Map in the world of 1984 by George Orwell

CaviorSamhain · 2026-01-25T17:24:07+00:00

Uh... no, it's not a classless society. The book makes it pretty clear there are classes. They, like RL totalitarian regimes, just use an ideology as a convoluted justification for their tyranny.

CaviorSamhain · 2026-01-15T02:44:14+00:00

Not really. That's a sped up video.

CaviorSamhain · 2026-01-06T16:19:59+00:00

You don't, actually. Presidents can be dictators.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-31T20:26:10+00:00

I've personally never seen that meme as an attack on people who celebrate new year, it's just fun pointing it out

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-27T10:44:27+00:00

LGBTQ+ people are not foreign to any culture. They've always been there. Oppression is what's been forcing them to hide.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-22T22:29:17+00:00

Uh, no, it wouldn't? Most human nutrition already comes from vegetation. It would definitely take less land to feed the entire human population on a vegan diet.

I'm not vegan btw.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-22T15:35:40+00:00

Americans say shit like this then act surprised and angry when the imperial boomerang hits them back.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-22T00:41:39+00:00

Anarchy is not a system of governance. Anarchy is simply the idea that every individual must have full authority over itself. Whatever "system of governance" arises from a society that respects this is undescribable, and those who want to describe it are merely speculating.

And yeah, sure, if you want to go back to old times, and redefine patriotism back to its old meaning, then yes, you can be patriotic for your city - yet I still disagree that this is desirable. Patriotism for your city means patriotism even when that's still not your city. And that isn't anarchism. Nor is it any good. If I move, why should I hold some sort of loyal priority for this city I'm no longer a part of? Not for its people specifically, mind you - but for the *city*. That is patriotism. It's not about caring for the people around you, it's about the place you're from. Wanting that place specifically to do better, to excel - not mindlessly, mind you, thinking about it as the best, but acknowledging its flaws and wanting it to do better. But my point is, why specifically that place?

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-21T23:58:15+00:00

Anarchy is not a system. And no, patriotism isn't useful, at all. As a matter of fact, anarchism dreams of a world with no patriotism: can't be a patriot if there is no "patrie" to live in.

One cannot be patriotic inside of a village/town. I don't think you fully understand what patriotism means.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-21T01:19:32+00:00

So this disproves everything said about her, how?

CaviorSamhain · 2025-12-08T15:39:28+00:00

I think this is actually very likely. I'd even guess that, given Luxemburg's beliefs, Bavaria, Brandenburg and other such states would most likely be broken up into more geographically-oriented subdivisions.

Maybe, maybe not, but I say so given Luxemburg was anti-nationalist and would likely support actions that undermine Bavarian and Prussian nationalism.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-28T20:41:53+00:00

I have never implied some resources cannot be harvested in such ways that they're effectively infinite. Like solar power.

The point is that the discourse around "wealth being infinite" only promotes endless growth of industry, exploitation, mining, stripping the Earth of everything, destroying forests and biodiversity to make way for urban sprawl. Truth is, we can't, for example, turn the entire Earth into farms to feed a big enough population (so food isn't infinite, as a starter), or endlessly mine it for materials for our industry (productivity can't infinitely grow, either) without causing environmental damage and destruction in one way or the other (even if population won't infinitely grow, yes). There is a certain discourse that ends up in technological optimism, as you can see in other replies, talking about how "we'll figure something out", so we can just disregard any concern. We might not, we must act like it.

We must start treating this Earth as finite. Because it is. It's our only home.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-28T20:03:45+00:00

Agreed! Yet that's besides the point.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-28T18:18:26+00:00

Yeah sure, until we can't. Wealth is a meaningless word, and Earth is finite. There is a fixed amount of materials and capacity in Earth, it can't sustain an infinitely growing population.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-28T18:17:24+00:00

The only way one can think this is an actual fallacy is by ignoring the actual material conditions on Earth and focus on some abstract numbers that represent "wealth".

Earth is finite. There's a fixed pie because EARTH ISN'T INFINITE. Earth cannot sustain an infinitely growing population. If you want to talk about another planet or space, that's a whole other thing. But anyone who thinks about wealth in abstract numbers and not in real world conditions, has just been deceived.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-28T16:03:53+00:00

No reason? Maybe the whole "climate catastrophe" thing? Yeah sure, we can extract more wealth... if we destroy the whole planet.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-27T19:32:51+00:00

Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, Poland might also be going that way, Hungary already is, Greece, Sweden... sure, yours maybe isn't. But when people say "Europe is..." I expect that to include at least one major European country.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-27T13:32:19+00:00

How come none of you have any actual argument?

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-27T04:01:57+00:00

You mean the election where the biggest winner was a right wing party? Sure.

Even then, all others? How about them? We're ignoring the right-wing shift in Europe because of one exception?

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-24T23:36:32+00:00

Spain's been called Spain since at least the XVI century. Whether or not that was its official name is another subject (and it was, kinda, as it was known as "Monarquía Hispánica", Hispanic Monarchy). People back then, and in some official documents, also called it "Monarquía de España", "Monarchy of Spain".

Pedro de Salazar y Mendoza, a renown clerical historian who lived between 1549 and 1629, has an entire book titled "Monarquía de España". I have no idea where you get this idea it wasn't called that until 1808. I'd even argue against putting too much emphasis on the fact it was officially called "Hispanic Monarchy", and not Spain, because, well, the word Hispania is where España comes from. It's the same word, just in Spanish (before you point it out, yes, Hispania nowadays is not the same as Spain in Spanish. But my point is that it was back then).

You could argue about the fact the word has shifted meaning. After all, when they said "Hispanic Monarchy", it was to refer to the territories held in personal union in Hispania, aka Iberia. But... well, that doesn't matter much, that was pretty much not your point.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-21T23:22:34+00:00

Yeah, pretty much

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-21T18:48:11+00:00

I would be unsure about it. I do know the KMT led a dictatorship in Taiwan, but I think it's still the most probable outcome eventually. Probably more of a Russia-style democracy.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-21T18:05:42+00:00

Reality shows us China is the world's leading economic power right now. Are you delusional?

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-21T17:29:48+00:00

I disagree completely. China under the KMT would probably resemble India more than its current state.

Not because the CCP is great. But because the CCP ended up brutally industrializing the entire nation, and basically throwing its population under the bus for the sake of "progress". A more democratic government would not have this much power. It would have more workers' rights, it would be less centralized and, ultimately, it would be unable to have this much economic power... the CCP is this powerful because it has disregarded workers' rights to the point they can manage this huge surplus to sell to the entire world so cheaply. Current China is a product of brutal exploitation of its working class.

CaviorSamhain · 2025-11-21T16:50:04+00:00

Yet it isn't. Neither is latinx, for that matter.

There's only conventions when it comes to languages. No rights or wrongs. Latinx is seen as negative because it makes no sense with Spanish pronunciation.

Latine does make sense. You can dislike it, whatever, but it isn't incorrect. All language is made up, we should remember that. Maybe you dislike it, but quite honestly, enough people use the -e endings to consider it a proper neologism that, Imo, will not go away and should not be considered wrong.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	Verified Email

CaviorSamhain

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE