American patriots when they realise it’s Burger “king” and not Burger “mister president of the Republic”
Americans in the 50s: “Now we will hear a song from Mr. Elvis Presley, the democratically-elected president of rock 'n roll”
Made me actually laugh out loud
Shhh! Do you want them to hear you? They may make a Ronald Reagan-themed fast food chain if you give ghem ideas.
Damn, not even McDonalds. If the US sends you a Burger King, they REALLY hate your country and are trying to kill you with food poisoning.
IIRC, when this photo was taken, Burger King had some kind of exclusive right to operate on military bases. Dunno if they still do but contractor fuckery is one of our most important American values.
If I remember correctly, this was when Burger King opened a location in the main US Iraqi base.
They don’t have that contract anymore though, that expired in the early 2000’s. Last I heard Subway owned the contract, but they lost it to someone else a year or two ago.
Am I alone when I say that Burger King is better than McDonalds?
It might depend on what country you’re in. In the US? At least where I am, both are horrific garbage, but McDonald’s is at least edible.
We call it “Hungry Jack’s” over here, because of…reasons? I just found out that we are the only country on earth to do that.
You’re Australian I’m guessing? It’s because the Burger King Oceania franchise license was bought by Aussie billionaire Jack Cowin, and the Burger King name was trademarked by Adelaide, so they renamed the company after Jack.
Basically, Burger King was already taken.
Yeah, I never really thought why it was called that over here, I just assumed it was just called that in some countries, I was yesterday years old when I found out it was only Australia.
This is from 2004 in Afghanistan. We all know how that ended. A resounding defeat for the Burger Empire.
It is funny though to see this image making the rounds again online.
It’s just such a perfect visual allegory for the empire
Americans like to think of themselves as modern Romans. The difference is, the Romans actually spread culture along with war and destruction. One seriously wonders whether, a thousand years from now, average citizens will even remember that the American empire existed.
Almost everything it built will have long since crumbled. Except for food. There will be relics like loaves of sliced bread, stacks of burger patties, snacks, luminescent drinks. The preservatives will keep them in pristine condition.
Huh? Americans do spread culture? Too much of it frankly. American media is global media and American brands like Disney are known everywhere.
Also you don’t have to give props to the Romans wtf
I don’t admire the Romans (this isn’t some sort of RETVRN posting), but I think you have to recognize they played a certain historical role in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Much of western European culture rests on a Roman substratum. They advanced the productive forces in the empire, and when that historical role was completed, they were conquered by “barbarian” tribes who had developed a higher level of production – namely, feudalism. Michael Parenti has written on this.
You’re absolutely right that Americans do spread culture, and way too much of it, but – it’s a weird sort of cultural export, corresponding to the basically negative essence of capitalism in the historical-dialectical process. For the most part, it’s either 1) the basic technology and social structures of modernity, which by historical accident they possessed in the most developed form, or 2) a cultural art-product that is completely corrosive and negative, a sort of “anti-culture,” if you will. This latter is the superstructure, not of a social order, but of an anti-social one. Now as regards 1): nothing about it is uniquely “American,” and in fact the American version is flawed at its base, due to it being organized according to the profit motive. In the People’s Republic of China, productive mechanisms developed in the US are being transformed and superseded, a process of de-Americanization and corresponding Sinicization. For 2): American media/music/etc., being global but only in a capitalist sense, is essentially devoid of content. It is pure formalism, whose only value as a cultural art-product lies in certain purely technical advances: particularly in the art of cinema. As capitalism gives way to socialism, and countries break free of the imperialist yoke, these technical advances will be adopted and used in an art which is no longer “global” and “American,” but is rather expressive of the values and desires of the proletariat of a particular socialist society. Particularly as the primary stage of socialism gives way to the stage after it, we will likely see a flowering of proletarian art comparable to any of the great artistic periods of the past.
The Romans advanced the productive forces of conquered territory the same way America does - in a way that’s self-serving and oppressive. Doesn’t sit right with me to talk about them like they’re doing it to benefit society (except their own).
And regarding American art, you don’t have to like all of it but you don’t honestly think it’s all valueless and devoid of content do you? Like, sure there’s Disney and marvel and whatever, but there’s also entire histories of art beyond that. For starters, all the music genres pioneered by black Americans like blues, rock and roll, jazz, country, rap, etc. “American” describes a lot more than big white corporations
A very dusty truck
