1579
Every day. (lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chester22@api.clubsall.com 18 points 2 years ago
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago
[-] Daxtron2@startrek.website 7 points 2 years ago

We just need to have some bell riots and WW3 and then bam star trek

[-] kshade@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Don't forget to add a little bit of post-atomic horror!

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 20 points 2 years ago

Are you telling me you can't even imagine a better world?

[-] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 2 years ago

I think that they mean you still have to eat and sleep and try to have joy in your life.

[-] Squirrel@thelemmy.club 7 points 2 years ago
[-] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too

[-] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 years ago

Can you simply imagine things into existence?

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 years ago

You can act them into existence, but you'll never even start if you can't imagine anything better, even if that's just "we should improve society somewhat."

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 11 points 2 years ago
[-] lath@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Your nightmare is someone else's dream.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 points 2 years ago

My nightmare is a libertarian's wet dream?

[-] lath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

No idea. Never met a libertarian.

No realistic society can satisfy everyone, because when it comes to individual desires, "we the people" falls apart.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 years ago

How about a society that isn't predicated on the exploitation of others?

Some societies are objectively more pleasant to humans than others, otherwise we wouldn't strive at all

[-] lath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Any society needs resources. In order for a society to grow or maintain itself, their consumption of resources must not exceed the production of it. Should we pursue a society that doesn't depend on the heavy exploitation of resources, it would mean to severely limit the reproduction of its population within the society's means of sustaining them. Our planet does not have the capability to sustain our current 8 billion population.

Many of us will die and after that many would be restricted in their rights for procreation.

As such, while those societies might be pleasant for some humans, the ones it needs to get rid of to achieve its desired status won't be too happy with it needing them gone.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 years ago

I think it's doable. Sure we won't have so much cheap crap in the north, but no one needs to starve.

[-] lath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

It might be. Depends on the people really. Hopefully there will be a good example to follow.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Moving on from class society

[-] Censored@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

People all over the world have agency.

this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
1579 points (96.4% liked)

memes

18451 readers
572 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS