I believe that if the economy was going to be rooted towards democratic planning as opposed to market forces, then there would need to be some way to distribute the resources of the world in a way that all people benefit. In such a system, certain groups that inhabit areas with more resources must necessarily share them, even at their own possible detriment, with areas that do not have as many resources, if not the world could not have equal development among its citizens

I agree I'm just saying Oppressed Nations considerations will be taken with higher priorities than those of people who are responsible colonizing and have reaped the benefits of the imperialist system

I've read this article and others like it. Again, I dont recall a single crisis which hasnt served as a backdrop for EU doomsday theorising.

Ultimately, these nations know they're stronger in than out and time and time again have come together and negotiated and reached an amicable solution.

I don't actually agree that Feudalism & Slavery were overthrown, that's definitely a bit of an oversimplification. I mean, sure, you can point to the French Revolution, or you can point to, say, the US Civil War (questionably), but in the wider scheme of these systems, these were kind of isolated incidents more than drivers of such concepts being systematically disassembled. I think it would be more apt to say that instead of them being overthrown (implying active uprising), that a variety of intersecting factors led to them essentially being phased out.
The reason why I say this is because it's not like every other country had their own iterations of the French Revolution; like sure, there widespread movements in some countries (i.e. Romania) which pushed for the abolition of feudalism and/or slavery, but many of these weren't actually the reason for why feudalism subsided in such countries, and the influence of these revolutions are debatable. Some of the reasons why Feudalism subsided were because of increased government centralization, effects of population decline (i.e. black death) & militarism, shift of powers away from nobles, and various other things, like new economic incentives from trade which prior didn't exist. Peasant revolts did carry some level of influence, don't get me wrong, but I wouldn't say this was universal in why Feudalism as a wider system ceased.
Same with slavery imo. The idea of slavery having been ended through revolution is a very westernized idea, to where I'm surprised you'd say that. In the US, let's be honest, despite abolitionist movements, the real pressure for slavery to end became less humanistic and more because of rushed economic disparities. The Civil War wasn't solely about slavery, it's not like the Union wanted to wage a war solely because of the rights of black people. The abolition of slavery came as a tiered result of it, sure, but that wasn't the main influence. And elsewhere in the world, the end of the slavery by no means came because of revolution. The arabic slave trade for example never had any form of such. It basically just stopped because of various influential factors, or, alternatively never actually stopped, hence the existence of slavery - still - in north africa (and underground in Qatar, despite it being "technically" illegal). Certain places in the middle east didn't have it criminalized or made illegal until late 20th century to mid 21st century and it was essentially because of international pressure. While certain european countries (again, Romania) has slavery revolts the global systems of slavery definitely didn't come to a halt because of revolutions, it's hard to say even individually which ones really did. I'm sure you'd also agree that even in a modern context, it's not like slavery has been abolished, given the use of slave labor still by multi-billion dollar conglomerates abroad.
I think this is why, like, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of systems being rotated out, but these are typically natural processes because of influential intersecting socio-economic/socio-political factors. Like I don't disagree hyper-capitalism will likely lead to the end of industrial capitalism, but I doubt the reason will have anything to do with revolution or uprising, despite the fact they may exist parallel to such happening anyway

Is it sensationalist to say the US infrastructure is crumbling?

I think yes and no, but it's a complicated issue.
US infrastructure is poor, but our country is also f***ing massive, and even on a state level, there are state-federal restrictions and procedures which complicate infrastructural implementations. I don't think things like highways are honestly that bad consideirng just how much of a landmass they have to cover, but yeah, things like public transit are awful, and probably will never really be "fixed" if fixed is assume to mean "as good as a country like Japan", because it's not such horrible organizations like the MTA (even though they certainly carry some blame ofc), but rather the actual logistics behind it. Like even if you wanted to reform the subways in, say, NYC, what do you? Tell everyone not to sleep at night because of how loud it'll be and close off half the city to tear up the streets? There are other questions which people just don't really care about answering to, so they aren't built into a budget. Like for example, train lines - where should they be? Where should they go to? etc.
Other things like internet, electricity, etc. are regional. The size of the country - and culture of maintenance - has a lot to do with it.

Love the avi strangelove>>
So overall it’s more complicated then people give it credit for. Yeah I agree

thanks, it's from the deleted alt cut of the ending, i know people before thought it was photoshopped or something since that ending isnt super widespread or known

don't get me wrong, i think that we definitely need a lot of infrastrucure reform, so i'm not giving it a pass, i'm just saying that it's less because of simple malfeasance or lack of caring and more because of logistical challenges and postponement (because of such) which has now lead to a cycle of if you ignore it, it gets worse, but if you change it, it leads to massive logistical challenges. like i know the entire country isn't NYC, but to givey ou an example, they tried to overhaul the L-line of the subway in NYC, and that simple closure for overhaul construction messed up people's lives and caused so much of an issue in the city, that they had to reinstate partial service even during repairs, which thus postponed repairs. this is like an issue across the entire country though. like imagine you need to overhaul electric distribution in a big city. do you just turn off the electricity and tell people to deal with disruptions? some places are so relatively isolated that they can't just put them on a different grid or something in the mean time because of how spaced out they are

Idk if you wanna go into this but how best do you think infrastructure reform should be implemented?

I'm going to be honest, I don't think I really know or claim to have the answers. the problems are a lot easier to identify than the solutions. realistically for an easy answer, we really should have started 20-30 years ago, but now we've been just patching the same infrastructure over and over that i'm not sure fully what we can do. in the very least put more money into it from the bloated military budget, and funnel that to states maybe? i know however long ago there used to be federal funds states could tap into for infrastructural purposes, so maybe restore that? I don't know as far as logistics though. That's where it gets hard.

Idk maybe the nation guard or army engineers would be good a good idea

it'd be a good means of creating jobs too, for sure, i guess the worry is both; A) minimalizing/dealing with the disruption infrastructural changes creates, especially in centralized cities/townships, and B) guaranteeing maintenance/upkeep.

i think B is a bit of a problem because it's a cultural rather than political thing. like a lot of people always point to Japan and say "look how clean their infrastructure is". but it's not just a thing that "oh, Japan cleans their stations and we don't". it's how people value things; people litter way more, you have people pissing on the walls and s*** in the bathrooms, etc. I don't know how that stuff can realistically be fixed.

Thoughts on social media censorship?

Social media censorship sets a bad precedent but at this point too many idiots have a voice, whether I agree with some of their points or not.

Nothing should be censored, ever.

See Pee

Remember when the President didnt check twitter

imagine if they implemented it ages ago before trump became president. they woulda prosecuted his ass

After recent events I’ll give you this one took burning down the city to get alittle justice

@yesac

Imagine thinking that minimum wage raise is a good thing

Why isn’t it?

Because hes a 16 year old right wing libertarian

Lol this thread just gonna be synopsis being an insufferable 35 year old

"Whites are more skilled than blacks "

^ your last post on ktt1