even in the hellcommunist conclusions (which I don't think are agreed upon generally) capital escapes and humanity is dusted by nuclear communism.
-
-
-
Replying to @meta_nomad @realMaxCastle
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.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
How is capital going to escape from a gulag? I jest, so where's the _point_ of disagreement, human action effecting possible future divergences?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
'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?'
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
well, zacc is the proposition that the answer to what happened is "capital can't take care of itself".
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
We will have the answer to this in the next 20-50 years globally, and some places the answer is pretty clear...at least to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @meta_nomad @cyborg_nomade and
At least we got somewhere. The split is the age old question of humans having authority over their reality, free will. Henlo academy!
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
I think this is precisely it.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Whilst it's fresh again. I'm not saying long term humans have agency over capital. However, for a short time 200000BC - now capital utilized humans as a means for its own future. The question is of free will in that time period which could fuck up capital's aims...
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.