While I still agree with oldhead talk about religion being the opium of the people, I think contemporary times have demonstrated it is not the only opium or even the leading opium at this point, and I often find myself agreeing more with liberation theology religious people than I do "this new tech treat is so awesome that there is nothing we can do about it so we may as well cheer the masses' increasing precarity and hope and wait for the excesses and vanity projects of the rich to trickle down to the masses" bazinga defeatists.
Going to drop another Samir Amin quote about that phrase in particular.
Nevertheless, another reading can be made of Marx. The often cited phrase--"religion is the opium of the people"--is truncated. What follows this remark lets it be understood that human beings need opium, because they are metaphysical animals who cannot avoid asking themselves questions about the meaning of life. They give what answers they can, either adopting those offered by religion or inventing new ones, or else they avoid worrying about them.
In any case, religions are part of the picture of reality and even constitute an important dimension of it. It is, therefore, important to analyze their social function, and in our modern world their articulation with what currendy constitutes modernity: capitalism, democracy, and secularism.
Techbros and bazinga defeatists are firmly in the "inventing new ones" category. Even in your example, they are acting as if the new technology is some all powerful, inevitable, unstoppable force from above so they may as well worship it cheer on this technological progress. They have essentially in a way, reinvented the concept of God.
Techbros and bazinga defeatists are "firmly in the "inventing new ones" category. Even in your example, they are acting as if the new technology is some all powerful, inevitable, unstoppable force from above so they may as well worship it cheer on this technological progress. They have essentially in a way, reinvented the concept of God.
I lost count of how many people I've met that saw "progress" as some Civ game style bar that only crawled upward toward specific goal milestones. A lot of inevitabilists seem to see dae le singularity or even FALGSC as inevitabilities, and even otherwise self-described leftists can convince themselves that they just got to sit and wait for that progress bar to fill up and everything to just change in a way that suits them (while rhetorically shitting on people for being "afraid" or "emotional" for not sharing their toxic positivity).
I lost count of how many people I've met that saw "progress" as some Civ game style bar that only crawled upward toward specific goal milestones.
As much as I love the series, Civilization has done irreparable harm to the public's understanding of history and how technology develops. People seriously think you can just invent saddles for horseback riding even if you're in a place without horses. G*mers are going to need serious re-education after the revolution.
I still can't get over Civ II having a "corruption" stat that only appears around the time communism is invented, but if you switch to "democracy" the corruption stat is nullified.
The series is still stuck in the '90s. Belief in the End of History, Great Man, and so on. The least they could do is look into more systemic analysis and archeological discoveries involving our prehistoric ancestors.
Even the typical "science victory" ideology is propaganda, unexamined ideology that only feeds into grifts. Go to other planet, plant flag, win, roll credits, show score.
Ahh the idealistic idea that change/adjustment/progress is both inevitable and always positive. You're going to hate me for this, but Samir Amin had something to say about that too.
The fact that these adjustments can be positive or negative argues in favor of an interpretation of historical materialism based on the concept of "under-determination." I mean by this that each of the various levels of reality (economic, political, ideological) contains its own internal logic, and because of this the complementary nature of their evolution, which is necessary to ensure the overall coherence of a system, does not define in advance a given direction for a particular evolution.
The fact that these adjustments can be positive or negative argues in favor of an interpretation of historical materialism based on the concept of "under-determination." I mean by this that each of the various levels of reality (economic, political, ideological) contains its own internal logic, and because of this the complementary nature of their evolution, which is necessary to ensure the overall coherence of a system, does not define in advance a given direction for a particular evolution.
That resonates hard with me, especially after being told how I'm against the inevitabilist's personal idea of "materialism" if I don't agree that the latest hype wave of consumer products and worker exploitation is different this time and will revolutionize the world in a way that will totally trickle down this time for real.
I don't just mean treat printers. Before that I got "materialist" sophistry about internet funny money, and even a brief but fierce moment where dar le VR/AR was the revolutionary hotness.
and even a brief but fierce moment where dar le VR/AR was the revolutionary hotness.
The fact that we've gone through multiple phases of this in the last decade is extraordinary. First it was Oculus, then Google cardboard/daydream, then Oculus gain, then the Meta quest headsets, and finally Apple vision pro. Everytime it comes up, people are sure that this time VR will go mainstream! Maybe it's time to accept that as social creatures, humans do not want to live with a headset strapped to their face 24/7. Hell, even when we had to cover our faces for a good cause and public benefit, like masking for a pandemic, people invented the most juvenile of excuses to not wear a mask.
The fact that we've gone through multiple phases of this in the last decade is extraordinary. First it was Oculus, then Google cardboard/daydream, then Oculus gain, then the Meta quest headsets, and finally Apple vision pro. Everytime it comes up, people are sure that this time VR will go mainstream! Maybe it's time to accept that as social creatures, humans do not want to live with a headset strapped to their face 24/7. Hell, even when we had to cover our faces for a good cause and public benefit, like masking for a pandemic, people invented the most juvenile of excuses to not wear a mask.
Maybe one of the incarnations of "Glassholes" will finally stick around someday soon, but for now I'm enjoying the reprieve from even more socially normalized surveillance and creepshot-enjoying.
While I still agree with oldhead talk about religion being the opium of the people, I think contemporary times have demonstrated it is not the only opium or even the leading opium at this point, and I often find myself agreeing more with liberation theology religious people than I do "this new tech treat is so awesome that there is nothing we can do about it so we may as well cheer the masses' increasing precarity and hope and wait for the excesses and vanity projects of the rich to trickle down to the masses" bazinga defeatists.
Under late-stage capitalism, we have so many opium options available now, both literal and metaphorical.
Just talking negatively about some such opiates can even be perceived as a threat to the opiate supply.
Going to drop another Samir Amin quote about that phrase in particular.
Techbros and bazinga defeatists are firmly in the "inventing new ones" category. Even in your example, they are acting as if the new technology is some all powerful, inevitable, unstoppable force
from aboveso they may as wellworship itcheer on this technological progress. They have essentially in a way, reinvented the concept of God.I lost count of how many people I've met that saw "progress" as some Civ game style bar that only crawled upward toward specific goal milestones. A lot of inevitabilists seem to see dae le singularity or even FALGSC as inevitabilities, and even otherwise self-described leftists can convince themselves that they just got to sit and wait for that progress bar to fill up and everything to just change in a way that suits them (while rhetorically shitting on people for being "afraid" or "emotional" for not sharing their toxic positivity).
As much as I love the series, Civilization has done irreparable harm to the public's understanding of history and how technology develops. People seriously think you can just invent saddles for horseback riding even if you're in a place without horses. G*mers are going to need serious re-education after the revolution.
I still can't get over Civ II having a "corruption" stat that only appears around the time communism is invented, but if you switch to "democracy" the corruption stat is nullified.
The series is still stuck in the '90s. Belief in the End of History, Great Man, and so on. The least they could do is look into more systemic analysis and archeological discoveries involving our prehistoric ancestors.
Even the typical "science victory" ideology is propaganda, unexamined ideology that only feeds into
grifts. Go to other planet, plant flag, win, roll credits, show score.
Whitoids can't help it. In the face of interstellar travel, all they can think about is new places to colonize and settle.
One of my dearest childhood dreams and wishes was to explore the stars.
Watching that dream get monetized and monopolized by techbro manchildren trying to sell that dream back to me was crushing to watch over the years.
Communism is OP in civ 6 because it is only system which focuses on production, and production is and always was OP in Civ.
Ahh the idealistic idea that change/adjustment/progress is both inevitable and always positive. You're going to hate me for this, but Samir Amin had something to say about that too.
That resonates hard with me, especially after being told how I'm against the inevitabilist's personal idea of "materialism" if I don't agree that the latest hype wave of consumer products and worker exploitation is different this time and will revolutionize the world in a way that will totally trickle down this time for real.
I don't just mean treat printers. Before that I got "materialist" sophistry about internet funny money, and even a brief but fierce moment where dar le VR/AR was the revolutionary hotness.
The fact that we've gone through multiple phases of this in the last decade is extraordinary. First it was Oculus, then Google cardboard/daydream, then Oculus gain, then the Meta quest headsets, and finally Apple vision pro. Everytime it comes up, people are sure that this time VR will go mainstream! Maybe it's time to accept that as social creatures, humans do not want to live with a headset strapped to their face 24/7. Hell, even when we had to cover our faces for a good cause and public benefit, like masking for a pandemic, people invented the most juvenile of excuses to not wear a mask.
Maybe one of the incarnations of "Glassholes" will finally stick around someday soon, but for now I'm enjoying the reprieve from even more socially normalized surveillance and creepshot-enjoying.