Class war: wheat vs humanity
Don’t even get me started on cats.
Comment on Humans didn't invent agriculture
barsoap@lemm.ee 5 months agoAnd here we have a typical specimen exhibiting capitalist realism: Observe how the subject is analysing everything they come across on a “who works for who” basis, projecting human modes of production onto the universe. Applying it, even in vain, this reductive universality ensures that they will never think beyond it and, not thinking beyond it, not question either working for a capitalist or being a capitalist who is worked for, thereby in either case working for capitalism, a form of human cooperation in which happiness, well-being, yes even human connection (that necessitating eye-level communication) is traded for hastened advancement of the economy to achieve post-scarcity.
trolololol@lemmy.world 5 months ago
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I suspect cats. my.clevelandclinic.org/…/9756-toxoplasmosis
MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 5 months ago
All realism is bullshit soulism.net
setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Fool. Allow me to show you truth: timecube.xyz
barsoap@lemm.ee 5 months ago
Eris help us, the zoomers are here with lame humour.
MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 5 months ago
That’s not humour, it’s postmodern political theory.
Have you read any postmodern theory? Check out cyborg feminism. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Cyborg_Manifesto
skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
9 points out of 10, very good. Except that capitalism doesn’t want to ever achieve post-scarcity. They’re a dog chasing a car, without scarcity and demand their profit streams dry up.
barsoap@lemm.ee 5 months ago
Hence why post-scarcity is the natural death point of capitalism.
Your question is essentially the same as Freudians arguing among themselves about the existence of a death drive: How could it possibly benefit the individual? If it can’t in some way benefit the individual, how can it be a drive? How does it mesh with the pleasure principle? The answer is simple: It doesn’t benefit the individual. In certain circumstances it benefits the genome, that’s why us seed-pods can, in certain circumstances, enter states in which it is pleasurable.
And all-encompassing and all-powerful, indeed, religious, as capitalism may seem right now it, too, is a seed pod. It does not have to will its abolishment to bring about the material conditions abolishing it.
Of course there’s also nothing speaking against it not making things unduly nasty for us. But that’s mere politics, not fate.