![zifnab25 [he/him, any]](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/16834d2e-60b9-423e-8882-6552cb49486b.webp?format=webp&thumbnail=128)
Could be fun though
Fighter: Barbarian's fratbro drinking buddy
Wizard: Fighter's emotionally distant and verbally abusive father-figure
Monk: Wizard's even more emotionally distant and verbally abusive father-figure
Sorcerer: Monk's third ex-spouse, mostly along to look after the Fighter because he's like a little brother to her
Ranger: Sorcerer's daughter by a second marriage and also the Druid's husband (which has led to some confusing moments with the cleric)
Bard: Rogue's legal defense counsel
It is always worth remembering that the difference between a guy making $60k and a guy making $600k is about $540k.
the conditions of the working class are also improved by imperialism
I think that's highly debatable. If nothing else, imperialism undermines domestic labor power, as domestic workers are devalued at the industrial level and shuttled off into police/military industries where they are more easily controlled from the top. But my main focus is on the industries where democratic socialism have the biggest impact. Health care, education, mass transit, and other service-sector work isn't easily exported and won't directly benefit from generically "cheaper" cost of living for a functionally poorer working class cohort.
many of the stable goods consumed by the people in Scandinavia are either partially or entirely sourced in colonized countries
These consumer goods exist within the private market. Imports undermine domestic labor and retail work is almost entirely privatized. There is no notable distinction between a Swedish democratic socialist shopping at ICA and a British constitutional monarchist shopping at Tesco. They both receive the same capitalist-driven benefits. Neither system is predicated on imperially supplied imports.
people in western countries enjoy a higher standard of living because of it
People in China enjoy a comparable (sometimes superior) standard of living despite it. People outside of western countries - particularly those in the Global South - can experience democratic socialism without any of the horrors of imperialism tacked on.
Democratic socialism and imperial economic expansionism are two independent political phenomena. One does not contribute to the other, save in contradiction. I might argue that Scandinavian democratic socialism is actively being undermined by imperialist political arrangements, as in the case of Finland joining NATO and ceding a large chunk of its surplus to militarization. Alternatively, one might look at how Worst Korea, the UK, and India have suffered sever living quality declines as neoliberal economic policy cannibalizes their public sector services.
The benefits of imperialism - particularly in the wake of the 21st century - do not appear to accrue to lay residents of these nations. They are entirely bound up in aristocratic cadres who can reinvest the surplus into imperial expansion. This pattern isn't unique to the modern moment, either. It is the same story told during the Dutch post-30-years-War Era, the post-Civil War period, and the WW1-WW2 period.
Cuba would not exploit other countries if it wasn't embargoed because exploitation isn't inherent in Cuban economic system as it is under capitalism.
If you showed up in Havana with a cargo ship full of H&M clothing and electronics produced in a Samsung sweatshop and cosmetics tested on adorable animals and gold jewelry mined out of a West African slave pit, plenty of Cubans would receive them happily. This is commodity fetishism in action. Nobody understands the blood and toil that made these surplus goods appear and relatively few people are able to reconcile the information with how they live their lives.
Cubans who leave the island have absolutely no compunction at consuming right alongside their American peers. Americans who visit are never turned away because their money comes from a nation full of rapacious barbarians. There is nothing inherent to the Cuban economy that prevents it from absorbing the surplus labor of their neighbors. This is entirely a consequence of US foreign policy, executed with the belief that Cuban socialism cannot exist absent the cheap labor of their neighbors.
The Americans were wrong in the 1960s and again in the late 90s when they predicted the embargo would topple the Castro government. You're wrong now. Democratic Socialism has nothing to do with Imperialist looting and plundering.
A great deal of western economy runs on exploitation of Latin America and Africa where western companies commit crimes against humanity on the daily basis.
Undeniably. But the benefit of this exploitation accrues first and foremost to the ownership class.
Scandinavian companies are directly involved in exploitation happening in developing countries
US cut-outs in Scandinavia function in much the same way as the 50-state strategy for the domestic arms industry. This secures political patronage by way of kickbacks and sinesures to elites within the Scandinavian domestic polity. But it does not benefit Scandinavians writ large. The beneficiaries are entirely within the foreign rooted patronage network and have contracted over time as the network grows more efficient.
Scandinavia is not a closed economy
The economic benefits of Scandinavian socialism are geographically and linguistically limited. Traveling overseas for medical care and education is a luxury, particularly when your conditions are chronic or time-critical. And the labor for these services is primarily sourced from the Scandinavian polity. They're not importing a bunch of Global South doctors and teachers to get the cost of their socialized programs down.
the labor needed to make Scandinavia run happens in the countries the empire subjugates
The labor needed to make the Scandinavian Treats Network flow is a consequence of colonialism. But Treats trade through the privatized economy. There is no publicly financed cheap TVs, cars, and textiles service. And the benefits of these industries accrue primarily to the bourgeois not the proletariat. That is why they're the focus of intensive advertising and other consumerist propaganda. Nobody in Scandinavia needs to spend millions during the local soccer tournament to promote the public mail service or the local judiciary in order to garner support for it. Its the newest FIFA title and scammy financial products and the fanciest luxury watch brands and clothing styles that get the lion's share of promotion. None of those are consequences of Democratic Socialism.
Cuba is indeed a far more principled example of socialist policies in action.
Cuba isn't "principled", its "embargoed". Cubans would be more than happy to get the Scandinavian tier of treats if they were on offer.
But my point is that Cuba can still deliver public services despite being cut off from treats networks. These are distinct systems of trade.
Sure. But that's one point of failure relative to the N points tied to each major update to a "supported" platform.
The whole western economy runs on cheap labour and resource extraction from the colonized countries
A great deal of the western economy runs on cheap imports from industrial rivals, like China and India. But Chinese standard of living has been improving by leaps and bounds, approaching (and in cases exceeding) their western peers. I don't think it is fair or accurate to say that a Nordish person working in the O&G sector and using an Apple phone is somehow profiting off the back of Chinese labor any more than a Chinese person using a fossil-fuel powered device while working in a phone assembly plant is profiting off Nordic extracted labor.
Scandinavian social democracy only seems to work because of the imperialism they practice on third world countries
The articles you're citing largely focus on the weapons export industry, the knock-on-effects of fossil fuels, and the relationship between economies as a whole. They fail to discuss either the scope or benefit afforded to individual Scandinavians, relative to the handful of senior executives and majority stakeholders in these industries.
To say the US democratic model or the Middle Eastern monarchy model are predicated on imperialism would be far more accurate. But, again, the flow of trade is heavily biased towards a minority of residents. The real benefit of Scandinavian socialism isn't that it grants access to cheap consumer goods. You can get that anywhere - from Qatar to Haiti to Taiwan - without any regard to the social system. The benefit of the Scandinavian model is in how it delivers professional health care and education labor. That's the primary appeal of the system and it has nothing to do with cheap foreign imports.
Success of social democracy is not possible without inflicting inhumane suffering and oppression upon people in the global south
Success of social democracy is not predicated on the success of a consumerist market economy. Cuba is an excellent counterexample. It implements a raft of policies that are comparable to Scandinavian social services and reaps enormous economic benefits despite being entirely cut off from imperialist trade and cheap labor.
The real benefits of the consumer economy are the capitalist brokers, not the Scandinavian social democrats.
Is this accurate or overstated? I was under the impression the Nordic Model is more predicated on fossil fuel exports than straight-up slave labor (as compared to, say, economic success of The Philippines or India or Israel or Saudi Arabia, where dirt cheap labor from neighboring states is essential to operations). Nords would be poorer without fossil fuel exports, but they'd still function within the EU trade network and enjoy a basic post-industrial standard of life with high quality education, health care, and mass transit.
By comparison, the Pacific Rim satraps are all ruled by folks who make their money entirely off of an export market powered by dirt cheap human labor. The shipping and vacation industries through the Pacific Islands are entirely a function of indentured labor. The agricultural industry is entirely plantation labor. Its a very different beast.
Honestly, as a lark, I think they should just swap presidencies for a few months and see how things go.
Genuinely love to break up a combat/dungeon-crawl heavy game with some light-hearted day-in-the-life-of gameplay once in a while. Having the DM describe the lazy cat stretched across the alchemist's countertop, while some mischievious pickpocket tries to nick the rogue's enchanted dagger and the knight errant helps an elderly woman cross the street can add a lot of color to a very number-crunchy game. Picking through a flea market of random niche nebulously useful magic items, while a merchant drops hints about the next sidequest, gives you a real adventurer's vibe.
Genuinely hate having long, drawn out arguments over whether the shopkeep would have the principle material component for my most import spells or basic equipment (there's no bat guano, one swayback horse, and only sixteen arrows in a fantasy city of 50,000 people? god damn, dude). Or digging through spreadsheets to figure out how many javelins the local economy can absorb. Or bickering over whether the Charm Person spell gets us in fight with town guards. Genuinely do not want anyone consulting a series of random charts and tables to determine why we can't get a full night's rest in the town's nicest inn.
Please just make this a fun story to enjoy and not a pedantic fight over the future prospective mathematical efficiency of my stat block in the next combat.
I'm sorry, but that's just bullshit. The rule was implemented as a patch in to deal with the fact that Strength is the most efficient stat in 2e. Everyone wanted to max out their strength score and Gygax didn't want everyone coming to the table with near-identical stat blocks. So, for one value - 18 - in one stat - strength - he created a secondary rule that stratified characters that much further.
RPGs are games, not art, and I don't give myself airs.
This is also nth-levels of bullshit.
Rivaling the rogue's boutique skill system for moments of "Why on earth did they shoehorn that in there?" game design.
Old 2e game back in middle school. My DM introduced a weapon common to goblins called a "Herculean Club". It did d10 damage and could be used by a small creature, but it would break in two if you rolled less than a 3.
Our ranger loved them, because they were ideal for two-weapon fighting (big oopsey on the DM's part). But his rolls were shit, so he was always breaking them. At one point, he went through six different clubs in an encounter, and the DM demanded to see his character sheet. Dude had, like, 30 of these on there. But also an 18/70 strength score, so... shrug
Going to the B-roll footage of Apocalypse Now to deny the existence of Vietnam
they knew exactly where to find us
Gotta wonder if the US-privately-owned-and-operated intelligence systems are fatally compromised or simply selling info, Catch-22 Milo Style, to highest bidders.
I was under the impression that the dollar had been hitting peaks it hadn't seen since the 80s. So this isn't a downturn as much as it is a leveling off.
The uprisings were relatively bloodless though.
Relative to prior decades, maybe. Idk if I'd describe The Troubles or the Years of Lead as "bloodless".
The troubles continued well into the 90s
The worst of it was in the 70s, peaking with Bloody Sunday. The 90s were notable precisely because of the ceasefires, political accords, mainstreaming of Sinn Féin, and discrediting of the radical dissident groups.
Unless I'm forgetting some especially disastrous conflict in the 1970s and 1980s
There were a bunch of uprisings in Eastern Europe towards the end of the 80s, as the Warsaw Pact dissolved.
Spain and Portugal both had coups. Romania overthrew its government. England had The Troubles with Ireland. The Years of Lead in Italy ran from the late 60s to the mid 80s, and there was some nasty organized crime conflicts through this period.
The 90s were comparably much more sanguine.
Doing another Slay and Say.