Not what I said, but have fun interpreting stuff into my comments…

Ah you’re also not missing in the party. Nah I’m not, I’m just realistic…

I have yet to see an authoritarian “state” that I consider communist (and that just doesn’t give it a bad name and fuel for western propaganda) that “uplifts the people” (and doesn’t repress them)…

It’s true though, that it’s probably better than capitalistic states (mostly, because all the systems we have are a mixture of all kinds of ideologies), I think China as example certainly does a better job than the USA at this point (various metrics, like addiction, mental/physical health etc. backs this as well).

Non the less, communism in its core is anti-authoritarism.

You really think those are “liberalists”?!

Why do you guys have such a black/white view of the world? There’s more room than just authoritarians, and authoritarianism and liberalism are somewhat antagonists anyways.

I mean on the other hand Marx was anarchist (though with the exception to have authoritarianism as means to change the system, which I don’t agree with, because it’s also unrealistic to assume that people in charge just throw away their power).

I think having Authoritarianism no matter how, just gravitates towards people that should definitely be not in charge. We see this everywhere. Power corrupts and dehumanizes.

Removed by mod

I guess the downvotes know exactly why ^^

Well let’s say tanks are pictured…

Let’s be optimistic, there’s the case for legalization, which may elliminate any substance for war, and thus it comes to end, just not the usual case for a war…

I gotta admit I chuckled a bit when I saw where this was posted…

AI is a curse…

I honestly think, it’s very cool for prototyping ideas at this point. It’s also parasitic. Although I think because of (maybe) different reasons: It gives people the power (which they unfortunately use way too much) to imitate an art, but in an non-arty imperfect way that doesn’t comprehend details (of the art), resulting in slop. For software that can go very wrong as we see here. This is also a reason why I mostly quit open-source, because now everyone can code a bad version of a library, it sucked the art out of good open source etc. and it’s increasingly difficult because of good wording/“look” etc. to differentiate on quality of code, previously you could often check a code-base review it somewhat and know how good the quality is, now it’s more like “is this slop or not?” (in which case I go a big circle around it, because reviewing is often not worth it)

At some point though, I think this automation of work is inevitable, we need to think about a society that can peacefully exist without having the requirement to work to exist. I actually think this could easily be utopian, everyone can focus on what they actually think is fulfilling life.

Though, it’s sad and concerning that technology is developing faster than society can adapt, which is why I’m mostly with you, because people (or representatives like politicians) just aren’t “programmed” for these fast-paced changes, to adapt the technology such that the future may be more utopian as it currently is heading towards a dystopian future…

Yeah I think the route of Norway makes more sense. Prohibition failed historically multiple times. I think education and factful discussions (pros/cons) without irrational condemning drugs would actually be a sustainable long term solution for addiction (because let’s face it, it’s mostly about unhealthy addiction).

Just legalise all kinds of substances without e.g. ads and other measures that effectively reduce the issue. And give proper education early (ideally from long term addicts, so that it’s believable and properly shows the issues).

We see with weed, opiates and currently growing cocaine where uncontrolled markets go and promote addiction…

I doubt that this will be much different with tobacco in a prohibited future…