Message from @.gif Harvester
Discord ID: 452362835012485120
@RyeNorth everyone has their own version of what utopia would look like. Therefore utopia cannot exist. As such, you are right, anyone promising or working towards utopia is going to be authoritarian. Because they are working towards their utopia, which is not utopia for everyone else.
The divergence in opinion is that i think Utopia isn't really just an ideal world that someone has. part of the problem with the idea of Utopia is that it persists in ideology as a promise on the other side of suffering. It's bait to get people to do something they would not do otherwise, a sociological exploit in humanity for the preservation of the species.
It's what separates someone who wants people to just acknowledge the thresholds between their own sovereignty and that of their peers, and someone that wants to replace social structure with one where money no longer exists, or races are separated to solve sociological problems.
They're different levels of victory.
In order to build a culture of personal responsibility, you need only convince an individual. In order to rebuild society's values, you have to subjugate the individual.
Granted that might be my view due to the fact that personal responsibility is still the closer cultural infrastructure to what exists...
I just don't see that as a utopian worldview
i wouldn't define the idea of utopia as being just a bait used in some ideology. Everyone or near everyone has their fantasy version of events, of stuff that they wish had played out. That is utopia. And certain ideologies promise that as bait. And that is where they become dangerous, because they are promising a new version of the world that will somehow simultaneously exist along side very other version of the world from every other person subscribing to that ideology. This is obviously a false promise as only one version can come out the other side and you don't know whos but its not yours. making the definition of utopia so narrow as to only be the bait of an ideology means we need to come up with a new name for everyone's own perfect world they have in their head.
and i got tired of having to make new words for stuff when they rebranded racism and had to come up with colorism
lmao
I guess you're right on a strict definition sense.
The danger comes in depending on how devoted you are to Utopia, not based on your vision of it.
I guess that's what I was outlining. My Utopia would just be where people aren't absolute dicks, and I'm only devoted to it insofar as I believe people can with towards that personally.
Utopia becomes a problem when you force me to be on it.
Your Utopia ends at your property line.
I don't want to genocide people with popped collars or anything.
Is it bad my idea of Utopian society is the society depicted in Alfred Huxley’s “Brave New World”
Because while reading that novel I knew I was suppose to find the “dystopian” future horrifying, but I actually just found it efficient.
It was literally just the exact opposite of the Orwellian dystopia.
And it’s the direction I see modern society currently taking. Modern society is just extremely inefficient compared to Huxley’s World State
"right-wing archiving websites"
Cause that makes sense
lmao
this is fkin ridicolous
waybackmachine is now nazi lololol
fk them, is not like they can prevent their sites from being archived anyway
Its ok when we do it
But if you do it to us you are a nazi !
Have Vice considered not writing articles that need correction?
Is this real? I thought it was a joke...
I can't find a source, but I am bad with twitter, anyone?
i heard that vice thing was a troll
that was literally just posted like 8 posts up
>rightwing archiving websites
Archiving is now a rightwing thing? 😏
its right wing to record things
of course those who support Hillary would say this