Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:11:52 No. 646693
>My thing is, why does it seem impossible for people that soyface over sci-fi futures to actually imagine a new form of society?
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:14:55 No. 646697
>>646693 Honestly he really was
Then they took his universe and shat capitalist realism all over it anyway :)
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:18:20 No. 646701
Modern society considers science to be value-neutral and unbiased. Scientific progress as linear process not contingent on any social/political/economic factors leading humanity to an inevitable utopia. There's a reason economics field desperately want to pass off as an actual science.>Just believe in science brah it'll solve everything
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:35:52 No. 646716
>>646712 Any of the ones from the 20th century, not the new garbage.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:37:06 No. 646718
>>646707 Make them watch capitalist realism propaganda?
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:44:28 No. 646723
>>646707 The point of star trek is that communist society is impossible unless we develop impossible magical tech
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:44:37 No. 646724
>>646718 Please explain how Star Trek is capitalist realism.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:56:16 No. 646735
>>646723 >The point of star trek is that communist society is impossible unless we develop impossible magical tech <slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. “Liberation” is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse… Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 15:59:06 No. 646741
>>646735 Guess that can be considered correct
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 16:01:43 No. 646745
>>646723 The Prime Directive is a big stumbling bloc as it basically is the idea of civilizations having to pull themselves up by their bootstraps (taking the idea of uplifting civilizations off the table) and in context of the cold war saying it is bad for the Soviet Bloc to help the global south industrialize.
>>646735 Yet the steam engine goes back to Vespasian that didn't see the point of them when Rome not only had slaves but an unemployment problem with plebeians. So the problem is not tech.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 16:06:50 No. 646755
>>646745 >Yet the steam engine goes back to Vespasian What exactly does that prove? Do you think that the ancient Romans would have had the technology in terms of metallurgy, chemistry, engineering, etc. to design steam engines comparable to those of the 19th century? Obviously the level of development of the productive forces has a huge impact on what forms of social organization are feasible. Capitalism can't exist in a world without the technology for intensive industrial production and capital accumulation, nor can it exist in a world where scarcity no longer exists. The fact that Roddenberry recognized that technology like the replicator would make capitalism impossible shows he was familiar with the basics of materialist thinking.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 16:10:46 No. 646764
>>646756 That post agrees with me. It's not enough to build an extremely simplistic steam engine. There are all sorts of peripheral technologies and developments which go into making something like that feasible on a mass scale. What good is a steam engine if you lack the knowledge of metallurgy to forge the proper parts, or withstand the necessary pressures?
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 16:11:57 No. 646766
>>646764 I don’t have an argument then. Your right tech does matter to societal change
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 16:15:23 No. 646771
>>646755 >>646751 What it proves is the superstructure forms the shape of technology. For example the early Internet came from the Pentagon's desire of having a computer network that can withstand a nuclear strike on the US mainland yet the modern web moved away from that decentralization not due to tech allowing for centralization but due to the end of the cold war removing that political concern.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 20:48:00 No. 647162
Capitalism isn't going anywhere for the foreseeable future, if not for the rest of the human race's existence, if not also the entire existence of any potential post-human species we may evolve into.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 21:32:18 No. 647240
Maybe the reason why the future will be money-less is because in the end stage of capitalism, that we have entered now, every capitalist tries to be a bank that prints money, it will be the privatization of money. Not in the way Bitcoin crypto-bros are hoping for. It will be every single corporation relentlessly picking at the brains of people to get them to buy into their corporate schemes. It will cause everybody to become alienated from the money-form.
>>646735 Star trek is a fully realized communist society something like that can only be build by a socialist stage.
>>647167 >seething fukuyamoid lol that is so true
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 21:37:47 No. 647247
>>646684 >Type 1 civilization will have a universal currency and how fucking bitcoin is the way there, whilst also discussing how this society would basically end inequality between people. These people lack basic understanding in Marxism but so does OP.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 21:39:28 No. 647248
>>646684 Because futurology shills just jerk off over technology and don't understand/hate politics, sociology, etc etc. More technology = more betterer.
Anonymous 2021-12-17 (Fri) 18:26:33 No. 649764
>>646684 >why does it seem impossible for people that soyface over sci-fi futures to actually imagine a new form of society what they're soyfacing over aren't new forms of society, but new tech and meeting weird aliens
tricorders, advanced medicine, fasors, starships, moon colonies, asteroid miners etc. and klingons, romulans, vulcans etc.
that's all they're interested in
Anonymous 2021-12-17 (Fri) 18:34:10 No. 649773
>futurology
Anonymous 2021-12-17 (Fri) 22:49:01 No. 650090
>>646735 Graeber debunked this shit
Anonymous 2021-12-17 (Fri) 23:01:16 No. 650105
>>650090 Not really son playing at being master and servant is a whole different ballgame from say the horrors of slavery expansion to the west of the USA antebellum
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 01:55:28 No. 650240
>>646684 Modern pop sci fi tards are either the Bill Gates type optimist liberals or the hyper ancap techbros. The rest got drowned out in the noise of these people. They can’t imagine the fact that historically technology can’t be developed and implemented with actual systemic change in the production and distribution relationships. To them all technology can be developed under capitalism. Which is hilariously wrong seeing how primitive communism was crushed by slave society because of agriculture, it in turn get crushed by the serfdom system of feudalism and then replaced by industrialism when capitalism came about.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 18:46:38 No. 651290
>>646745 They didn't have a useful steam engine in Roman times, what they had was basically something like a tea kettle mounted on a pivot so that when steam came out of the spout it would create some small torque and the thing would spin around. Huge world of difference between that and a machine that can use steam to pump water up vertically through significant heights, which became useful for coal-mining since the shafts were usually filled with water. Also see
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3100893 on how the development of the steam engine was connected with developments in science
Anonymous 2021-12-29 (Wed) 18:00:27 No. 665849
Because most of them are just sci-fi nerds and sci-fi has been largely depoliticized through the same processes and transformations that depoliticized most media. This has trained them to think about technology in a particular and mostly wrong-headed way.
Anonymous 2021-12-29 (Wed) 18:06:17 No. 665856
>>646712 TNG mostly. Avoid crap like DS9 that shits all over the economy canon.
Anonymous 2021-12-29 (Wed) 19:03:39 No. 665916
>>646684 They are soyfaced sci fi retards specifically because they can't imagine a non capitalist world so they just retreat into escapism and the idea that commodites will solve our problems.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:19:19 No. 666273
>>646707 I love the scenes in star trek where you have contemporary humans meeting people from the future cause it shows not just how much technological progress there has been, but also cultural. It literally the same if today we contacted some savage who lived in a cave. He would be shocked at our way of living.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:23:13 No. 666277
>>646745 >>646751 >>646755 >>646764 >>646766 We had an almost identical discussion about roman industrialization and roman steam engines a few years ago. It's spooky how similar this current discussion was to the past one.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:30:16 No. 666288
>>666280 >You may live to see mecha dystopia yet anon. I rather live in a bright future without mecha than a dark one with them fam
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:36:28 No. 666293
>>646751 >Original innovation is a meme, what matters is building on old concepts to make better more productive tools I don't believe this.
Stuff like lasers, radio signals, nuclear reactors, solid state electronic components like diodes , what old concepts are those based off ?
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:40:12 No. 666295
>>666293 >technology is invented in thin air with no historical context factoring into it lol lmao
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:42:27 No. 666298
>>666280 >>666288 mecha would loose against "oldshool" weapons like tanks or helicopter gunships, because mechs are big easy targets.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:43:55 No. 666300
>>666298 >mecha would loose against "oldshool" weapons like tanks or helicopter gunships, because mechs are big easy targets. Burger detected.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 01:46:16 No. 666301
>>666295 That's not what he said. He said that that tech tried to make something new instead of making a current thing more efficient. Nowdays you don't see much of that. Our whole culture is about "execution of an idea instead of an idea", which while important, leaves you slightly better copies of the previous thing instead of something new.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 02:07:09 No. 666328
>>666301 There is no such thing as something new
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 02:15:09 No. 666337
>>666295 >>666328 Example time: Einstein came up with the idea for lasers when he wrote physics papers about photons. So the idea for lasers is derived from the observation of material reality. It didn't come from nothing, but it also did not have any historical priors.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 02:23:07 No. 666350
>>666328 Well, if we gonna argue about definitions then we can do it day and night cause definitions aren't really that great to communicate, so I'll give an example and a cultural one. Before Star Wars we never had space operas or light sabers, even though a light saber is a combination of some plasma weapon and a sword. Both which existed in our imagination, but were never combined in such unique way. Today movies have alterations on lightsabers and space operas, but are afraid to think up completely new genres. The same can be said about all parts of our society. I already talked how tech is just more efficient and it's hard to convince people to think up something new, the same is true for movies. Everything is a remake of some franchise which existed decades ago. Same can be said about music, where are the new music genres? This is a problem of culture which only can repeat the past with slight alteration, but never imagine it in a new way.
It's actually even more funny when you see people break out of this. If not some people at SpaceX who tried to experiment, I'm sure our rockets would be made to burn up to this day. They decided to imagine a rocket as a reusable vechicle and are in the process of making the first spaceships like you see in sci-fi movies, instead of explosives that shoot some small payload.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 02:25:48 No. 666354
It's not that it's impossible for someone to imagine. Plenty of Futurists such as Jacque Fresco have imagined an advanced society without capitalist hierarchy and money. The tech he described isn't even all that out of reach. The reason some people can't imagine is because they think history only goes one way. Essentially they see capitalism as having always existed through human civilization so it will always exist in some form. They see feudalism as just capitalism plus slavery and kingdoms. This can be worked with though just reframe communism as the new form of capitalism but maybe call it something else.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 18:19:19 No. 667068
Arthur C. Clarke (big sci fi author and co-writer of 2001: A Space Odyssey) sometimes wrote nonfiction futurology pieces, I was looking through his 1962 book Profiles of the Future and in chapter 14 he did recognize the long-term potential of fully automated general-purpose manufacturing technologies, which he called "Replicators", to undermine capitalism and produce what nowadays we would call a post-scarcity economy:
Incidentally, this section may have been a big inspiration on Gene Roddenberry's vision of a post-scarcity future–Roddenberry is quoted at
https://arthurcclarke.org/site/how-arthur-c-clarke-helped-save-star-trek/ saying "Arthur literally made my Star Trek idea possible, including the television series, the films, and the associations and learning it has made possible for me. My association with the Clarke mind and concepts began in 1964 with his book Profiles of the Future". The 1967 Trek writer's bible also included a line suggesting he was already imagining a non-capitalist future (made more explicit in Star Trek: TNG, which also had 'replicators') but skirted around the issue because "television today simply will not let us get into details of Earth's politics of Star Trek's century; for example, which socio-economic system ultimately worked out best."
It's true that Clarke presented the "Replicator" as an extremely advanced technology far off in the future, but in a 1969 interview discussed at
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/11/goal/ he did seem to suggest that more near-term advances in automation might undermine the capitalist system, saying "The goal of the future is full unemployment, so we can play. That’s why we have to destroy the present politico-economic system."
I think even if we imagine more near-future technological advances, we still have the basic principle that fully automated manufacturing would lead to self-replicating machines whose production costs would go down to raw materials and energy, which would probably dramatically drive down profits from manufacturing in a competitive capitalist system, not to mention that some governments or communities might purchase their own self-replicating manufacturing facilities to be run on a non-profit basis, a sort of "public option" competing with the privately owned ones.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 18:23:17 No. 667072
>>666273 And then all of that disappeared with nu-Trek, where everyone acts like a 21st century Marvel character
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 21:07:48 No. 667227
>>666354 >This can be worked with though just reframe communism as the new form of capitalism but maybe call it something else. Super capitalism.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 23:49:17 No. 667415
>>667230 Anime isn’t real
Mech suits would be defeated by the laws of physics, gravity would prevent something that large from moving in the way such suits are portrayed
Fiction isn’t real life
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 00:37:17 No. 667516
Because futurology has become copium rather than a positive vision of the future. They need the techno-rapture to come save them because they cannot dare to envision an alternative to capitalism. Thinking that enough Elon Musk's and other techno losers will save humanity.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 00:54:49 No. 667537
>>667415 >Anime isn’t real That's what you think.
>Mech suits would be defeated by the laws of physics, gravity would prevent something that large from moving in the way such suits are portrayed They said the same thing about going to space.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 00:55:11 No. 667538
>>667415 That's why western mechs are better, because they're big slow stompy boys.
Though sure, long range missiles make any kind of mech/tank obsolete but whatever, it's fun. Besides tanks still have their place on the battlefield even if they don't play a central role anymore, mechs could too.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:03:45 No. 667548
>>667537 > That's what you think. No, that’s reality, put down the funko pop for even 30 seconds
> They said the same thing about going to space. When, in the fucking 19th Century?
I know this is leftypol, so freakishly low bar, like literally, lower expectations than I have for actual children
But please tell me you’re not genuinely so fucking stupid you can’t recognize the difference between launching a rocket out of Earth’s atmosphere and having a giant human shaped robot stomping around on Earth’s surface
>>667538 I mean, mechs are cool and fun, but people that don’t realize those things couldn’t actually even exist on Earth are stupid, and like you said, they’d be pretty useless due to rockets and missiles anyway
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:20:43 No. 667565
>>667563 >In this fictional show Opinion discarded
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:25:42 No. 667570
>>667568 >Spaceships existed in my soy faggot media before they were invented! God I really hate you fiction fags and your little soy fucking arguments
Just because a few things from fiction could actually be replicated in real life doesn’t mean all or most of it can, or will you start explaining how superhero comics and fucking fantasy means we will one day tech magic our way into actual superpowers you dumb soy sipping bitch?
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:29:40 No. 667572
>>667563 Jesus Christ that looks like dogshit. What was the last action anime that didn't have these fucking awful cel-shaded 3D models?
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:36:42 No. 667577
>>667568 But they existed as technical proposals with calculations and experiments by people like Tsiolkovsky and Goddard before they became popular in fiction, who are the engineers drawing up serious proposals for giant fighting mech robots that move as quickly as the human body?
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 01:58:34 No. 667590
>>667577 Gundam lifted its colony design from American physicist Gerard K. O'Neill and again it explained these mechs were engineered for space with the first prototypes literally being weaponized heavy machinery for colony construction. Then it explained how that became so power by saying they have fusion rectors thus each mech has more energy production then Three Mile Island and even had them using radiation from unshielded fusion reactors to jam radar to explain why long range missiles were not effective.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 02:09:18 No. 667605
>>667590 So my next question is why the fuck they’d design robots shaped like people for zero-g construction instead of something more useful, like a giant mech octopus thing
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 02:17:16 No. 667612
>>667605 Rule of cool. They did lamp shade it where a later prototype mech didn't have its legs attached yet and the technician told the pilot they don't really need legs for space combat.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 10:03:24 No. 667933
When you hit the point where the cost of production becomes inconsequential for a normal person , then economic models that rely on scarcity break down , you could say that everything becomes socialist if you are feeling generous , but but post-scarcity and end stage socialism are probably the same thing.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 10:33:09 No. 667950
>>667590 You've partially justified the existence of space habitats but the fact that the colonies in Gundam are derived from some fanciful thinking done by a physicist in no way implies that mechs would be feasible to built in real life.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 11:34:52 No. 667975
>>667570 I'm going to start saving now and I'll be vindicated when the AR chips become mandatory and you poorfags have shitty default avatars, while I get the coolest, limited edition skins and overlays. I'll look the best, smell the best and my dopamine quota will be at least double than you peasants.
Long live soy tech! Gamers rise up!
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 17:46:54 No. 668178
>>646707 >the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force this doesn't make a lot of sense though because what is accumulated is just a dead byproduct of a bigger process but not a driving force in itself
the driving force is worship, endless worship and the consequence of that worship will always lead to the same outcome of money and property being in the hands of a few
worship of markets
worship of the state
and similar entities
it is nihilistic worship because all of those things have no intrinsic meaning unless they are in relation to each other, meaning they can not derive meaning directly out of themselves
money derives it's meaning not from the commodities that can be gained through it's accumulation but it has first and foremost a sentimental value which is the creation of value through indirect means via the people
Capitalism was born out of Christianity and behaves in very similar ways because it is it's base and that leads to problems because this base is a dead religion meaning the world will be engulfed in Nihilism
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 19:37:16 No. 668267
>>666300 he is right though
the battleship called Bismarck was sank by inferior tech
https://de-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de the inherent weakness of walkers is they topple over easily due to their leg design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnl9ffCfrsc Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 20:07:46 No. 668303
>>668267 To be fair battleship doctrine even then required battleship to be protected by cruisers and destroyers in a battle group with the idea the AA artillery of the entire fleet makes an impenetrable wall of flak for airpower. Going up against Yamato's battleship group during Midway would have been a slaughter for those biplanes with the Yamato sinking late in the war because the IJN just threw it out without its support (kinda like just having a lone Abrams tank go alone in a charge then being shocked as it gets wrecked). Post war the issue was while battleships still had freighting firepower, they have to get much closer to their target then carrier groups.
Mechs in Anime can easily get back up.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 20:52:42 No. 668335
>>668267 I can't speak for the other anon but I was trolling upthread. My post about burger detected was a reference to how American posters are a meme on /m/ because they go on this same autistic rant every single day of the year about how mechs would lose against tanks. It's funny how they think this is some deep insight.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 21:03:22 No. 668343
>>668338 The problem is the enemy can nuke you back, NATO cold war wargames constantly had opforce always instantly escalating to full scape nuclear retaliation against NATO whenever NATO used a tactical nuke as NATO generals playing the USSR said what good are ICBMs if don't use them?
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 21:06:30 No. 668349
>>668343 >The problem is the enemy can nuke you back, NATO cold war wargames constantly had opforce always instantly escalating to full scape nuclear retaliation against NATO whenever NATO used a tactical nuke as NATO generals playing the USSR said what good are ICBMs if don't use them? What good is imagining how war would play out against a nuclear armed force if it will never happen because of mutually assured destruction? All questions of first world nuclear armed countries fighting are pointless. It will never happen THEY WILL LAUNCH THE NUKES. Conventional land war and air war between two nuclear armed countries has never happened and will never happen because if it starts, the full nuclear arsenal will be launched on the first day.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 21:10:59 No. 668352
>>668349 I should clarify. That's how I would declare first vs. second world. Do you have a nuke? If you have an proliferation treaty approved nuke and ICBMS or nuclear armed subs, you have a permanent seat on the,
nuke council security council. China, Russia, US, France, England.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 22:01:07 No. 668401
>>668056 >In space the issue of weight doesn't apply Inertia still applies though, you'd need huge rapidly-changing forces to get giant robot limbs to do complicated rapid accelerations to match movements of human limbs, and giant hunks doing such fast accelerations might also break apart under the strain
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 22:43:20 No. 668462
>>668401 Based even better science understander
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 22:56:33 No. 668474
>>668401 You underestimate the strength of steel (that actually bends before breaking). For example the recoil of large artillery doesn't cause them to break.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 15:47:20 No. 669352
>>668352 Oh shit you are right it is the Nuke council that have permanent seats. So to have a permeant seat you have to have nukes got it. So when the DPRK ever going to get one.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:40:37 No. 669682
>>668474 OK but are we talking about mech suits only a few times bigger than a person, or giant ones as big as tall buildings? Most artillery guns aren't that huge, and the biggest one was apparently one built by the Nazis called the "Schwerer Gustav", if you look at the shots of it firing at around 20 seconds into
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf3fgfHoTOc&t=20s it doesn't look like the acceleration is that dramatic compared to how much a person can accelerate their arms. Also the force causing the acceleration in an artillery gun is perpendicular to the cross-section, which is "normal" stress, as opposed to "shear" stress parallel to the cross-section (see the diagram at
https://amarineblog.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/what-is-shear-stress.jpg ), which I think would be more likely to fracture a giant metal beam.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 22:13:32 No. 669711
>>669315 The mirror universe is the actual prophecy for our future.
Unique IPs: 47