Purely from the point of view of a museum visitor it’s a unique and exceptional experience being able to see so much of the worlds history and culture in one place. But at the same time it takes away something that could be really special about travelling to another country because that’s the only place where these things are on display.
Yes, Marx makes it clear what’s wrong with Capitalism, why it cannot last forever, provides a philosophical framework for viewing any problem, conflict, or struggle, and shows how to move beyond our present dystopian state.
In a lot of cases revolutions get started by one thing: hunger. People will mostly be to scared to lose what they have, even if it’s little, but hungry (real hunger, not just “I’m hungry, let’s eat”) people won’t care, because they have nothing to lose.
Not until vast portions of the global economy fail and the residents of the 1st world start feeling the hunger and hardships the 3rd world has been feeling for a long time
Jumping straight into Capital is like going spelunking with no tools or training, it’s Marx’s masterwork but it’s dense and complicated for those not versed in Marxism already, and it isn’t targetting the average person, but economists and scholars. That’s not to say you should never read it, just hold off, for now.
Marx did write for the common worker in several texts. Wage Labor and Capital and Value, Price and Profit are short and concise works on Marx’s critique of Capitalism. After that, I’d wrap around to Engels again for Socialism: Utopian and Scientific to understand the history of Socialist efforts and how Marxism solves the problems they have faced, and touches on Dialectical Materialism, the philosophical framework of Marxism. Add on Critique of the Gotha Programme to see Marx critique a weak Socialist program and advocate for a better method, then swing over to Manifesto of the Communist Party to tie everything by Marx and Engels together and spur revolutionary fervor.
Finally, I would make sure to read Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Lenin. This does not really get into Marxism-Leninism, this is Lenin as a Marxist examining how Capitalism has changed over time to exploit the global south via exporting machinery and predatory global bank loans, absolutely critical for understanding modern Capitalism. If you want to get into Marxism-Leninism, add on The State and Revolution by Lenin as well, but you do not need to at this point.
We are in the Age of Imperialism, specifically its decay. Over time, the global south is becoming increasingly revolutionary and are throwing off the IMF and the US. Eventually this will destabilize the US, the world’s current largest Imperialist power, and give rise to the possibility of a Socialist movement within the US as commodities become more expensive and Material Conditions weaken. This will be due to a decreasing subsidization of cost of living in the US off the labor of workers in the Global South.
Every movement with a gun sounds like there’s a loose screw in it (it always clicks). Also it usually has a clip of 300+ bullets.
Every mouse or keyboard input into a computer, every loading bar, every screen popping up makes screaching sounds. Except when having a failing DVD drive or broken hard disk I’ve never heard any computer making these sounds.
A secret tracking or listening device has a blinking red light and beeps.
Every car, always with airconditioning, drives with open windows because of the window reflections. Even during rain, extreme heat or highly contagious zombies trying to bite you through the open window.
That one actually has some basis in reality though. My terminal still dings at me, it’s just that having it ding too much is annoying and out of fashion now. Does no one else remember PCs piezoelectric beeping, even before you upgraded to an actual soundcard?
the sound design of the real world is rather boring and often unappealing. Sound designers on movies are gods of those audiotary universes, they will paint it however they want
I was behind two cars on the freeway, one in lane 1 and one in lane 3. They both decided to merge into the center lane at the same time. I remember the sound distinctly because it was so different than I expected. It sounded like two large, empty cardboard boxes hitting each other. No screeching tires or glass breaking sound (both windshields and side windows broke, but remained intact). It was very unexciting.
yea precisely. Sound design is less about how it really sounds, but more about how you think it should sound + some flair to make it a show.
Fun fact! sometimes in movies when there’s a big fire sound designers will put animal roars into the fire sounds to add an extra layer of fear you don’t even realise your body is going to react to
It’s unsafe, not renewable, not independent from natural resources (which might not be present in your country, so you need to buy from dictators) and last but not least crazy expensive.
I didn’t realize Australia and Canada who has highest uranium reserves are dictators. Canada also used to be highest uranium producer until relatively recently.
There is no need. Though Kazakhstan and Russia may be cheapest if you’re near there.
1964 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu had a bench seat and headrests didn’t come until the 66 model. A 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu could have saved Marvin.
I mean tiny bit is somewhat normal to correct for road camber or rutting…but those doing it back and forth like they are in a 70s pickup truck with fully worn out steering rack and bushings is pretty lame
If you’re interested in energy solutions and haven’t read the RethinkX report on the feasibility of a 100% solar, wind and battery solution, it’s definitely worth taking a look.
Whilst I agree that we need to decarbonise asap with whatever we can, any new nuclear that begins planning today is likely to be a stranded asset by the time it finishes construction. That money could be better spent leaning into a renewable solution in my view.
Exactly this. I am "in favor" of nuclear energy, but only in the sense that I'd like fossil power to be phased out first, then nuclear. Any money that could be spent on new nuclear power plants is better spent on solar and wind.
I’d like Nuclear power not to be thrown out with the bathwater because it is practically essential for space travel/colonization in the long term. Solar panels can only get us so far, and batteries are a stop-gap. We need nuclear power because it is the only energy source that can meet our needs while being small enough to carry with us.
it is practically essential for space travel/colonization in the long term.
Seems like it’s pretty important we not burn through our finite reserves of it if we can help it. I’m not saying we should reach zero nuclear, but I don’t think we should be relying on it too much either.
We are no where near close to running out of nuclear material. And for its energy density, we are unlikely to run out anytime in the next 10000 years. It can also be found in asteroids or other rocky bodies, so unlike wood or fossil fuels, Earth isn’t the only place to get it.
Does it cover everyone on the planet using the same amount of electricity as a North American? 8 billion people now. And usage is increasing too, gotta power EVs and AI (but not limited to that).
Nah, they won’t. It goes bling-bling, has a couple of good use cases, but because it generates Market Hype, Companies will cram it into everything. And i hate it.
The good safety of nuclear in developed countries goes hand in hand with its costly regulatory environment, the risk for catastrophic breakdown of nuclear facilities is managed not by technically proficient design but by oversight and rules, which are expensive yes , but they also need to be because the people running the plant are it’s weakest link in terms of safety.
Now we are entering potentially decades of conflict and natural disaster and the proposition is to build energy infrastructure that is very centralized, relies on fuel that must be acquired, and is in the hands of a relatively small amount of people, especially if their societal controll/ oversight structure breaks down. It just doesn’t seem particularly reasonable to me, especially considering lead times on these things, but nice meme I guess.
The good safety of nuclear in developed countries goes hand in hand with its costly regulatory environment, the risk for catastrophic breakdown of nuclear facilities is managed not by technically proficient design but by oversight and rules, which are expensive yes , but they also need to be because the people running the plant are it’s weakest link in terms of safety.
Unless you are in Britain, where they manage to have a costly regulatory environment and poor safety outcomes because THE PEOPLE TASKED WITH KEEPING US SAFE JUST STRAIGHT UP FALSIFY RECORDS.
memes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.