you seem to like Hadestown? What's it about? I looked it up on you tube, and saw something two hours long. I'm not very good at paying attention to long videos tho-
Okay so
The musical itself is like 2.5 hours but you definately don’t have to watch it through to enjoy!
Hadestown is a musical (very jazzy style music) that combines two ancient myths, the tale of Orpheus and Eurydice (the dude whose wife died and walked to the underworld for her, was told she could come with him only if he walked in front and didn’t look back, but then he looked back and lost her forever) and the tale of Persephone and Hades (the god of the underworld kidnaps an earth goddess, but nothing will grow without her, so they decide she gets half the year in earth and half with him once they are married).
Hadestown takes a very anti-capitalist stance to the myth, with climate change being caused by the industrialization Hades does while Persephone is away, and is really special to me and a lot of others because Orpheus, who is autistic, is seen as touched by the gods themselves. The underworld is also a kingdom ran by two black people so that’s cool. The cast also has lots of amazing shenanigans (if you want a taste search my blog for irreplaceable ecstasy 😂). The musical has TWs for drugs, alcohol, someone getting beaten up on stage, and some very creepy old guy vibes.
If you’re curious you can find the soundtrack on Spotify! Or ask me more 😊I don’t just like Hadestown I am consumed by it lol
26 notes
·
View notes
My Political Manifesto:
In order for an ideal society to come into being, there must be certain agreed upon elements. Number one: Extensive Social Programs are needed. I don't care if you're conservative or progressive. I'm probably a bit of both in different ways myself (I hate change in my personal life and I like monarchies, but I like things like socialism).
Whether you be Conservative or Progressive, you must acknowledge the importance of a social safety net. If you can't do that, then clearly you don't have empathy for those who can't care for themselves or who might not be able to work (like me). In all cases, social programs are a necessary facet of government.
And when I say extensive social programs, I mean extensive. I don't care fully if we get rid of money, but we really need to at least devalue it. Money is just paper. You can always print more. Economics are a scam created to support the idea that money is fundamentally a part of society. It isn't. It can be, but it doesn't have to be. If you need to print more money to provide for all these social programs, do it. Nobody can stop you. It's just paper, after all. Merely paper society has convinced us contains deep value and significance.
Getting back to the Extensive Social Programs, they truly will need to be expansive in their power. We need a UBI, a national healthcare system, Unemployment Insurance and Benefits, Disability Insurance and Benefits, etc. We will need all the social programs. A government that doesn't provide for its citizens cannot be said to be a truly compassionate government.
Once society has agreed to support all these extensive social programs unconditionally, then the main mission I have been pushing for will be complete. I still have other objectives politically, of course. But my first priority is making sure that the government knows to care for all of it's peoples. If you can't work or if you're incredibly shy or if you otherwise can't function in this cutthroat world of ours, the government should care for you and make sure you're not neglected. If the government isn't willing to do this, then they have abandoned the people. And once they've abandoned their people, no government can be fully and truly legitimate.
Once society has learned how to care for its citizens (cost be damned! You can't put a price on these services! Not when they help so many!), then my main goal is finished. Once we've learned that you can't put a price on helping people, then I will be at peace. I have taught people that economics and fiscal matters are all nonsense and idiocy invented by people in the 1700s. Economics were not around when humanity was first created. They are a social construct, and a useless one at that. The sooner they're stamped out the better I say!
Once I have destroyed the foul spectre of capitalism and economics, there's only a few more things I'd want to advocate for. I would advocate for pacifism and a promotion of peace on a global scale.
I would also advocate for the abandonment of most forms of social conservatism. I understand it's easy to be afraid of the unfamiliar (I've been afraid of new things too), so I can't really hate people for that on it's own. But (and this is important) you can't use that fear as an excuse to torment people who are different from you. We are all humans. We all think, we all feel. You cannot be so quick to judge. A little Conservatism in your personal life and affairs is one thing (lord knows I've been afraid of changes in my personal life), but conservatism should never be used an excuse to discriminate against those who are different from you. That's the opposite of my message with my Social Programs: For a society to function, you must have compassion for those around you. Social Conservatism tends to destroy that empathetic quality in people. It is not a good ideology, not at all.
I would also advocate for monarchism (or at least not for the abolishment of monarchies). Even in this ideal world of mine, I don't see the problem with monarchies. They are a good rallying point for people, and it would also just be unfair to get rid of most of them. I'd be fine with making them only symbolic figureheads, but we shouldn't abolish them. That usually leads to cruelty and unnecessary violence. Anyone who is so devoted to the abolishment of monarchism that they want to have a repeat of the French Revolution has ignored my tenant of compassion and empathy. You may not like royal families, but killing them is just inhumane. Monarchs are people too. And all people deserve compassion and empathy. Complete hatred of someone leads to violence, and that always ends badly.
Also, outlaw eugenics and impose harsh penalties on anything promoting survival of the fittest ideologies. I understand Charles Darwin was a genius biologist, but I legitimately think this world would be better off without evolution. Too many people use it to promote hateful beliefs and violence against people with disabilities.
Although I have a lot of other beliefs too, I think this is a good place to stop for now. If you want to establish a movement, there's got to be room for at least some mild disagreement between members of the movement. But as long as people can rally behind my core tenants of extensive social programs and a government/society that shows compassion to all its members, then I think I can really make this into a movement.
4 notes
·
View notes
we have the solutions
but not the good sense or good will to use them.
ofc that isn't entirely accurate. there are definitely people out there doing their parts in every way that they can.
and then there are those like elon who have so much wealth they could change millions of lives in an instant.
people are more or less aware that this game is rigged. against us. all of us. there are some who benefit much much more from this. they are hurt much less and in different ways.
imagine being socialized to be an oppressor via cultural forces. to think you're better because of the color of your skin. if you happen to see passed the privilege that gives you.. that has got to be pretty shitty.
but not as shitty as being on the receiving end. indigenous people, jewish people, women, and lgbtqia+ people. anyone disabled, neurodivergent, or unacceptable by society's standards..
the military industrial complex. big oil and big farma. big agriculture. etc.
our world has been orchestrated by oligarch/aristocrat types for hundreds of years.
they know what they're doing.
we all know what we could be doing better.
yet we're not.
and people wonder why i pray for aliens, for a miracle. why i devote my self to spiritual cultivation above all else.
this world will continue until we destroy it ourselves.
that is a big job with a lot of responsibility. there is a lot of mysterious shit going on with our planet. with the people running it.
even if none of that is true... the machine we are up against is immense. but it is made of humans (?)
let's reason with those we can and let's do the most humane to those we cannot. that is exemplary. that is justice.
yes we can def punish people in humane ways. i've always disliked the idea of killing but if there is 100% a way to make such a person pay while keeping them alive AND having them learn.. i would prefer it.
2 notes
·
View notes
Anti-Capitalism and ChatGPT
(wordcount: 1,177)
Here’s the thing. I’ll be the first to admit that ChatGPT is cool, yeah? And I’m far from ignorant of the wonderful things it’s made possible. But there’s a pretty big problem with its professional usage,
and before you stop reading,
I promise that the point of this post is not "you have to stop using ChatGPT." Just. Stick with me for a minute, cuz contrary to what you might expect, this is not a problem contained to just the normies that don’t use ChatGPT: this is about how ChatGPT will affect you.
I’m about to use some scary words like “scalping” and “exploitation,” but remember I’m not accusing you of anything. In fact, let’s start with the good stuff.
Among other things, it could be argued that ChatGPT actually enhances workplace accessibility by “leveling the playing field,” in a way. Any job candidate can quickly make up for lack of time/skill/ability in one area by using ChatGPT to fill in the gaps, right? An individual’s personal quality of life can improve by “outsourcing” aspects of their work to ChatGPT — they have more free time, and maybe their work quality and pay grade improve too.
But I’d like to point out that this isn’t ChatGPT making life better for employees. This is actually ChatGPT eliminating the entire role of “employee.”
Okay, crazy statement time:
A person using ChatGPT in a professional setting is no longer an employee, but, in practice, actually a corporation.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? Well, in concise terms, ChatGPT catalyzes the exploitation of labor by collecting it all in one place, meaning that the labor of hundreds of people can be scalped and represented as the work of a single entity: the individual using ChatGPT.
This essentially transforms the individual employee into a CEO of their own small corporation, which is being outsourced to larger corporations for work. Our new “CEO” doesn’t even have to pay any “employees,” keeping all of the profit they earned with the labor scalped by ChatGPT. This is why the individual is able to reap so much more profit from using ChatGPT than they ever could from working as a single employee.
You may think I’m trying to frame our new little “CEO” as the villain of this story, but it’s exactly the opposite. They’re just playing by the rules of the system, and within the system, it’s way nicer being a corporation than it is living as an employee. It’s just proof of concept that life on top is exactly as easy as we’ve all been guessing it is, and the only requirement for leveling up is a willingness to exploit labor. ChatGPT is a shiny new miracle tool that makes exploitation easy and accessible to everyone, and it doesn’t even look or feel like exploitation because there are no faces attached.
But that’s where this short-term improvement goes downhill: it’s accessible to everyone, including the actual corporations, who have already amassed the means to exploit labor en masse. If ChatGPT gives individuals a level-up by eliminating the role of employee and allowing them to act as corporations, how does that same level-up work when a corporation uses it? Well, I guess it’s a good thing the role of “employee” has been eliminated, because they aren’t needed anymore lol: not if your goal is to turn a profit, and we all know that’s just how things go.
But hey— galaxy brain here, but couldn’t that be kind of a good thing actually? The current system doesn’t function without people on the bottom who are available for exploitation, so if ChatGPT can automate the exploited parties for us by scalping labor from the past, then doesn’t that mean that the endless work necessitating human employment in the first place is finally… unnecessary? For the first time ever, we could be looking at a society where pretty much all of the labor is already accounted for, meaning all humans are free to pursue any passion they want regardless of their background, regardless of their class, regardless of how much money they- oh, right… Money.
The world I described above either sounds like a utopia to you or a dogshit stupid pipe dream, and unfortunately, both are true.
The problem is,
while technology has advanced to the point where it’s finally ready for automated labor, society has not.
We still live in a system where if you don’t work, you don’t eat, regardless of whether any work actually needs to be done. So… what actually happens in the current system if labor is automated?
Well, I won’t bore you with the typical “THE ROBOTS ARE TAKING ALL OUR JOBS” routine, but like. It’s only half wrong? I mean, we don’t even have the tech to automate all labor anyway, so it’s not like that’s literally what’s happening. But there are still… a lot of jobs that can be automated now, and that puts a lot of people in positions where they have to compete with ChatGPT in order to keep food on the table. It’s already a losing battle for a lot of people.
Using ChatGPT gives you a taste of corporate power, of the ability to exploit if it makes things financially easier for you. And that’s understandable, right? We’re all struggling in a system like this. Just don’t forget that line of reasoning when it comes full circle, where instead of getting to do the exploiting, you’re the one being exploited (again). Don’t forget what it was like to be on top: how normal it felt, reasonable, unremarkable. It didn’t feel like exploitation when you only experienced the profits. That is who owns you now. Let that radicalize you.
So long story short,
the existence and usage of ChatGPT is not the problem. In a better world, you’re right that ChatGPT could be a great ally, but the current structure of the job market has transformed it into a competitor. The human working class and ChatGPT are forced to compete against each other, not because it is rational for us to be enemies, but because the system pits all laborers against each other for the “privilege” of work. People are realizing that they really can’t beat the competition this time, so don’t scold them when they don’t share your enthusiasm. We’re all dogs in this fight, and ChatGPT has fucking lazer eyes.
It’s not the end of the world – the job market has always been prone to fluctuation – but this is different from your average fluctuation. It re-frames so much that used to seem impossible, but if we don’t change the system itself to match this advancement in technology, I guarantee it’s not gonna be the people at the top who pay the price.
The choice is not whether or not to use ChatGPT.
The choice is whether to discontinue ChatGPT so that society can continue with the relative stability it had before, or to embrace ChatGPT as the ally it could be by changing the structures that weaponize it against us.
(Okay I’m getting off my soapbox now, I sure hope nobody else is in this abandoned soapbox factory, can you imagine how embarrassing it would be if anyone actually heard me say all that lol)
2 notes
·
View notes