What does he listen to?

Yea Forumscore since this board seems to be full of hard lefties now, probably because fantano started tweeting about his political stances since the last time ive been on this board.
what a pathetic board.

reminder to report and sage twitter threads

Attached: Twittershit.png (393x349, 16K)

Actually he is upset because he was capitalized on.

Maybe there just aren't any jobs in gender studies and he's a fucking idiot

Probably the Beatles

based capitalism dabbing on soibois

Maybe but all jobs should have a livable wage
t. Stemfag

If you look closely, there also aren't any jobs in science related fields that don't have anything to do with propping up the military-industrial complex.

You bet your ass that if a liberal arts degree gave you the skill to shoot cruise missiles into Yemeni hospitals, English majors would be getting 450k/year

No, he's not. It actually means that capitalism is working as intended.

A barista living in San Fransisco has made terrible life choices outside anyone's control but their own. If you can't afford to live somewhere, you shouldn't live there.

But it doesn't. So it isn't in demand. Therefore, you get paid less. Is this too complex for you? Or do your arguments against capitalism inevitably boil down to "I don't like the priorities of the world so you should change them to accomodate me"?

> English majors would be getting 450k/year
Language majors already get a decent enough wage. Do you think getting a English degree means you're fated into a life of writing articles/books? There are plenty of boring desk-jockey jobs that require someone who's proficient in English. It's not particularly interesting, but it's not in the dismal state that social studies is in.

The issue isn't that he isn't getting paid enough for his job, the issue is that he got a meme degree and can't even get a job in the first place

AJJ

???

I think the "decent" implied something with at minimum a livable wage.

Some of the wages I see out there for even a master's are abysmal. Stemfags should still make more of course

What the fuck more can you say about gender that isnt said in academia and get a job out of it? Would people hire you for personal parties to dunk on the patriarchy?

The slurping sounds of himself gobbling cock.

A master's degree in the critical examination of minority women's basket weaving should not guarantee you anything more than ridicule. Effort is not value. I could spend all day digging a hole in my yard, but nobody's paying for that either.

Clairo

> there also aren't any jobs in science related fields that don't have anything to do with propping up the military-industrial complex
That's fucking stupid. There's a large degree of overlap between stem fields, and waging war requires knowledge of several scientific disciplines. Of course you can draw some vague connection between most stem jobs and war. People with stem jobs are payed well cuz they actually do useful shit.
> muh brown people
Who gives a shit

>Or do your arguments against capitalism inevitably boil down to "I don't like the priorities of the world so you should change them to accomodate me"

This is the basic argument of any revolution ever. "I don't like the way that things are, therefore we will try to fix them." 1776, 1789, 1848, 1917, etc. The arguments are against whatever the current social order is differ from point to point throughout history, but the central thread holds true.

It isn't complex that "things which are in demand command more money," but why should that system be in place? Why should those that prop up the industries which wage war, extract resources from the Earth, and consume them at a frantic pace be considered better than others which do not? The only position that you could argue that, yes, the current social order is fine is that either A) you directly benefit from it or B) you plan to benefit from it and see yourself as a member of the expansive class of temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

I’d say they’re trying to get jobs in HR as “Diversity and Inclusion Coordinators”. The thing is there may be what 500 companies in America who have the extra money to create such a worthless fucking position.

Fuck off with your fucking meme ideology. It's not like communist China or the Soviet Union were any more enviromentally friendly. Look at the Aral and Caspian Seas.

Digging a hole and then filling it back up is much more productive than a gender studies degree. If you dig a big hole and move large quantities of dirt you become physically stronger.

In both situation worthless holes are involved.

Based

Yeah, higher education is pretty fucked. Blame degree inflation. Still doesn't mean a meme degree should guarantee you a job.

kek

its seems more like what a failure gender studies is.

Suppose I just empathize when essentially a whole generation was brainwashed into going to college and FOLLOWING THEIR DREAMS.

I made the smart decision to study worthwhile stuff but I still feel bad for those that didn't realize until it was too late.

But people want baristas to be in every major city so is the solution to that having them living 20+ miles out of the city they work in? What are we going to do when all of that is automated, expect these same people to work in the automation industry?

Wasn't talking linguistics, I know my friends who are learning Arabic, Russian, Chinese are already getting picked for some nice jobs with some government/NGO types as opposed to those that know Spanish, German, etc.
English was just an example by the way, it can be replaced with anything that exists in a liberal-arts sphere.
>Of course you can draw some vague connection between most stem jobs and war.
Did you read the other part of that phrase? Military-industrial complex? It doesn't just boil down to waging war, but extracting as much of the hydrocarbons in the Earth's crust as possible and burning them for fuel while knowing that its harmful to the world at large. But of course, its more profitable to create an unlivable hellscape in 30-50 years rather than try to deal with it now.
>Who gives a shit
That's the issue, no one gives a shit till you bring the war home to them. Americans in particular are so insulated from what we've done in the Middle East that opinions like yours are all too common and they don't care, yet somehow they think that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in other countries is justified to keeping our economic model alive.

There's a lot of retardation to unpack here and I won't bother with most of it because you're a worthless commie who wouldn't read it anyways, but here's a little nugget to chew on that even you should be able to digest: If you want true sustainability without expanding beyond Earth, you need to reduce the entire world to subsaharan Africa standards of living. Guess how much of the public would support that?

If you live in the west, you benefit greatly from the established system. Even the poorest American lives better than a wealthy African. Tell all those millions of poor Americans you're going to take their cars and iPhones away. I fucking dare you.

why wont anyone pay me to call them sexist daily?

Did I fucking mention communism you fucking dolt? Christ you people are like Pavlovian dogs, any critique of capitalism's environmental rapaciousness or the military-industrial complex IMMEDIATELY gets a knee-jerk response from you shitheads about "muh gommunism"
Sorry that no one's made a conservative revolution movement because those buffoons are more than happy with being bilked until the end of time by anyone in a higher social caste than them.

Capitalism is broken. The fact that you're so worried about automation proves this. Zoning laws play a large role in fucking up housing prices.

Calm down Comrade.

So do you want to "tear down capitalism" without providing a viable alternative, or do you have one but refuse to say what that alternative is because you know it's indefensible?

If you aren't providing solutions, all you're doing is bitching.

> but extracting as much of the hydrocarbons in the Earth's crust as possible and burning them for fuel while knowing that its harmful to the world at large. But of course, its more profitable to create an unlivable hellscape in 30-50 years rather than try to deal with it now.
Your point being?
> deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in other countries is justified to keeping our economic model alive
I'm not trying to justify shit lol

Cuz the only alternative to capitalism thusfar has been "muh gommunism". What were you gonna mention, some form of anarchism or socialism or some shit? Don't embarrass yourself

You know even in a magical clean energy paradise we'll still have militaries, right? America was playing around with electric battleships by the 1920s. There isn't some monolithic "military industrial jew" (yes, your logic is the same as /pol/, all you do is switch "jew" with stale 2004 era colbert memes) that you can slay with your Tesla or whatever, unless you're going to go full Ted Kazinksy and advocate we all live in caves.

>We all live in caves
God I wish

Chapo Fag House, Shaun and ContraPoints

99% of the population would rather see anprims strung up as traitors against humanity than give up their iPhones. Good luck with that.

>yet somehow they think that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in other countries is justified to keeping our economic model alive.
Why do you hate democracy? If you put it up to an open vote, Americans would nuke Afghanistan for 20¢ off gas prices. If you believe in democracy, then you must believe in Imperialism, provided the people of the Empire so choose.

Then fucking revolt. Fucking do it you pussy

>If you want true sustainability without expanding beyond Earth, you need to reduce the entire world to subsaharan Africa standards of living
The obvious alternative is to continue consuming the world's resources at a massive pace and then create a boiling hellscape. There is no in-between for this.
>If you live in the west, you benefit greatly from the established system. Even the poorest American lives better than a wealthy African. Tell all those millions of poor Americans you're going to take their cars and iPhones away. I fucking dare you.
Again, your idea is either "we live like cavemen or we make zero changes," you completely dismiss anything in between that. Just live in material comfort and ignore what's going on in the world because change is Too Hard For Us

> There is no in-between for this.
This but unironically. Read Kaczynski.

>The obvious alternative is to continue consuming the world's resources at a massive pace and then create a boiling hellscape. There is no in-between for this.

These are two seperate issues you conflate for purely political reasons, with two seperate solutions. And no, there is no inbetween. Either you go full an-prim, or you delay the inevitable. Or you harness the power of capitalism to start strip mining the solar system. Those are your three options.

>Again, your idea is either "we live like cavemen or we make zero changes," you completely dismiss anything in between that.
Because
1. Americans would not accept an Indian standard of living, either. Which is what the "in between" is.
2. The world could not sustain the current population indefinitely at that standard of living anyways, so you've just kicked the can down the road.

>Just live in material comfort and ignore what's going on in the world because change is Too Hard For Us
The solution is the same as the solution always has been, expand and exploit.

Attached: playhopper.png (741x1458, 1.28M)

Well they're not changing voluntarily. You'll need *GASP* authoritarianism to do that

This
It filters out the retards into poverty
Too bad I'm a retard, but that's evolution

i don't want to hear it
tweets from three weeks ago who fucking cares
fuck capitalism
fuck academia
fuck liberal arts programs
fuck people with the money to go to college for fun
fuck the humanities
fuck gender studies
fuck gender studies "scholars"
fuck gender studies professors
fuck gender studies graduates
fuck lawyers
fuck americans
take this guy's cell phone and throw him in the water (keep the phone)

> expand and exploit.
> Or you harness the power of capitalism to start strip mining the solar system.

Attached: nm4mhwaavtmz.png (960x446, 330K)

to what end

probably satire anyway

the end goal is a self replicating von neuman swarm expanding outwards from earth and returning a constant stream of resources

each individual shipment may take millenia but if you sent packets of raw material back to earth every day, they would arrive every day (after the millenia long setup phase

humans will conquer the galaxy with robots purely to continue the spic-nig cycle

hopefully for his sake

To no end. Didn't know there had to be an end.

>I'm not trying to justify shit lol
"muh brown people, who gives a shit"
>Your point being?
Perhaps ejecting every shred of carbon in the Earth's crust into the atmosphere would be a bad thing? Maybe?
The clear answer is to clearly not try anything at all, and just let our current economic system kill the world for paper money.
As for proposing solutions, the answer is clear. Decarbonize, retool our economic system away from massive consumption, etc. It will be impossible to achieve a system of sustainability in capitalism because it demands constant growth.
There's a difference between a military-industrial complex and a military, man, far and away.
>If you believe in democracy, then you must believe in Imperialism, provided the people of the Empire so choose.
Half the people in the US would vote for their own hangman to own the libs, so no, democracy is kind of a failure in a lot of regards.
Just because the people vote for it doesn't make it a moral thing to do.

this works too

> Decarbonize, retool our economic system away from massive consumption, etc
> It will be impossible to achieve a system of sustainability in capitalism because it demands constant growth.
Exactly. The solutions you've proposed are practically impossible to actually put into practice. Maybe someone will actually try some shit once it affects the profitability of the aforementioned system but by then we'll already be pretty fucked.

> Just because the people vote for it doesn't make it a moral thing to do.
moralfag out

>The clear answer is to clearly not try anything at all, and just let our current economic system kill the world for paper money.
Repeating strawmen doesn't make them correct, especially when I proposed a solution and you hadn't. Why respond to my post if you're not actually going to respond to what my post says?

>Decarbonize
Actually the solution is to close the carbon cycle with sabatier reactors and transition to a liquid methane economy based on existing natural gas infrastructure, but at least you're vaguely on track
>retool our economic system away from massive consumption
This is where you get shot. No, really. You cannot reduce America's standard of living to that of a Tibetan monk, because Americans will just kill you and take your stuff to bolster their lifestyles. Your solution is infeasible without fascism. It's "if I was magically president and had total control" tier.
>It will be impossible to achieve a system of sustainability in capitalism because it demands constant growth.
What's wrong with constant growth? The universe is infinite on human scales.

>There's a difference between a military-industrial complex and a military, man, far and away.
Are you actually retarded? WW1, which occured at the dawn of the industrial age, was already considered a "war of machines". Do you think we'll go back to fucking drummer boys and muskets? Are you that incredibly brain damaged?

>democracy is kind of a failure in a lot of regards.
You're right in that you could never make your "system" work without straight up fascism, concentration camps, reeducation centers and all.

I have. I need to read more deep ecology-centric works though.
>The solution is the same as the solution always has been, expand and exploit.
To what end? Why should we continue to expand and exploit?
There's a massive push to do so right now from two directions; capitalism, and the ramifications that it has created. We create ever larger existential problems for ourselves the more advanced we become and the more exploitative our economic processes become. Why would this ever end with a post-space colonization?

>it's a Twitter faggots scapegoating capitalism for their issues episode

Attached: p2f8f8vy4n611.jpg (390x376, 25K)

This post is unbelievably based and respilled

> sabatier reactors and transition to a liquid methane economy based on existing natural gas infrastructure, but at least you're vaguely on track
This won't happen soon enough
> You're right in that you could never make your "system" work without straight up fascism, concentration camps, reeducation centers and all.
> Your solution is infeasible without fascism
At least you're somewhat on track here

youtube.com/watch?v=CysJLhfeaVc

> To what end? Why should we continue to expand and exploit?
To no end? It's all relative
> create ever larger existential problems for ourselves the more advanced we become and the more exploitative our economic processes become
No reason to care. You're right, we've got a pretty good chance of just dying as a species. Bare minimum we'll really fuck shit up for ourselves.

Fucking based

>To what end? Why should we continue to expand and exploit?
To continue to advance our ability to expand and exploit, so we can expand and exploit, so we can continue expanding and exploiting. Because the alternative is stagnation, mandatory birth control, abject poverty, and eventual collapse. Earth CANNOT sustain humanity indefinitely unless you get rid of ALL industrial technology, which you claim is "extreme" and something you don't support. The ONLY alternative is to continue expanding.

Capitalism is not what drives expansion. Human nature is. Capitalism is a convenient system of exchange to facilitate the expansion and exploitation we would be doing anyways.

>This won't happen soon enough
And you think a pure electric grid will? The majority of our infrastructure is already in place for a closed cycle methane economy, it's literally the only solution that CAN be done in time.

>At least you're somewhat on track here
Ah, let me rephrase then. Previously, I've posited that Americans will shoot you if you try, in a general sense. Now we can be more specific. I will shoot you. If you run for office as an open fascist, I will exercise my innate right to defense against tyranny, and I will shoot you.

imagine being so cucked that you defend a system designed to benefit an increasingly smaller group of people that will never include you

lmao

Posts like this convince me that the mods of Yea Forums are almost as intentionally incompetent as the mods of Yea Forums.

> And you think a pure electric grid will?
no, nothing will
> it's literally the only solution that CAN be done in time
can doesn't mean will
> if you run for office as an open fascist
pretty sure you're confusing me with that other fag

It does benefit me. It benefits you, too.

imagine being so cucked that you defend a system designed to benefit an increasingly smaller group of people that will never include you

Attached: 1200px-Hammer_and_sickle_red_on_transparent.svg_.png (1200x1200, 50K)

Capitalism benefits everybody. Even if I'm not a multi millionaire I can still buy cool shit that wouldn't exist otherwise

>no, nothing will
I mean, that's mostly true, we're already past the point of "the earth is gonna get rough for a couple centuries". We can still avert going full Venus though. There's multiple different "tipping points", some we can still prevent.

Also if I'm confusing you with the unironic ecofascist then that's my bad

If you live in the West, you are in the top 5% of the globe. Even if you're on welfare.

Seems pretty hopeless tbqh, by the time profitability in the west is affected, we are well beyond the point of no-return for anything resembling our old world. Yet plenty of people seem fine with that?
Literal billions of people's deaths will be less concerning for the system than the loss of profits.
I did, did you not read the literal next line of my response to you? We have to completely redo our economic system as a whole, and enter into a post-capitalist society. Capitalism has to end at some stage, just like every system of economics. A big impetus is coming into being right now.
>Actually the solution is to close the carbon cycle with sabatier reactors and transition to a liquid methane economy
What exactly do you produce when you burn methane?
>You cannot reduce America's standard of living to that of a Tibetan monk, because Americans will just kill you and take your stuff to bolster their lifestyles.
Again, this is an argument of "well we can't reduce it even partially the amount of any resource we consume because people won't like it" which is bullshit. You don't have to reduce yourself to the level of a Tibetan monk to not completely fuck the world
>What's wrong with constant growth? The universe is infinite on human scales.
Perhaps the universe is, but the Earth certainly isn't. You are calling for infinite growth within a finite habitat. How do you square with that?
>WW1, which occured at the dawn of the industrial age, was already considered a "war of machines". Do you think we'll go back to fucking drummer boys and muskets?
Perhaps maintaining what is akin to a world police force in order to maintain global hegemony to protect our oil interests isn't what a military should be used for?
>You're right in that you could never make your "system" work without straight up fascism, concentration camps, reeducation centers and all.
Buddy the capitalist system and liberal-democratic order is rife with that, hate to shatter your worldview.

>What exactly do you produce when you burn methane
Okay, so you obviously don't know what the Sabatier reaction is. Let's explain.

Take water, split it with solar (or wind, or hydro). You now have oxygen and hydrogen. Take atmospheric CO2. Combine it with the hydrogen. You now have methane.

When you burn it, you get CO2 and water. The inputs are CO2, water, and renewable electricity. This is a closed cycle except for the power requirements, which are fairly reasonable and can be accommodated by solar farms, wind farms, or hydro.

>why not use the electricity directly?
Because electricity is a bitch to store and liquid methane is really good at energy density. Batteries are really bad at energy density. You're giving up ~10% efficiency for greatly improved handling characteristics and compatibility with existing natural gas infrastructure.

>Again, this is an argument of "well we can't reduce it even partially the amount of any resource we consume because people won't like it" which is bullshit.
Regardless of whether you think the truth is bullshit, it's the truth. Humans do not lower their standards of living willingly. When you try it, they revolt. If your solution cannot maintain current living standards, it is not a solution. This isn't a debate, those are simple facts you fail to grasp.

>Perhaps the universe is, but the Earth certainly isn't.
nigger did you miss the part with the rockets
>How do you square with that?
>Perhaps maintaining what is akin to a world police force in order to maintain global hegemony to protect our oil interests isn't what a military should be used for?
I also greatly prefered the periods in history where there was no dominant power, and secondary powers were in a near constant set of wars. That seems like a good system, let's go back to that.

>Buddy the capitalist system and liberal-democratic order is rife with that, hate to shatter your worldview.
And your solution is more fascism. Kill yourself.

>designed to benefit an increasingly smaller group of people that will never include you

Citation needed

> We have to completely redo our economic system as a whole, and enter into a post-capitalist society
Impossible. Also you're a stupid fucking commie.
> You don't have to reduce yourself to the level of a Tibetan monk
The vast majority of people will not willingly reduce themselves to any level below the one they are currently at
> some stupid thing about protecting our oil interests
not the only thing out military does

>Impossible. Also you're a stupid fucking commie.
Great argument.
>not the only thing out military does
Cool, tell me more.
>The vast majority of people will not willingly reduce themselves to any level below the one they are currently at
Cool, so we'll all just die then after taking the world with us in an act of civilizational murder-suicide.