"the nobles that were killed under the French revolution weren't bad people! They just kept sending people to death in pointless wars and kept mistreating them because they were disconnected! Have som sympathy for the rich assholes!"
SkyeStarfall
joined 2 years ago
Not really, it's quite a modern phenomenon
For most of human's history, the world was largely the same between generations. There were big shifts, but they were much more gradual (the industrial revolution took place over the course of generations, for example). I'm not quite sure when that changed, but it was probably at some point after WW2 (WW2 was a drastic change itself, of course, but probably more accurate to call it a one-off event during that time period)
The world is changing so much more today, so it's even more applicable now than before
We build the thing on the moon itself
Sure, it's mostly barren rock, but it still got useful stuff there, like for example water (hydrogen and oxygen, rocket fuel), carbon and oxygen in the rocks (methane, also rocket fuel), metals (building rockets), and various other elements
From what I've read we know, it's relatively poor in nitrogen and carbon, so the moon is not as useful as it could have been, but water is really all you need. If you can produce fuel and rocket parts on the moon, it's about as useful as it can be for space exploration and development
Since, remember, the alternative is getting those resources either from the surface of the earth (expensive in terms of fuel, and requires powerful rockets, aka bigger ships, also expensive), or from some place further out like the asteroid belt (time consuming). Gravity on the moon is much much smaller, so even if we don't have a space elevator, it would be far cheaper to use the moon as a starting point, or at least as a refueling point
And also, new technology is still being developed
So it's not even that all progress has stopped, things are still moving forwards
If the people at the top's plan is actually WW3, then they're stupider than they let on.
Sure, in theory it's profitable, in practice though? All you're left with is a wrecked world that's worse to live in in every possible way, and that's assuming nukes won't fly
It's literally the broken window fallacy, which to me has always been a dead obvious problem. Stability, cooperation, and peaceful progress and development has always, and always will be, much more beneficial to everyone in the long run
These people are literally enemies of humanity
Good games tend to be made by creativity, and conservative "anti-woke" people don't exactly tend to be creative
It kinda goes without saying that being able to think outside the box also comes along with being able to put yourself in other's shoes and empathize, huh?
No, but people were much less alienated from their labour, so it likely didn't feel nearly as soul-crushing as it does today
I know this is a common counter argument, but some times really are more truly closer to the end of the world than others
During WW2 this was more true than in the past, after nuclear weapons became invented it was more true than in the past, after the US and USSR stockpiled enough nukes to destroy civilization a dozen times over, while being at each other's throats, it was more true than in the past, once climate change became a real crisis that's not being solved it was more true than in the past
And finally, we now have a confluence of all of these factors, with fascism coming back into the world where we might see another World War-like scenario. Even when the dust settles on what the US and far-right are doing, what's going to be done about climate change? The issue will be put even more on the back-burner than it already has, and it's going to wreck our crops and fuel further instability in the world
Before the stockpiling of nuclear weapons, there never was a plausible way to end civilization globally. But they very much enable the possibility of doing so now. If all stockpiled nukes were fired, it would be more than enough to affect the global climate to the point of global crop failures, and the human population would possibly be reduced to less than a million. Not to mention all other life on earth and the havoc it would cause on ecological stability. Certainly enough to cause yet another mass extinction on top of the already in progress holocene mass extinction
It did confuse me at least a few times
Depending on the situation, repetitive shit might be unavoidable
Usually you can solve the issue by using regex, but regex can be difficult to work with as well
Which is funny because these days I just buy frozen vegetables and make food with those, and I still enjoy it far more than my parent's cooking
It really isn't even about fresh vegetables
Yes, this is crucially what is often forgotten
If you are actually directly participating in a war, then it's nothing but destructive
"War is good for business" would apply mostly to china in this case, and a little to Africa and maybe South America depending on how involved they're gonna end up being