Collatz_problem [comrade/them] @ Collatz_problem @hexbear.net

Posts

0

Comments

169

Joined

5 yr. ago

No, most people in 1903 lived not that much differently from the Medieval times. Urbanization was still low then. An average person from 1969 would adapt to 2025 much faster then an average person from 1903 to 1969.

This is until you do multivariate functions. Then you get for f(x(t), y(t)) this: df/dt = df/dx * dx/dt + df/dy * dy/dt

This is good actually, because it will reduce the brain drain of other countries. Critical support for JDPON Don.

It doesn't actually matter, because both Ukraine and Russia have already been heavily mining the frontlines for 3 years already.

Even capitalism tries to evolve to crab

Thanks to these maniacs, Kim Jong Un now seems to be wisest person on the earth

The historical materialism is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be... unnatural.

Bears usually avoid humans, unless very hungry, because those who didn't avoid us, didn't tend to live very long.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.

My problem with fission reactors is they take a really long time to get running whereas solar can be deployed quickly, even in areas that are underdeveloped. We need to decarbonize global electricity production at a rate far too fast to build nuclear reactors for everyone in the world.

Those solar panels also must be manufactured, which require building more factories and mines. In the end, the difference in industrial investment scale is not that important.

The truth is though that ultimately, politicians are gonna be malleable to those who are going to vote

No, they are not. A single donation from a billionaire would buy more press to get more voters from name recognition than a million working class supporters. And if the politician betrays his base, the most he can fear is losing reelection, and even this is not assured. If a politician goes against billionaires, he is going to be smeared, harassed and have his opposition funded. This ensures that the only politicians in any significant elections are already guaranteed to serve billionaires.

The first entry in the logs you assemble to discover the lead up to disaster:

Liberalism has always been about freedom for property owners.

Yeah, communists don't like it, when you attack socialist states, and will strike back.

And after capitalism is over - it will be time for getting rid of the state, and what will be needed for it, will be seen at the time. Maybe it will wither away voluntarily, maybe it will be smashed in an another revolution.

The socialist state is a necessity to survive against capitalist onslaught, and wanting to dismantle it before capitalism is crushed is suicidal behaviour. How would anarchists deal with the Entente intervention or Nazi Germany or USA?

I would gladly switch to anarchism if your revolution manages to win instead of being crushed by capitalists.

Kronstadt

Non-authoritarianly licking the boots of Tsarist generals.

Thinking of politics in terms of good guys and bad guys is kindergarten-level.