It’d be surprising if we haven’t either ruined ourselves or achieved an actual end of history by 2300. So, that.

The savings from completely ignoring space aren’t what people think, though.

Depends on how far you’re thinking.

Nowhere else in the solar system is anywhere near as habitable as Earth, and there’s still lots of empty space to fill on Earth. Consider for a moment how much easier a city on Antarctica would be than a city on Mars. Human space travel is done purely for science or recreation, at this point, not for growth.

If you want to “disperse” in any significant way, you have to start looking at exoplanets, and it’s going to take centuries to get there, and we don’t have the technology to survive that yet. Once we do, there’s a strong argument for it, because our planet and solar system will only last so long.

Yeah. Surveillance is covered already.

Overkill. Just find the illegal no-age-collection ISO. Installing with your middle finger raised is optional, but recommended.

There’s many kinds, but yes.

I know canola has the lowest saturated fat of them all, which is also why it doesn’t smoke easily.

Did you ever play with the pre-NN chatbots?

Other plant oils are even better yet, if you don’t insist on the consistency. Except peanut, maybe? I forget.

Learn a second language and keep up with the language your parents speak. You will regret being a brat about not wanting to speak this language especially as your family members pass.

Languages are the one thing that gets harder as you get older. Kinda why immersion schooling seems like a decent idea, even if it delays other skills a bit.

You’re right, it is a thought terminating cliche for a lot of people. If you get rid of the thought terminating cliches and put in the work to understand, you open yourself up to all the ideologies, not just anarchism.

but that doesn’t make us incapable of moral judgement or unable to imagine radical alternatives to the status quo

If you want to turn this around and sell something to me, fill that in with details. Anarchists have a way of pointing out things that seem terrible, but then when you ask how things should work instead, getting really vague.

On it’s own that says nothing about the movement itself. But, when it’s literally all you can find even looking hard at an old idea, it starts to seem like there’s nothing there.

Yes, things are the way they are now for a reason, but rarely a good reason.

Doesn’t “a bunch of other things have been tried, and they had X problem” count?

On policy specifically, that’s usually the gist. There’s been a lot of history, very little is original unless new technologies are involved, and even there it’s uncommon (eg. tech monopolies are railroad monopolies).

I recommend the book Capitalist Realism by Mark Fisher, as it is what snapped me out of being a social democrat, personally.

You know, maybe I will. I’m pretty sure I did read Bullshit Jobs. Or maybe just the notes?

Actually, you pretty much nailed it, nice. TBF that makes it kind of a trick question, since it’s not neatly in any of the categories.

Do you think the world isn’t complicated? Even anarchists usually do. If anything, you see the argument that the world is too complicated to be reduced to numbers and laws.

Does it have to be just suspect?

When one of my grandfathers died, there was two equally-sized groups of people at his funeral who had never met or heard about each other, and knew him by a different name.

I wish there was much more to say about it. He wasn’t a spy; if he was hiding anything from the other group it was just that he was married and divorced.

American English is the most spoken kind and pretty close to British RP, so it’s not Quebecois. If you want a weird dialect, maybe Jamaican patois, or some of the ones from backcountry UK.

I think you already have the answer, and know everyone else here agrees with you.

Honestly nothing. It’s almost like a compulsion, where I feel like if I ignore something I’m a bad person.

Oh? Which ideology on that list the push for, then? I’m in the picture, I used to agree with OP on a lot and now I agree on less, but can you even guess how?

Nothing is being sold here, I literally just listed a couple anarchist things OP believes. Learning as you get older is a real phenomenon, at least for most people. And, there’s no shortage of older people who have more complex, less absolute ideas about any number of things than they did when they were younger.

You did this yourself by extolling the virtues of markets as a defense of capitalism, apparently not knowing that markets are not exclusive to capitalism.

I used a different word on purpose, because capitalism doesn’t really have a consistent definition. According to Hexbear, China isn’t capitalist despite having all the associated features, for example.

That a revolution might work out well.

I used to think starting over fresh sounded like a great idea, and the only question was if it actually justifies spilling any blood. Now, having learned a lot more about human nature, and having seen a bunch of politics as it’s actually practiced, the French and Russian revolutions turned out exactly like they always had to.

For reference, the French one sucked all the way through and then failed, with the silver lining that it planted ideas which became useful and important generations later. The USSR is too recent to objectively comment on in that way, but it’s not impossible it will end up seen in the same light.

Obviously, it varies, but a thing often happens where as you’re exposed to the details of how the world works you start to realise the generations who came before and made it weren’t total idiots.

Thinking it all makes sense isn’t where that goes, but “a monopoly on the use of force is probably necessary” or “markets are more airtight than people think” can be.

The irony there being you now have more car than just a single large vehicle. Although you won’t be driving more than one at once.

You’re basically down to 0 strong parties. And really 2 is a minimum, since if there’s more the other parties can just go around any one or two that are being dumb.

Anarchism has the critical difference from other political factions in that, in one way or another, they don’t believe that a government with a monopoly on the use of force is necessary.

Libertarians usually think something needs to take on that role, if maybe at a minimal level, although if you add no government to a libertarian you get an anarcho-capitalist. If you subtract it from left-wing anarchism, you probably just get a vaguely progressive person.