Permanently Deleted
That attitude bugs me as well. Chapos act like this. Felix's meltdown about having to wear a mask at the gym for example. Or Hasan acting like its not weird at all to buy an expensive luxury sports car etc.
And the Bug-Eating-Wars drag on, with no sign of a speedy resolution.
For sure but also not all treats are equal in how exploitative they are or how much they destroy the environment or whatever.
Not that entertainment/edutainment/informational content with a socialist bent is bad entirely (I'll keep listening to that garbage), but IMO all left media personalities are small business owners, and they act like it.
I've lived in a few places where tourism either was or is a significant industry.
Tourism is such a shitty industry more or less anywhere in the world to greater or lesser degrees. It's got all the low pay servitude of the regular service industry with the job insecurity dial whacked right up cos the work is seasonal and the added fun of gentrification and the hell that brings cos rich tourists decide to buy a second home there. Chuck in the fact that popularity of tourist hot spots tends to rise massively and plummet dramatically - sometimes in the same decade - and it's a complete disaster for anyone living there. Hawaii seems to be even worse cos you are also contributing to driving out a native culture on top of it. I've lived as I said in tourist hotspots where people who have lived there all their lives are in desparate poverty and can only imagine how much worse it'd be if that was your entire culture being erased on top of that.
tourism if properly handled is a great poverty reducer. of course, it isnt properly handled, but it is possible. look at china for instance. if you visit them almost all the money goes to developing the community you visit and is a big plank in their poverty alleviation and cultural preservation campaigns. rather than just sitting in some bougie assholes pocket
Cuba, as well, does a great job of channeling Havana tourists into an economic engine that enriches the entire island.
I'm willing to bet Vietnam and Cambodia have a better track record monetizing tourism for the public rather than just feeding a handful of plutocrats
Building a beautiful city and hosting guests doesn't have to be some kind of nightmare business model.
honestly i think we're due for a "is tourism bad?" struggle sesh
Hawai'i is uniquely bad to visit because people pressured by rising prices can't just move a couple hundred miles away - they are expelled from their ancestral lands basically forever. And the home and rental prices in Hawai'i are particularly bad since the pandemic
if property is theft why would it be bad for anyone to want to see the natural wonders of the world, and why should anyone have any right to deny another's right to experience them in person? all of it should be all our common heritage as human beings
just adding to the start of the struggle, I'm gonna go drrink and play videogames
just adding to the start of the struggle, I’m gonna go drrink and play videogames
starts struggle session
bails instantly to go drink and play video games
:gigachad: unbelievably based
I said I'd bail but i'm still here because I'm lame
Anyway TECHNICALLY the comment above me started it. Also too drunk to continue see you in 10 hours <3
flying is wasteful and boats are scary so yeah sure
edit: i'm afraid of the ocean but I'd maybe take an ocean-train to hawaii
If you go through a railing you fall all the way down the mariana trench lol
if property is theft why would it be bad for anyone to want to see the natural wonders of the world, and why should anyone have any right to deny another’s right to experience them in person? all of it should be all our common heritage as human beings
This is a take that is maybe justifiable in a world in which International FALGSC has already been established; but I don't think it applies in the here & now. It's like saying that because hard national borders are a product of Liberal-Bourgeois Nationalistic ideology (they largely are), that this means that the DPRK should just submit to the South. It's a take that helps absolutely no-one for whom the discussion actually matters.
I mean is the image in the OP suggesting that things would be different with communist property relations? not really
I suppose it depends on whether or not you're assuming that world in which Communism is politically dominant would also mean one in which a place like Hawai'i would be able to maintain it's own political & cultural autonomy. :shrug-outta-hecks:
i think it would but like, how would it "pay for" necessary infrastructure in the absence of its tourist economy? like China didn't just build its manufacturing base out of literally nothing, so, would Hawaii be better off without tourist income if that tourist income were explicitly under the operation of and to the benefit of the natives? The things in the image re: water resources are nice thoughts, but what if i.e. even in the absence of tourism driven changes in water allocation there is a need for an expensive desalination plant? infrastructure doesn't just come from the aether and just assuming Hawaii would otherwise Make It Happen is just... wishful thinking
I mean, my read on the original, original post; the one that's got the little palm tree on it. My read on the take that it's trying to give, is that it's bad to personally partake in tourism to Hawai'i, because it only really serves as a way to sell a kitsch, commodified version of Hawaiian culture to :thumb-cop:-shaped gringos, to absolutely no benefit to it's native people. Probably not unlike Cuba under Batista really.
Uhh, as to what Hawai'i should, or would do otherwise, especially under Communism? I have no idea, and don't pretend to. I'm from the rural midwest & I'm too broke to ever leave this hellish void. Cuba may be a good place to look for inspiration though, perhaps. 👀
if you negate a need for hawaii to “earn” money by being a tourist hotspot
So, how
What can the hawaiian islands provide that would build the necessary infrastructure for self sufficiency? Posing hypotheticals from post- global communism is still wishful thinking
Does global communism mean building everything everywhere without regard for anything? Without the need to support tourist infrastructure why build Whatever Project in Hawaii over whatever region more resilient to climate change issues? Infrastructure doesn't come from nothing and if there's no reason to consider the beauty of whatever region over something more survivable long term, again, you're operating on wishful thinking, but unfortunately humanity can't survive on vibes alone
that's just wishful thinking and vibes tho at least "spend tourist income on benefiting the locality" is based on real world necessity. Like what is this equal distribution of resources shit? Build air conditioners in death valley to uh keep up tourism??
I'm going to sleep good night
One supposes that under FALGSC, Hawaii could have political and cultural autonomy without having to be either fully self-sufficent or have an exportable resource surplus.
Meh.
The Virgin Tourist v. The Chad Migrant/Traveler/Bedoin. Traveling for months or years at a time, camping at parks in between cities, working odd jobs at every stop and making new friends along the way, never owning real estate, traveling in a large family group.
double book it with the "what is cultural appropriation, really?" struggle sesh and see which one gets more play
A lot of the big tourist landmarks are removed from the rest of the city. There's a bunch of Paris outside the Beltway that tourists never visit.
New York is another classic example. Times Square is a big tourist trap full of overpriced hotels and entertainment venues. Most people either live in the north end of Manhattan or out on Long Island. The actual tourist footprint is a tiny fraction of the city.
Same with New Orleans. Most people don't leave the Jackson Square area. Nobody in the Fourteenth Ward or Gentilly will see you. Even just walking as far as Marigny and the tourists drop off to a trickle.
And what we usually call Las Vegas is actually an unincorporated community called Paradise. The actual city of Las Vegas is pretty unremarkable, and no tourists ever go there.
Even just walking as far as Marigny and the tourists drop off to a trickle.
Which is good and/or a shame, depending on your point of view, because the Marigny is great. I used to go to the Dragon's Den and Cafe Brasil all the time in the 90s.
It definitely depends on the place. As a Floridian the only negative feelings we have towards tourists is that we’ll make fun of you but as much as I hate this place we do depend on tourism. Hawaii isn’t the same. And of the things making it suck here tourism is really far down the list.
tourism, but only permitted to nonce island and you're required to assault at least 5 now-subjugated anglos per week of holiday (rounded up to the next week)
I dunno, this feels like another case of boiling a larger, systematic problem down to individual choices, like recycling albeit with a higher price tag. Odds are any given tourist isn't going to make or break Hawaii/it's problems, there's far bigger fish to fry like the rich people actually in charge and running it all.
Turns out Hawai'i is just the part of the universe outside of this guy's house
"Touch grass" mentality and its consequences predate the "touch grass" meme itself. :grillman:
Honest question: What should Americans do on the very meager vacation time they get?
National parks, camping, all beaches on the mainland are publicly accessible, visit other cities and stay in motels.
I don't get what you're all on about but I enjoy my Vacations of abandoning civilization to go amongst the trees and find the rarest grass to touch.
