Thanks for speaking on our behalf, but I think most accelerationists know a societal collapse has consequences. We’re just OK with suffering for 50 years so that future generations can prosper
We’re just OK with suffering for 50 years so that future generations can prosper
Correction: You’re OK with inflicting widespread suffering and death, especially on the most vulnerable, for the faith-based belief that, contrary to historical evidence, it will result in a society more aligned with your ideological utopia.
In Europe, feudalism lasted 600 years last time, and only ended because a plague loosened up the nobility’s power over peasants. Vestiges of that old system endured in some parts of Europe for another 200 years after that, too.
In some neofeudalist future, where the lords and nobles have access to incredibly invasive technology for monitoring the thoughts and actions of all people, for controlling even more links in the chain of the production of food or tools or weapons, that power structure may turn out to be even more entrenched than the last time around. It’s not far fetched to say that the next time strictly inherited class comes around, it becomes a permanent feature of all societies that follow.
To add, the Junkers in Germany were the party of the old aristocrats. The last Junker to do anything of note was Von Hindenburg, who gave Hitler the chancellorship. Been completely irrelevant on both ends of Germany ever since.
You presented no signs of deep. You’re relying on logical fallacies like Survivorship bias, where you assume society will re-emerge. There is no logical reason that would force societal collapse to follow previous patterns.
You’re okay with 50 years of widespread suffering to maybe have any society. But not okay with paying increased monthly taxes to guarantee a stable society.
FYI, there are accelerationists on both sides. The ones on the left are just unwitting allies of those on the right because their ideology is founded upon the belief that, contrary to all historical data, pushing society to a more miserable place will magically result in widespread class consciousness and a workers’ revolution.
This is something that has never happened in any major way in recorded human history and never because of intentional suffering. Generally, the historical results have been genocide and/or centuries of oppression.
I’ve noticed that many of these cruel and reactionary ideologies are not based in any historical data nor science. This is used to be called hysteria.
They still haven’t answered either; so I can only assume they did not realize the contradiction between accelerationism and paying more taxes. Sad times we live in.
Because you think you’ll ’endure the pain’ and then get to ‘build a better system’.
But better odds are you’ll just die early on, and the system you dream of will never come to pass. You have gambling brain. ‘We’ll totally win next time! Just got to start over one more time!’
Accelerationists aren’t exactly deep thinkers who understand entropy.
Thanks for speaking on our behalf, but I think most accelerationists know a societal collapse has consequences. We’re just OK with suffering for 50 years so that future generations can prosper
Correction: You’re OK with inflicting widespread suffering and death, especially on the most vulnerable, for the faith-based belief that, contrary to historical evidence, it will result in a society more aligned with your ideological utopia.
In the same vein, I appreciate your making that decision on behalf of me, my wife, and kids.
In Europe, feudalism lasted 600 years last time, and only ended because a plague loosened up the nobility’s power over peasants. Vestiges of that old system endured in some parts of Europe for another 200 years after that, too.
In some neofeudalist future, where the lords and nobles have access to incredibly invasive technology for monitoring the thoughts and actions of all people, for controlling even more links in the chain of the production of food or tools or weapons, that power structure may turn out to be even more entrenched than the last time around. It’s not far fetched to say that the next time strictly inherited class comes around, it becomes a permanent feature of all societies that follow.
To add, the Junkers in Germany were the party of the old aristocrats. The last Junker to do anything of note was Von Hindenburg, who gave Hitler the chancellorship. Been completely irrelevant on both ends of Germany ever since.
You presented no signs of deep. You’re relying on logical fallacies like Survivorship bias, where you assume society will re-emerge. There is no logical reason that would force societal collapse to follow previous patterns.
You’re okay with 50 years of widespread suffering to maybe have any society. But not okay with paying increased monthly taxes to guarantee a stable society.
The Greek were right, democracy doesn’t work.
Democracy does work, but it needs to be maintained.
Democracy only works with an informed electorate.
Who said I’m against increased taxes, wut
Ofc liberals can win any argument when they get to make up what the opposing side thinks
You’re okay with more taxes, but you’re an accelerationist…
What does accelerationism mean to you? And what benefits do you believe society gains from this?
P.S. For the sake of transparency, I’m not liberal; but you can call me whatever you like.
FYI, there are accelerationists on both sides. The ones on the left are just unwitting allies of those on the right because their ideology is founded upon the belief that, contrary to all historical data, pushing society to a more miserable place will magically result in widespread class consciousness and a workers’ revolution.
This is something that has never happened in any major way in recorded human history and never because of intentional suffering. Generally, the historical results have been genocide and/or centuries of oppression.
I’ve noticed that many of these cruel and reactionary ideologies are not based in any historical data nor science. This is used to be called hysteria.
They still haven’t answered either; so I can only assume they did not realize the contradiction between accelerationism and paying more taxes. Sad times we live in.
I’ve said this before to one of these types and then they started calling me a nazi. They’re unhinged evil morons.
Taxes need a functioning society so a government can function to collect them.
Ahh, the ‘hooray for me and to hell with everyone else!’ mentality. Always the sign of a stable, sensible person.
Why did you think there’s a “hooray for me” here?
Because you think you’ll ’endure the pain’ and then get to ‘build a better system’.
But better odds are you’ll just die early on, and the system you dream of will never come to pass. You have gambling brain. ‘We’ll totally win next time! Just got to start over one more time!’
It’s just so stupid.
Nah, you’re just a fucking idiot.
Always atart with yourself first.