It is completely inexcusable that people in STEM fields are so reactionary, considering how capitalism utterly destroys science.

If universities were actually "left wing indoctrination factories" like the right thinks they are, every STEM grad would be taught, for example, what Kropotkin had to say about innovation.

  • unperson [he/him]
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 years ago

    I was hoping they'd reply before I went to sleep 😕

    • crispyhexagon [none/use name]
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      the answer is: its irrelevant.

      first off, not my job to solve the issues of wind or solar tech on a fucking internet forum.

      secondly and more importantly, the point is that nuclear waste is bad not that its the worst possible thing int he world ever.

      lets assume only coal power existed. that was the only power source. would you argue we should use it, even knowing all the obvious issues with coal?

      nuclear waste is bad, has had a detrimental effect on my life and the lives of people i know, ergo i do not support nuclear fission energies. its not that fucking hard to understand.

      edit: ohhh no i stepped away for a whole hour to deal with real life shit, how terrible, i must have been owned so hard kristina. fuck off

      • unperson [he/him]
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        lets assume only coal power existed. that was the only power source. would you argue we should use it, even knowing all the obvious issues with coal?

        Of course. No electricity causes endlessly more suffering than the pollution of coal power plants. Would you really prefer to return to feudalism in your hypothetical situation?

        If so, you're a by-the-book reactionary.

          • unperson [he/him]
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            It's not, but industry requires artificial power. And industry is Good. And Capitalism and Socialism require industry. They are even defined by machine industry. Read Marx.

            • kristina [she/her]
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 years ago

              it aint worth the time arguing with a nutjob. if it were real life, just physically force them out of the room is my opinion. i have a huge disdain for them if you cant tell

            • crispyhexagon [none/use name]
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 years ago

              industry good therefor i cant even imagine a world in which we live without power but also embrace communism, trying to do so means youve never read a book.

              im sure the anprims love you at parties.

              • unperson [he/him]
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 years ago

                Please explain how we reach fully automated gay communism without commanding many times more energy than what we can produce with our own bodies.

                Your first sentence is exactly true, and anprims are indeed reactionaries. Marx on the Luddites, the anprims of the 19th century (edit: it's in section 5, 'The Strife Between Workman and Machine').

                • crispyhexagon [none/use name]
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  nah. youre rolling deep on some stemlord shit and i dont need to explain anything, let alone amuse the idea that fully automated luxury gay space communism is the only worthwhile goal possible.

                  i was proposing a thought experiment to try and shake things up but youre literally the least imaginitive person around town, so you jumped straight to "no! go read marx!" instead of actually thinking about what a coal powered world would look like, and how perhaps mass consumption and automation via coal would not be the best idea for peoples lungs.

                  but whatever.

                  fuck off

                  • unperson [he/him]
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 years ago

                    A world automated with coal is impossible, even if you ignored pollution, because there's not enough biomass in the world to sustain full automation. Communism will require the command of today unthinkable amounts of energy. Nuclear fission is the stepping stone so we can arrive there without polluting and cooking ourselves to death.

                    What is your goal? You can't roll back the wheel of history. De-electrification, and therefore de-industrialization, implies the death of 95% of the population of the world. And the return to subsistence farming and a pre-industrial mode of production. Edit: remember, the preindustrial mode of production is what killed all the forests of Europe, because they needed wood for cooking, heating and tool making.