Treading Carefully: As far as I can see the core problem of the U/Acc - R/Acc debate is unfortunately due to free floating definitions. With this said, let's define:
-
-
even in the hellcommunist conclusions (which I don't think are agreed upon generally) capital escapes and humanity is dusted by nuclear communism.
-
Who makes nukes possible?
-
my quibble exactly with
@adornofthagn (which is why I don't think it's generally agreed upon). but the central point is that it's all about capital escape. -
How is capital going to escape from a gulag? I jest, so where's the _point_ of disagreement, human action effecting possible future divergences?
-
only farmers ever went to gulags, tbf. anyway, the point of the disagreement is whether the question is "what should be done" or "what happened". u/acc aligns with the latter.
-
'Only farmers went to gulags?' I'd push Solzhenitsyn but I'm guessing you're on the 'his numbers are high' camp? So then zacc and uacc are the same, if the question is 'what happened?'
-
well, zacc is the proposition that the answer to what happened is "capital can't take care of itself".
- 9 more replies
New conversation
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.