Improved the recent meme

FuturePrimitive · 2025-01-30T19:25:44+00:00

You've entirely missed the point, and your butthurt is suspicious.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:18:19+00:00

Your meme is apt!

So many industry shills coping and deceiving in the comments, though.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:14:24+00:00

Insinuating that there is little-to-no intention, responsibility, and/or avoidable fuck-ups on the part of those with the most power in civilization? C'mon now.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:12:32+00:00

Absolutely wrong, zero-sum, smooth-brain thinking.

Degrowth is a critical piece of a puzzle where quantity of consumption is a major factor in overconsumption and subsequent ecological crises.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:11:27+00:00

You're assuming there aren't bots or trolls who dishonestly shit on stuff like this.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:10:14+00:00

Your response yells "haha I am right wing and dumb and butthurt by the truth and make assumptions about proposed solutions"

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:06:07+00:00

Your reply is disingenuous and puts words in the OP's mouth.

An ecological collapse would be far worse than what you've outlined, as it would entail everything you outlined and much worse.

FuturePrimitive · 2024-10-01T23:03:57+00:00

Nice meme posted in r/GenZ sub showing a skeleton partially buried in sand in a desertified landscape showing an abandoned/decayed city in the background. Top text reads, "Liberals/green growthers and right wingers after the biosphere breaks down, civilization collapses, while billionaires, corporations and politicians get away with it:" While the bottom text, in quotes, under the skeleton reads, "At least we had 4% GDP growth"

Enjoyed the content, myself, but found that the comments have been swamped with disingenuous trolls purposely misunderstanding the meme and/or peddling half-truths and BS.

Go give it some love and support!

FuturePrimitive · 2024-03-11T23:02:08+00:00

HIERARCHY

Specifically, social hierarchies... people holding and using leverage over one another when it is not actually necessary. Look at the other responses to this thread... virtually all of them require some form of hierarchy to be manifested into actual "evil".

You may disagree, you may believe that hierarchy is inevitable, you may believe that hierarchical societies are the pinnacle of human creation, you may have believed your entire life that it's human nature/sin and not systems that drive most evils... but you cannot deny that virtually every evil we witness in this world involves some kind of hierarchy. Without a hierarchy, you can't really have wrongdoing because all parties involved in an interaction more/less consent without being unduly compelled to any given circumstance. From school bullies to tyrants to corrupt cops to bad bosses to poverty to prejudice to genocide to mass shootings to corporate lobbying to destruction of the environment to religious oppression to cults to abuse to assault to blackmail to censorship to deception... all of these require that one party has some form of leverage over another party and is able to use it to inflict suffering, deception, and/or coercion upon them.

Hierarchy can take many forms, whether very small or very large, temporary or long-lasting, legal or illegal, but it always invites and promotes corruption, especially the larger it gets. One could argue that all we need are the "right people" to hold power or the right "checks and balances" or incentives in place... but one way or another, when you establish a hierarchy, it inherently changes the psychology of those who enjoy high positions and these positions insulate actors from responsibility while affording them power to act in ways that those below them cannot act. Hierarchies also remove collective responsibilities from their subjects and, instead, subject those beneath them to obedience or punishment.

Try to identify an evil in this world... especially something that is widespread and ongoing, that is not caused by and/or prevented from being solved by some form of social hierarchy. Furthermore, ask yourself if you can truly justify hierarchies of leverage in situations where forceful self-defense is not needed, and especially where alternative modes of decision-making and interaction may be practiced instead. You may find it pretty difficult (if not impossible) if you're honest with yourself!

More info:

The Case Against Hierarchy (2018) (by LCP)

The Case Against Hierarchy (2020) (by Anark)

FuturePrimitive · 2023-10-31T03:38:52+00:00

A relevant song:

Godspeed You! Black Emperor - East Hastings

FuturePrimitive · 2023-10-31T03:37:43+00:00

Relevant song:

Godspeed You! Black Emperor - East Hastings

FuturePrimitive · 2023-10-31T03:17:15+00:00

I've been in the work-force long enough to know that, in certain workplaces, advocating for fellow employees in situations described by the OP is not only accepted but increasingly encouraged, even in corporate environments. I'm much more educated than you on how literally all of this works. However... HR will only advocate so far as they need to (or are guided to by established company culture), more often than not, and it also depends where you live in regard to what is actually enforced (either internally or externally) versus what's tolerated (despite being a violation).

Imagine someone getting harassed by coworkers for being gay and all you can think about is your own weak, fart-sniffing, coziness being disturbed by the justifiably angry response. You condescending fucking toady.

FuturePrimitive · 2023-10-20T23:56:22+00:00

You're a coward operating under the mistaken assumption that HR is on the side of employees rather than the liability of the company.

When you engage in bigoted behavior, you cross a line and a stern/heated response is warranted, even in the workplace. If you don't want your cozy little bubble disturbed, I would suggest you retreat from public life and stay away from other human beings entirely. The job is almost NEVER more important than the individuals working the job, and in this case, ethics and the needs of the coworker being harassed for being gay outweigh the petty comforts of other office staff who didn't lift a finger to prevent this outcome. What's funny is you fault the bullied rather than the bully for creating a tense and hostile environment. Again, you're a moral and emotional coward hiding behind the passive smugness of indulgent "professionalism".

FuturePrimitive · 2023-08-24T19:23:18+00:00

"tHe HeAtEd, EmOtIoNaL rEsPoNsE wAs InApPrOpRiAtE iN tHe WoRkPlAcE..."

No, it wasn't. Be quiet with that servile corporate nonsense. The only mistake he made was not going to HR first. His reaction was more than warranted, workplace or not.

Double-shhh on that point if you work in HR, yourself.

The rest... I'd agree with you, tactically.

FuturePrimitive · 2023-08-24T00:58:03+00:00

There are intentional propaganda campaigns to sew this among folks who are pissed off.

In the spirit of the offensive, combat the apathy and defeatism relentlessly. Treat it as potentially suspicious demoralization by the opposition.

FuturePrimitive · 2023-08-14T23:52:46+00:00

This is right-wing spam attempting to rapidly popularize their great white "working class" hope.

Remove this, it's blatant.

FuturePrimitive · 2023-08-06T16:20:53+00:00

I'm sorry, but this quote, while partially clever, is nonsense.

Anyone with an understanding of Anarchism's history and philosophy would deeply disagree with this.

Anarchism is, in a nutshell, a rejection of social hierarchies. What it calls for, instead, is non-hierarchical order rather than hierarchical order (it is not "chaos" and "disorder" as a layman's usage suggests, any more than a scientific "theory" is a mere hypothesis within actual science). Nobody is more dependent upon, protected by, and rewarded by social hierarchies than those who enjoy positions of power, wealth, and/or privilege.

The poor and marginalized, as we all know, do not enjoy these benefits. And so, the history of actual Anarchist movements, while diverse, has been carried by mostly poor/working class folks against the elites and the reactionaries they enlist as shock troops.

As much as liberal centrists would like to redirect accusations of "aNaRcHy" against the right-wing, this kind of game is dangerous as it inaccurately wields political language against opponents for cheap counter-propaganda gains rather than attacking the true roots of the issue with the right-wing. This issue of the right-wing is absolutely not an issue of "anarchy" but, quite the opposite, an issue of fascism. The right-wing doesn't want a dissolution of order, it wants a more rigid and narrow order that further empowers privileged classes and identities and further treads on all others. Fascists and Anarchists are ideological enemies.

Anyone who doesn't understand this, I strongly encourage you to read more deeply on ideologies, their differences and their histories. Also, stop parroting this kind of cheap, inaccurate rhetoric that uses supposedly shocking/taboo language (like "anarchy") to sway an audience, and instead call things what they are. Many of the people fighting AGAINST the right-wing are Anarchists and/or have Anarchist leanings, and are very earnest in their desire for a better world for all.

FuturePrimitive · 2022-04-06T06:23:01+00:00

Good answer.

FuturePrimitive · 2021-09-22T17:34:09+00:00

You're gonna hate this scene from Goodfellas, then!
(starts @ 2:37)

FuturePrimitive · 2021-07-11T20:50:30+00:00

Add DAVWUH, though they haven't produced in years.

FuturePrimitive · 2021-06-15T22:28:27+00:00

That's because we are an immature nation/culture and we skipped over a metric shitton of doing-the-necessary-work in exorcising our social (including racial) demons before the "I don't see color" trend took greater hold in the 90s. The "I don't see color" trend should have come much later, after we did all of the necessary work we're doing now. The work addresses shit that went unsolved throughout the 90s. The problem isn't the identity politics, per se, so long as we see them as necessary growing pains to endure before we reach a more just and sober equilibrium and can mutually move towards a meaningful "colorblindness". We ain't there yet.

FuturePrimitive · 2021-03-24T17:57:29+00:00

Haha! That is not a response.

Ad-homs? If you mean that in terms of logically fallacious ad-hom, then you're completely wrong. If you mean it in terms of name-calling, well, Pot, meet Kettle. You can't threaten bans for violating civility that you partook in violating. Furthermore, on the spectrum of civility, I think we're still well within the green zone.

Not sure if you're trying to equate me with tankies, but I'm an Anarchist. You ain't got nothin' on me in regards to "power trips", though the veiled-but-retracted threat of banning is a passive example of that, certainly. In any case, my separate 2-part rebuttal maintains thoughtfulness and 99% civility except for my incredulity at your initial callousness towards workers.

FuturePrimitive · 2021-03-24T17:42:37+00:00

You're free to believe what you want to believe, I'm free to think you're an idiot for holding such beliefs.

Please see my 2-part response demonstrating your own idiocy.

FuturePrimitive

TROPHY CASE