I think this is a logical folly that demonstrates how warped our view of reality has become. Because it seems we would rather change time than simply change our working hours. It‘s a little bit conspicuous that this is never being considered in a discussion that happens all over the world.

Great non-ideological analysis.

This has been going on for a while:

https://theintercept.com/2023/12/13/intercepted-podcast-israel-palestine-military-equipment/

So you‘re saying Coy‘s analysis so precisely defines capitalism it amounts to calling for its abolishment and therefore contradicts the Times‘ official stance?

It‘s pretty disgusting how dumb they think the public is. On the other hand reading the responses of the public to this lie…they might be on to something.

True

Yeah, that’s true. I just made the point because you said good government, and that, I think, is debatable.

Kinda

I wouldn’t conflate democratic with good government because it gives us certain freedoms. The liberty in contemporary democratic societies is of a certain kind. Foremost it is the liberty of trade, property and production. Other liberties follow through that. The consumer side freedom of choice follows just as the freedom to theoretically take any job. The state may allow you that, but you may still be excluded by the choices of those whose liberty is guaranteed as well. I mean a government that treats everyone the same, isn’t necessarily good, if its citizens have different means to begin with.

also looking at those countries we can see it isn’t a permanent fix though. Capitalists don’t stop fighting and will be successful in the long run

Also, it didn’t work out so well

what exactly do you mean?

Being a decent human being doesn‘t require an incentive. In fact if you try to be a decent human being because you expect it will be beneficial to you, you will probably fail

A democratic state allows its citizens to pursue their private interests. This is only possible though if this is happening in a legal framework, so that the private interests of one citizen don‘t infringe upon the ones of another. The outcome of this consideration then is the abstraction (the specific applied to the universal) of the free will of the citizens. We call it freedom and justice. Others call it the free market.

that‘s a bunch of false equivalences

At first you got to have a good analysis of how society and the economy works. Unfortunately this already is a tricky thing, because not everybody agrees.

yes, I also don‘t believe in the nation‘s interest, yet it somehow pretty brutally exists. Something‘s got to grow, somethings got to give.

I think you are on the right track with your ideals of the world, but I also guess you kinda know that this is not how states operate. Of course there are different types of states, but if you think of democracies, they are also not service providers to their citizens. On the contrary. Democratic states are the abstraction of all the private interests of their citizens. This is what they protect and advance. What arises out of that is that occasionally these interests will suggest a war is what the nation desires.

Thanks for the context

Why would you make a painting like this in 1981?

How is it even possible. We‘ve been killing them forever, and never seen a baby shark?