Likewise, the general public is convinced of the economic-financial irrationality that would mean eliminating odious debts and promoting universal public services to mitigate the unnecessary suffering of disadvantaged citizens (the ones that are literally deprived of the means to live through manufactured scarcity); it will be easy to rationalize and justify the need to eliminate part of the population considered redundant and disposable to save civilization. The FIRE sector (the rentier class) and the middle classes with a bourgeois mentality will gladly accept getting rid of the useless class if they perceive it as a threat to their lifestyle, privileges, and entitlements. Whoever controls the money controls the ideological-cultural narratives, therefore the vicious circle of perception management to manufacture consent is almost impossible to break.
Is natural teleology the best way to challenge the causal / functional approach to nature of techno-optimists? Or is a moral argument about naturalism as a political choice going to work better?
What happens if you introduce unlimited, clean, safe reliable energy into this system? With unlimited energy, there are very few things that can't be recycled or substituted cheaply. Uranium and thorium, nuclear fuel are unlimited, the sun will burn out before we run out.
Just looking realistically - hard for most people. Thanks for all you do.
"Hope is a longing for a future condition over which you have no agency." -- Derrick Jensen
"Hope is lack of factual information about the issue." -- Jan Klaas
35:52 they have the hope it can.
Really enjoyed your conversation.. trying to keep all your insights filed away... thank you both so much..
You both just made my evening!
Thank you, Hart and Derrick.
I always appreciate your questions, Hart.
Hart and Nate aren't related although their message/topics are similar.
@@johnbanach3875 thanks! I will edit my comment✌
Derrick isn't wrong about the willful illusions needed to sustain the system of destruction and big profit for the usurers and destroyers.
Likewise, the general public is convinced of the economic-financial irrationality that would mean eliminating odious debts and promoting universal public services to mitigate the unnecessary suffering of disadvantaged citizens (the ones that are literally deprived of the means to live through manufactured scarcity); it will be easy to rationalize and justify the need to eliminate part of the population considered redundant and disposable to save civilization.
The FIRE sector (the rentier class) and the middle classes with a bourgeois mentality will gladly accept getting rid of the useless class if they perceive it as a threat to their lifestyle, privileges, and entitlements.
Whoever controls the money controls the ideological-cultural narratives, therefore the vicious circle of perception management to manufacture consent is almost impossible to break.
Based on this odiferous load of gas i would say you are one of the useless class.
Is natural teleology the best way to challenge the causal / functional approach to nature of techno-optimists? Or is a moral argument about naturalism as a political choice going to work better?
Air (god): there's no choking atheists, and we can proove air actually exists and is vital to us as any logos or "Being"
Trees 🌳
Water 💦
Animals 🐴
Why won't the interviewer ask him about the terrible "pandemic" of the past few years? Not a word. Just silence.
It would be nice if people could give opinions on it without yt censorship... or could be neither gives a shit.
What happens if you introduce unlimited, clean, safe reliable energy into this system? With unlimited energy, there are very few things that can't be recycled or substituted cheaply. Uranium and thorium, nuclear fuel are unlimited, the sun will burn out before we run out.
Fantasy.
Humanity has NEVER had unlimited, clean , safe & reliable energy 😂
But any day now , right ? 😂
The Cult of Scientism strikes again ✌️