Mon June 12, 2017 6:06 pm
Green Habit wrote:Darrin always used consistently proper capitalization and punctuation.malice wrote:Darrin, i think
Mon June 12, 2017 8:42 pm
BurtReynolds wrote:malice wrote:Neo-Accelerationist
I don't know what that means but it sure sounds goodIn political and social theory, accelerationism is the idea that either the prevailing system of capitalism, or certain technosocial processes that have historically characterised it, should be expanded, repurposed, or accelerated in order to generate radical social change. Some contemporary accelerationist philosophy takes as its starting point the Deleuzo-Guattarian theory of deterritorialisation, aiming to identify, deepen, and radicalise the forces of deterritorialisation with a view to overcoming the countervailing tendencies that suppress the possibility of far-reaching social transformation.[1][clarification needed] Accelerationism may also refer more broadly, and usually pejoratively, to support for the deepening of capitalism in the belief that this will hasten its self-destructive tendencies and ultimately lead to its collapse.[2][3]
Accelerationist theory has been divided into mutually contradictory left-wing and right-wing variants. "Left-accelerationism" attempts to press "the process of technological evolution" beyond the constrictive horizon of capitalism, for example by repurposing modern technology for socially beneficial and emancipatory ends; "right-accelerationism" supports the indefinite intensification of capitalism itself, possibly in order to bring about a technological singularity.
Sounds interesting. Kind of a transhumanist idea.
Mon June 12, 2017 8:51 pm
Green Habit wrote:Darrin always used consistently proper capitalization and punctuation.malice wrote:Darrin, i think
Mon June 12, 2017 8:56 pm
Mon June 12, 2017 9:06 pm
Mon June 12, 2017 9:14 pm
BurtReynolds wrote:I'm only dimly aware of the terms myself, and I'm on my phone right now so I can't type, but I tend to go back and forth between transhumanism and primitivism, if those can be thought of as opposite poles on a spectrum.
I kinda think of a technology singularity as game over, though, so I'm not sure I want that.
Sun June 25, 2017 10:05 am
Sun July 16, 2017 7:09 am
Thu July 20, 2017 12:39 am
For a progressive, the highest virtue is to be on the side of the oppressed, and the worst sin is to be aligned with the oppressor. For a conservative, the highest virtue is to be on the side of civilizing institutions, and the worst sin is to be aligned with those who would tear down those institutions and thereby promote barbarism. For a libertarian, the highest virtue is to be on the side of individual choice, and the worst sin is to be aligned with expanding the scope of government.
Fri July 28, 2017 7:46 am
Fri July 28, 2017 1:13 pm
Fri July 28, 2017 5:00 pm
Sat July 29, 2017 12:09 am
Sat August 05, 2017 5:25 am
Sat August 05, 2017 5:38 pm
Sat August 05, 2017 5:46 pm
cutuphalfdead wrote:oh great another meme thread
Sat August 05, 2017 6:56 pm
Sun August 06, 2017 6:33 am
cutuphalfdead wrote:oh great another *spook* thread
Sun September 03, 2017 6:26 pm
Sun September 03, 2017 7:11 pm
meatwad wrote:So in light of your ideological bent, where do you stand on federal assistance for Texas in the wake of Harvey? There's an attitude in this country that rears its head sometimes saying the people who do something stupid, who then require emergency services/rescue, ought to foot the bill for it. Because why should hard-working taxpayers subsidize the stupidity and carelessness of others, right?
Yet Houston was essentially built on a giant flood plain, and only 15% of homeowners in the hardest-hit areas had flood insurance. Why should hard-working taxpayers subsidize the stupidity and carelessness of Houston's city planners and residents? After all, they chose to live there knowing the danger, right?