I want to live in a world where “stop cutting bits of babies dicks off” doesn’t require any further explanation.
“No, actually, its you who needs to justify cutting bits of babies dicks off. Not the other way round. Unless its hair, nails or connected to the mum, the default position is actually not to cut bits of the baby off.”
Its a great iceberg but im not sure id name a town after it.
I think its because we’re only just now coming to terms with the fact that we’re simply a collection of desires, the culture we were born to and stories we tell ourselves. In keeping, we had to have a story to tell ourselves and free will existing is the more compelling of the two.
I don’t think there’s an evolutionary purpose. To me, we just became far more self aware than our limited knowledge of the world we find ourself in could cope with and its more of a coping mechanism than anything else.
I seem to remember that the common concensus is that it would be easier to create a whole universe than the individual simulation model.
Crypto bros who follow ultra distorted stoicism (the only good philosophy is the ones made when slavery was normalised) that believe everyone else is unaware of what very basic knowledge they world they just learned that day.
Its also said “with liberty and justice for all” during a time where people kept literal slaves, without a hint of irony.
The wording far too inconsistent and vague to be taken as literally as you’re attempting to take them.
Owning something isn’t a job, even if you stamp your feet and strop about it really hard. Thats why no definition of the word defines it as a job. Stop making up meanings for words, its pathetic.
Landlord
a person or organization that owns a building or an area of land and is paid by other people for the use of it:
NOT A JOB.
No, owning something, in of itself, isn’t a job. For example, you own the device on which you’re typing you’re utter nonsense. Is you owning your device a job?
Have you ever seen a job vacancy for “landlord”?
No, of course not. Thats why “landlord” isn’t a job.
The worst example is the clean version of Ace hood’s bugatti, you got on an near game trial. Nearly every other word was absent. It was ridiculous.
I’d have a look at David greabers interviews on the subject. He was heavily involved and part-mastermind behind it.
Contrary to what a lot of people seem to think, a lot of it was about become too specific in their aims. The powers that be want to whittle away the numbers with infighting. So, they ask the sort of duck or rabbit questions to make that happen.
When they made specific demands, they stopped being a scary, faceless and uncompromising mob.
Theres more too and he’s very honest in his self critique imo.
No, you can’t just make up words either. It’s deliberately misused slang, at best. Even then, I didn’t say it was or wasn’t a word. Please try and keep the sophistry to a minimum. I said it wasn’t a verb as “landlord” isn’t a job and “landlording” isn’t a doing word.
That’s recruitment, not being a landlord. Recruitment is work.
Regardless of what names they may or may not have, owning something, in of itself, isn’t a job.
You’re making this seem a lot harder than it actually is.
Landlords who evade taxes are some of the worst scum imo.
They’re more than happy to charge people for using their things. They love that part. In fact, it’s their favourite bit.
However, when a country comes along and says “yeah, so, about that whole charging people for using our stuff…thing” they’ll act like they just asked to fuck thier mum.
Then they’ll look you dead in the eye and claim its a moral issue, without a hint of shame.
Again, you’re wrong. “Landlord” sn’t work.
landlord
a person or organization that owns a room, building, or piece of land that someone else pays rent to use
You can’t just make up you’re own definition of words. A landlord can outsource all of that to a management company and still be a landlord.
Maintenance is work and people should be paid for work. However, the landlord will get paid regardless of who does it. Thats because “landlord” isn’t work which is why “landlording” isn’t a verb.
Its not me who’s wrong, as owning something isn’t work.
Now, they might do some repairs or maintenance but thats actual work and not what they’re paid for.
What they’re paid for is for doing no work and they, like shareholders, are the only people who expect to be paid for doing no work.
Our society is so messed up that they even have people declaring ownership is work, on their behalf.
100% and they should swap jobs too. You hear from Christians all the time “this is the devils work” or “Satan made me do it.”
Conversely, how often do you hear this?
“What, that place? That one their? Yeah, that place is heaven on earth.”
Never
But “hell on earth” we hear all the time. You know why?
Because Satan is busy.
Imagine how much work hed do, if he got to be in charge. “Wanna know what will really piss yahweh off?”
they can but they’re so few and far between that they don’t need mentioning. Loads will claim to have been born poor too but experience has left me unable to trust those claims. I even reference the fact that its not literally all off them, so I’m not sure why you needed to mention it again.
All landlords, I was very clear about that but people making money through simply being a middle person sucks too. Nothing close to landlords though which is why I didn’t mention them and they aren’t covered by what I said.
Ah yes, the old “bitter or a hypocrite” trope. It has to be one or the other, as the amoral people who throw it around can’t comprehend a moral objection to exploitation, usually due to poor empathy and even poorer social skills. The only people who want something for doing no work is landlords and shareholders. Its just astral level projection from people born to wealth, who even try to moralise their explanation by claiming everyone else, not born to their privilege and opportunity, must be lazy.
It turns out, they dont care about anyone being bitter or hypothetical, let alone the morality of just about anything. They just really don’t want people talking about inequality or exploitation.
No, toxic positivity is toxic but that you chose to twist that to something no one said says everything anyone will ever need to know about you.
You don’t even care what the truth is do you?
Even then, that pales in comparison to your attempt at dismissing hard evidence and the scientific consensus of 99.9% of the worlds scientists as “a general millais.” That was hilarious by the way and the peak of arrogance.
Speaking of grownups, we’ll be accepting the evidence of our eyes and ears, despite how adorable as your little appeal to hedonistic nihilism and weaponised ignorance was.
It can be fixed and, as such, its not fatalism. So, wrong on all accounts. All youre doing is further demonstrating your appalling reading comprehension, presuming any good faith from you, which is how you ended up thinking the silly nonsense you’ve come to believe.
Grow up, you don’t know more than all the scientists.
Plenty for what exactly?
I see, not content with making up your own science and your own reality, you have to make up that I only read the headlines. Oh, and despite me clearly saying genocide is of course wrong, I apparently think there’s too many humans too. Definitely a pattern emerging with you.
I think we can see how you came to your “conclusions” and it certainly wasn’t the mountains of evidence proving you wrong.
Some did mention it and some were about energy usage, the lack of materials we need to go full renewable, models of every option other than ECONOMIC degrowth, how ridiculous the idea of the answer being in the stars is, the crazy energy cost just to get closer to fully renewable, the concerted effort of lobby groups to convince people everything will be fine despite the evidence of their eyes and ears, the lack of being able to store renewable energy, the ultra high energy cost of extracting and refining uranium and many, many more problems not resolved by people being born at a slower rate.
Seems a bit too much for toxic positivity to cope with.
The planet won’t be able to sustain life before then, if we haven’t changed nearly everything about society. Deal with it.
Edit: again, no, we won’t be transported to a new, perfect home amongst the heavens, washing away our past planetary sins. Youre getting confused with something else.
Don’t be a sucker
Its so mad that we have such a literal example of exactly what happens, due to prohibition, yet society refuses to see like for like. The mafia simply used the exact same routes to smuggle heroin. They didn’t disappear or die out, due to alcohol prohibition ending. They got into bed with the CIA, under operation gladio. What they did with crack wasn’t the first or the biggest example.
Like you said, you can’t people abusing substances. They remain illegal because somewhere some very powerful people are making too much money from them remaining so.