Of course they will. Either pick them or they’ll send it all to hell. Even now they probably think this Trump stint will make voters desperate for their next candidate.

And trees. You forgot the trees.

Just a prank, bro! Unless you howl at the moon and piss on nearest landmark to assert dominance. Then it’s so on!

But will you still eat it?

Truth is subjective.

You understood nothing from my comment and are completely wrong in every main conclusion you drew from it.

And this difference in thought, expression and interpretation is proof enough that while people can come together to form a community and pursue a goal or a project side by side, conflict still arises. Magnify this at the size of states and you have what exists today.

In the US, it was a minority that placed Trump in office. And a minority that voted against him. The majority did not care or was unable to care. Same for the protests a few days ago. As long as these initial protesters persist and continue to organize, more will gather around them. But if they stop now, the protest will either die or deviate in an unfocused direction.

The direction is fought for by the few leading the many. Every protest in history that succeeded or failed had or lacked a guiding voice. And without that guiding voice, the majority will scatter. This is a social fact that doesn’t need any paper to prove it and governments love making use of it since quite a while back ago.

And speaking of papers, your dependence on them is a bit foolish. It was only a few months ago when it was shown here on lemmy that many papers get published for the sake of publishing. A corrupted monopoly seeking grants, funding and subsidies without a care for accuracy or merit and where the “peer” reviewers are privatized and have no qualifications whatsoever.

I trust your papers as much as I trust the toilet paper in a public restroom. (Which is not at all, if you didn’t catch my drift.) …

The more time i spend here replying to your comment, the more i see you as a walking contradiction. You talk about people coming together to work side by side, yet post that kind of venom above.

So I’ll stop here before I somehow manage to worsen my opinion.

Nice theorycraft, but it’s just theory. In real life, it doesn’t work.

For one thing, by our own definitions, life is inherently evil. It takes, consumes, destroys, selfishly breaks down something else in order to sustain itself. We may rationalize it in different ways, but it can’t escape that attribute. And as long as an individual has to sustain themselves, they will have no choice but to commit evil. But we selectively view badly those who indulge themselves.

Another is that perfection cannot be achieved, wastage is unavoidable. We have to produce more than is needed or we will end up with less than required.

Accidents, logistics, incompetence, corruption and the like cannot be completely prevented. There will always be something beyond the calculated parameters that can and will eventually overwhelm a system.

And let’s not forget about the desire to control. Whether tyrants or the utopic society you’re implying for, it’s about control, whether to control oneself or all others. But is the mind that easily controlable and should it be? The desires we have and the willpower to pursue or restrain them aren’t that easily defined.

We are not all of the same mind. Neurodiversity proves that people are different in thought and in feeling. The pursuits and responsibilities two different individuals can maintain for themselves over their lifetimes can go below or above the set standard and a civilization must take into account the satisfaction of its citizens in order to avoid its own downfall.

Also, what was achieved in one society will likely not be accepted in another. So good luck expecting everyone, everywhere to accept a unitary system simply because it’s better. I sincerely have my doubts that anyone can succeed in that.

This all has to take into account the planet’s uneven geographical resources distribution as well. Our current production rates barely give a damn about sustainability. Soil nutrition, water consumption, population density, logistics and so on have to be taken into account, so this means population relocation, specialized production specific to regional conditions, limitations of product diversity and availability.

Anyway, what you want can’t be done and if it can be done, it can’t last because people aren’t static pieces of paper. A near-perfect distribution of basic needs requires a level of sacrifice and constant maintenance that we lack the willpower and stare of mind to accept responsibility for at this point in time.

…

Tl;dr:

To make it simple with a one-off example, will you feed fascists or racists if it meant their continued oppression of minorities? And if so, can you ensure everyone else will do the same?

Equal or equitable basic needs indeed need equal or equitable behavior, but we ourselves lack that. And due to that lacking, we make do with what we do have.

What should be doesn’t matter, only what is.

Because resources are finite and frugality is needed at times.

Don’t worry, she’s probably getting deported/disappeared soon.

Nah mate, it’s the “rich ppl need to experience poverty in order to empathize” argument.

Sorry, I’m not into S&M play.

Tried to follow Anakin into the dark side of the force.

Misguided pride or PTSD perhaps?

You say your life is great, yet call it pointless.

You also disparage Tesla’s scientific pursuits and possibly those of every other scientist or person of intellect that dedicated themselves to the betterment of humanity and whose achievements made possible the current great life you seem to hedonistically enjoy.

Perhaps i misunderstood your words and you feel such a life is incomplete without the addition of children. If so, again, I apologize.

But from your previous posts all i understood is that you find nothing worth doing in life other than having children. And that screams outwards a complete lack of self worth that needs something to hang on to in order to find some kind of meaning in life.

I sincerely wish you a happy life with as many kids as you need.

Maybe, maybe not. My thought for the comment was “tried to help, didn’t work, off you go and experience as is”.

Because not everyone learns the same way, so we can’t apply a fix-all universal method. Some kids, adults even, don’t get it until they experience it themselves.

What that “it” is changes from person to person and every time we think “why don’t they just understand”, maybe it’s that they can’t understand and need a different way of learning “it”. Which sometimes is painful.

I’m not sure why you think I’m offended. But I feel you’re still hurting and perceive this as an attack, so I apologize to you.

It’s fine to give up. Take your time and try to heal. Even if you don’t find value in your own life, raising your children is still very much meaningful as you say.

Perseverance against what if not pain?

Huh. So you enjoy being a mindless husk with the sole purpose of breeding the next generation.

I’m sorry you’ve been traumatized so much by life that you’ve given up on yourself as a person.

I sort of disagree. Some pain and suffering is what helps some people become better versions of themselves. Doesn’t work for everyone though, so it shouldn’t be the default experience, but rather a last resort.

So Nikola Tesla’s life of scientific research was pointless?