If this trend continues, it could redefine the relationship between capitalism and democracy—reminding us that economics cannot be detached from the values it claims to serve.

Also worth reading: Check out my series "Democracy VS Capitalism" on Medium, where I explore the tensions between economic power and democratic institutions:

Coming in mid-February: A three-part series on climate denial fake news, scientific manipulation, collective paralysis, and the secession of the wealthy. Why are some billionaires sabotaging climate action while preparing their escape? Stay tuned.

P'tit Tôlier

Essayist & Popularizer. I analyze the world through accessible philosophical essays. Complex ideas, explained simply—to help us think about our times.

independent nonexecutive director of listed companies Remgro, Netcare and Anglo American Platinum, along with a fine of R500 000, for failing to provide proof of a qualification she had previously claimed to have obtained.

The JSE has also banned Leoka from serving as a director or officer of a publicly listed company for five years.

Upon Leoka’s appointment as a director of the three companies, her curriculum vitae (CV) said she held a PhD in economics obtained from the London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London, in 2008.