- Atlas667Classic capitalist state leeching tactics, I'm betting somebody got a favor somewhere.
- Amazon probably weren't paying the politicians enough money so the politicians aren't gonna let them screw the consumer!
Ah, capitalism, with your endless power imbalance.
- On a related note I HATE how when I go buy alcohol they have to scan my ID here.
Potentially having to participate in marketing schemes for a beer?? Its not worth it.
There should also be a read only ID method with more watermarking validation or something.
I dont trust them POS with my info.
- Do you know how a lot of research is funded?
- Needs about 50 more "Here's why I do _____ and why it works"
- Understand the mind to then exploit it.
Why else would they put so much money into something if not to try and get more out of it?
Capitalists' morals are driven by their social position. To them this is right becauae its rewarding. To us its an akin abomination we create that destroys us
But the problem isnt inherently tech. Its how society is structured around it that allows it to be used against us.
- "Pariah", they've had the longest embargo on earth (which has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths), they had 90% of their whole countries infrastructure bombed by the US, and the Korean war has been called a genocide in the North by many scholars.
The world doesnt make sense if you ignore history.
They probably hack for the same reason the west does it: attack/defense and money.
- Imagine collectively trying to recreate a human brain with semiconductors so capitalists can save money by not having to employ as many people
- Strictly it is capitalists who run the government.
While an individual can be wealthy, it is those who own the wealth-making-assets who control the government, AKA the capitalists. Because controlling the wealth-making-assets makes you an important element of national security, so you get a seat at the table.
While making 750k a year means you get a seat at your companies table to do what they require of you. It is very very different. It's capitalists VS workers that matters. Not strictly the wealth levels.
PS. Also I got laid off, I'm broke, lol. To all you childish mofos who think I'm a socialist because I'm currently broke: False. Some people are raised socialists.
- I mean, It's the same as consciousness of ourselves in the present.
There are pieces of media that present the real struggles of the average worker. But not that many. Many films are instead invested in the ephemeral (and ever lasting) questions of reality, fiction(fantasy/action/drama), or inane or politically convenient biopics (if not totally altered).
You will occasionally see a nod to "struggling to pay bills" or some mundane romanticized struggle, stuff like that, but almost never a picture of what its actually like.
For the few popular films that do show it, and this is my critique of most media, they never compel the viewer to ANSWER the question of why this happens. This is because to present the real working class life is also to critique it and the conditions that create it.
The working class life reveals it's own critique. And that critique is not something that media owners like because it puts into question the whole status quo. It is INHERENTLY politically charged content.
So they avoid painting a real picture of average people. This lack of real exposure is a heavy influence on our ideas of reality. And essentially the viewers take this image and runs with it. The viewers ends up not learning HOW the world works, they start to see themselves as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", and end up seeing society as a pool of ever-permanent social mobility, its just not their turn yet.
This is, essentially, the same thing they do with the past.
And I do not have anything against "special people" in media. This can be helpful, even, if done appropriately, by being sure to present kids with the REAL AND RELEVANT paths on how to attain this specialty (if it isn't real and relevant its just escapism). What I critique is the role that medias self-reflection plays in the world and in the past that is problematic.
To come back to the actual post: Who originally started to view cottage living or working class farm life as cute and WHY? Was it truly our grandmas and grandpas? Or was it people compelled and organized to sell historical-fantasy books?
- Peoples idea of their own history are influenced by the media (print, film, tv, etc).
The owners of said media often prefer to fund historical content from the perspective of rulers, as this reflects their class character and aspirations. Meaning they have an infatuation with royalty because they do not think of themselves as lowly.
The people then adopt similar mechanisms of reflection to how they view their ancestors in the past.
I say this mechanism of reflection is a political tool designed to entice average people to think of themselves as above average in the past. And thus eliminate any consciousness of historical class continuation.
If you say "what?!" again, I'm just gonna have to assume you disagree but are too afraid to do so out loud.
- Many people romanticize their past so much that they side with historical oppressors. Oppressors who most likely subjugated most of their ancestors.
This is not a coincidence, but is the result of consuming media from people who engage in this same act of romanticizing their history, or this media comes from people who were themselves actually related to these oppressors.
- I'm definitely aware of this.
This is a very very far stretch from saying your family was royalty. Though i do guess you are technically correct. Forgive me, your highness. lol
Let me add that you've delineated a technicality with no real consequence to my argument. If anything supporting my argument by suggesting that makes anyone proper royalty.
- We need this for the Romephiles who definitely don't think they would have been slaves during the Roman Empire.
In the same vein, a racist meme shared around the internet is that supposedly some black people, while remembering their shattered ancestry, say "We were kings" [in Africa]. But a lot of white people will genuinely believe they were kings or at least related to kings.
And these erroneous class beliefs are very very common.
It even goes so far as to be used to widely support racism in the "my people" argument. Sir, sit down, statistically you were a illiterate or barely-literate peasant like the rest of us!
This is what happens when you use history as a political tool. This is how the powers that be erase class consciousness from peoples brains. They keep showing us a flawed history that almost always sides with the rulers and we adopt it. They make us forget what we are and where we come from so we side with the oppressors.
- This is kinda how I've come to view psychology because in the context I was raised mental health support was a luxury left for the wealthy. Albeit more about personality, upbringing and status rather than just individual idiosyncracies.
I understand that this may be a categorical error, since psychology can be the categorization of symptoms, but a lot of the things I learned "from the outside" really still stick.
Like the wealthier populations getting neat little explanations/excuses whenever convenient. Theres the scholastic benefit of ADHD diagnosis and anxiety diagnosis, which can help a lot in school/academia and to everyone else who cant afford it they get the cheaper label: "being bad at school" or "dumb". And still requires even more effort.
Theres the trauma and therapy cycles for otherwise normal behaviors like separation anxiety from parents, not being popular or highly esteemed, stress from not attaining goals, etc. The cheaper treatment being to suck it up.
What is normal for the poor to carry is a diagnoses and special treatment for those who can afford it.
And this is also reflected within the office as well! The outcome can be better if the professionals empathize with the one seeking treatment (theres a whole class/racial component here).
I agree with your sentiment and I think it's really all down to wealth and/or availability.
- Is it a democracy when theres a whole class of people who can take over the political apparatus?
Is it democracy if a group of people totally coopt the electoral process by cultivating all the candidates and their policies behind the scenes and then present a few issues for us to bicker about?
Democracy is supposed to be everybody.
And you may say "but you can pick the person and representatives". But often these are already cultivated by the rich OR the political apparatus has been so corrupted that picking them does nothing.
Not only cause you can't influence policies after you vote, so that voting essentially becomes a pinky promise you make with the candidate. But also because the rest of the govt is so corrupted that an individual candidate, even if independent, is gonna have a hard time working in favor of the people.
You say in between theres an ocean, but for analogy purposes, what can the Millions of us do in an ocean if we don't have a boat?
Where's your think tank and lobbying group?
- A rich billionaire has millions of times more political power than you.
You are living in a dictatorship right now. The dictatorship of capital. And just because our culture does not draw a line to differentiate capitalists and workers doesnt mean a difference doesnt exist.
Capitalists arent "just another citizen like you or me", but thats what they want us to think. It keeps the dream alive and the story going.
Oh "its us against the government". lol. Really?
Im telling you. The capitalists, the wealthy are the government.
- As if you have a say other than "that guy" or "that other guy".
The wealthy already fund politicians' careers, they fund judges, they fund campaigns. The wealthy already run the country. They fund both parties as a tactic. The parties are just "good cop/bad cop".
- You're simplifying too much.
So to you its the state VS who? The rich billionaires + us?
The rich billionaires are the state. We're the ones with no real representation.
The fundamental divide is workers vs capitalists, not simply people vs government.
- The AI astroturfing campaign.
If you had billions to gain, would you invest a few 100k or millions in an astroturfing campaign?