This doesn’t have the right to be this entertaining!
It seems to be that your question is a misinterpretation of past philosophies and theologies. Believing in an afterlife isn’t even natural for human beings and you can check that out in the work of anthropologist who trace our ancestry to hunter gatherers. Most of them have a really straightforward relationship with death.
What you mean is the thinkers of civilizations, and that’s a topic that Lewis Mumford covered in his book The Myth of the Machine. That thinking in the afterlife and all those tools like spirits and gods were used along history for… Power. You can think of that like proto-science or just trying to make sense of the reality, but to assume that all smart people of the past believed in gods, spirits, “the little people” and the afterlife is to picture a really homogeneous (probably greek or egyptian) past of humanity.
I wouldn’t say “What’s wrong with us modern people?” since today I find really reasonable to be critical of one’s and other beliefs. Not for the sake of destroying it, but in search for better philosophical answers. If you say something exists, you better try to explain what it is and how did you conclude that it exists and, if possible, show some empirical evidence. Today we’ve got science that is to date our best shot at nailing some comprehension of our material realities, yet, it all exists in a socio-political context, so to assume that something is “scientific” and therefore “real” is to have things mixed.
I suggest you to check the history of philosophy, that work of Mumford that I find it to be a masterpiece in sociology that everyone should know, and if possible, maybe understand how serious thinkers think: some are believers, some are not, but a sure thing is that a conversation about the validity of some positions exists somewhere. Like Spinozas god or Descartes god, how magical thinking works, why we believe what we believe, etc.
This is really noice.
As an anarchist: I must agree.
Fuck it, from where I come from: people in agriculture get smacked just by existing or trying to build common cause with “let’s end hunger in the world”. I’m with you, salutations from America Latina ! And let’s make those fuckers get what they deserve.
Oh that’s one of the fat ones. But not all of 'em, keep on searching and you’ll eventually find the (highly disgusting) answers!
Here from the South America: Now, Imagine Who Funds The US
Man, capitalism is just fucking wild, isn’t it?
I always thought that artificial languages always needed more stickiness. I learned some Esperanto, but it is easily forgotten if there is no need to use it.
Solarpunk, like many Libertarian Socialist paradigms, really shines with diversity, so languages focused on Solarpunk sound quite weird, like having homogeneous aesthetics. Usually, language changes, like the way Zapatistas talk in Spanish, pursue specific goals that can be done within a language rule set or some mixture between different languages like Spanglish (Spanish + English) or Portuñol (Portuguese + Spanish). The whole point is to be able to communicate a concept.
Now, like the examples you have shown, it seems easier to frame the “Solarpunk language” not as a language per se but as a dialect. Since some geographies share more common communication than between language speakers, it happens in English, Arab, Spanish, French, and Chinese… When you learn to speak those, there is always the question of whether you sound like a foreign person or a native from someplace.
Fellas, the FOSS team gets +1 c:
I understand your point of view since I have shared it for a long time.
It’s just that, you’ll notice, the way the social system is framed makes it impossible to have those things. The argument is that, as long as there is a hierarchy, you don’t have a say in how things are run: others will decide for you, and those others have interests that don’t align with the well-being of all to increase their power. Ala, power begets power, or money attracts more money. As you have seen, it occurred in the news or economic analysis.
Now, that’s my position, and I align with eco-anarchism. So, to be fair to you and give you space to find your own answers, I invite you to study the subject of politics. So, to point you in the general direction of people (like anarchists) who care about open education (since our interest is Libertarian Socialist society and not seizing power but creating new institutions of consensus and democracy), I’ll point you to the YouTube channel of WHAT IS POLITICS? who helped me navigate the most common questions about the subject in a 101 style. Mainly to avoid falling into the trap of “worbs,” which are words that mean nothing. You have found many of those, but he’ll help you catch them when you hear them.
Keep in mind that the subject of politics can be studied from many angles since it is really complex. And one thing is sure: no “objective” studies about the subject exist since everything is checked with different interests in mind. You don’t study why some people are poorer than others if your goal is not to solve the issue. Another example is PraggerU’s changing history, facts, and data to perpetuate the validation of the capitalist hierarchies. Do you get me?
I hope this helps you to understand the problem better. It is a challenging subject, so take your time to learn at your own pace, and if you need any sources to study the topic from a libertarian socialist perspective, feel free to send me a message.
Take care!
TLDR: I agree with the funny meme.
Well, you see. That’s the promise that has been made to us since birth. We even grew socialized to live like that’s what we are supposed to get. In a sense, most of the estate socialism I know of is focused on what you say.
Yet, after so many years living in this system, I’m convinced that asking nicely or having hierarchies just doesn’t cut it because the mere existence of an asymmetry in power means we are the ones under the boot. Money is just a reflection of that asymmetry. It can buy you governors, mass media, hired guns, etc.
As long as that difference of political power exists, no matter how “fairer” it can be, as long as you are on the side of the governed, we are on the losing end, my friend.
And you wanna know the saddest part? We, the people, are bombarded every day with propaganda focused on dividing us and discouraging us from pursuing how we can organize with each other in a way more organic way. But, of course, the discourse of hate is against ethnic groups, genders, sexual preferences, and religions… The media they own (the majority we can access) will try their best to deflect the fault of everything happening with justice and ecology to us instead of them.
Well, anyway, have a good one friend!
I want you to know that: I always check your post and I want to collaborate sharing academic texts and other sources. And I really appreciate your work so far :) Thanks for your determination friend
I’m in love with this version !
This thing right here. That’s right what I was thinking about!
That’s right. That’s the reason I shared content about why we have our position.
This happens to me pretty frequently.
I think is alright, language is a bridge and sometimes we feel more comfortable speaking our native language than others. But I don’t really mind speaking in English or Spanish with people I meet in Brazil. But the moment of realization that you are talking with another native speaker is always full of joy.
#feels-nice to speak with other bilingual or polyglots :)