How are you

i am well toad, hbu

I am swell, thank you

Improve demography

kill Jews

invest in hitler statues

^this

no not at the cost of culture

culture is the driving force of economy
culture is a set of social technics for the purpose of extraction/exchange/distribution/transfer of energy among participants of a semi-closed system, based on cosmological/religious assumptions, enabling non-zero sum and non-violent competition and cooperation (with more or less success)

My answer is an emphatic no.

😍

hellooooooo

@^^^ do you think it's accurate to say that tech/social advances and economic growth leapfrog off each other

I agree with the evola quote here. The economy isnt what brings everything with it, rather you can see massive advances in technology and culture that then also serves the economy, these arent these seperate wagons but rather two wagons, and when combining the two wagons together so say technology (science) and culture, we see the emergence of economy along that.

And advancing either of the former 2 pushes the economy forward and creates a feedback loop, the economy is as such derived frmo somethign, other ofrces, when other things are derived fromthe economy, much like evola states, we are simpyl playing around in degenerative models

Also on the poll, IMO obese people have to go to the doctor and get an ultimatum and eventualyl be refused treatment

the spiral is otherwise absurd

honestly most obese people realize how fucked they are only when their heart is dying

ischemic disease and all

@ＩＶ ＬＩ Ｖ Ｓ care to reformulate? t.ESL
Technic and social technic precede economy growth. Without culture there is no economy, as culture is the actions of humans individually and collectively. It's all very tautological, or I may have very weird definition.

The center of all this activity is calory, or energy, without it there is no motion, no life, no existence, no reality.

That's going a little more esoteric than I was prepared for

What I was referring to was how there is a minimum surplus of wealth required to make any given technological or social advancement

Early man had to become efficient enough at hunting to have time to dick around with agriculture

or how Renaissance era royalty were the only ones with enough money to finance formal scientific experimentation

My assertion was that advancement and growth feed off each other and move each other forward

@^^^ this is why I take in as many calories as physically possible every day

My chi is off the fucking charts

lmao fatty, your body has a limited amount of calories it can take before breaking completely

>how there is a minimum surplus of wealth required to make any given technological or social advancement
If there is no surplus, you stay at subsitence level, so obviously you need more for any advancement, and yes you're right, it's a feed back loop. Surplus can create new activity, as do technic. Though surplus in itself doesn't create new technics, it is merely surplus, which can be used or wasted. Technic in other hand can be created with no surplus, or very little surplus (until very recently, as productive innovation has gotten more and more expansive) and generate it's own surplus.

>My assertion was that advancement and growth feed off each other and move each other forward
it does until you reach the energy limit of your system, and then it crash

do you think that happens often

collapse? it's forever

unless you find the magic formula to prevent society from devouring itself once it reached it's limit

@everyone Daily Question 🔖

Should right wingers use antifa tactics on antifa, or should we take the high road?

optics.

I wanna

so no

KILL THE JEWS

No

YES