Conversation

Replying to

@SachaBlumen

and

@leashless

so real Q: who defends the have-nots? State? Who leans towards the rich?That's core of problem.

Replying to

and

State is itself a landowner, so by nature cannot arbitrate. Property needs a fundamental concept check.

Replying to

and

I've never heard squealing like that from the Libertarians who understood this case and fled from it.

@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net

Replying to

and

too often we confuse (monetary) value with (societal) values.

Replying to

and

it's not clear to me that "society" in that sense exists outside of shared religious beliefs.

@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net

Replying to

and

bold and brave became whining safe space kiddos. Killed initiative with religious money cultism. VC ;-)

Replying to

and

hahahaha I think the problem wasn't the VC (ahem!) but a misunderstanding of feminism.

@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net

Replying to

and

question is: what now? What's the plan? Not more poking at symptoms.

Replying to

and

New moral standards for all actors involved. Fundamental rework of system, not revolution as such.

@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net

Replying to

and

yes. In history religion was vessel for that. I hope we have left that behind. If not, I become priest.

Replying to

and

I think you can do without religion, but meme culture "fixes" discomfort ("share/like for visibility!")

2:51 PM · Aug 21, 2016Twitter Web Client

@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net

Replying to

and

Meme Culture is binary between #thoughtsandprayers and #OMGcuteness. Real discourse not part of it.

Replying to

and

My point is that it also subverts activism. Discomfort solved at the press of a button. But I digress.