How to Run a Country Scientifically

[@bashirabdel-fattah9499]

I was shocked to see that a video of this quality only had 85 views (as of the time I clicked on it), and that your channel only has 65 subscribers. Luckily, it seems like the algorithm is starting to recommend it to more people.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

I appreciate that! Hopefully the algorithm will be kind to me soon

[@merarifreethought]

Imagine asking women what they would need to feel happy and safe in becoming parents. Compassion, empathy and understanding is revolutionary. Force is the status quo.

[@SpectrumOfChange]

This idea somehow has never occurred to me, you just blew my mind and this will have my gears turning. Thank you!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Happy to hear that!!

[@HighStrangeDrifter]

Lately, I’ve been thinking you could run this country on an algorithm, but then I start thinking about how hard it would be to get someone you could trust to run it honestly and tweak it s needed.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Yeah totally, I think you'd definitely need a whole team for something like that and the team would need to be accountable to the public at large to preventing having the algorithm work against the interests of the people.

[@zombi3lif3]

Cryptocurrency is already working on this problem. You just add the options upfront, so anyone can investigate them, then the people vote. No single person or team have access. Only way to get something implemented, is if 51% + of people vote for it

[@B_Estes_Undegöetz]

@@revolutionaryth0tHow do you avoid accidentally recreating the current mess we have after one starts with the ideal state of the free-market? Or avoid creating the semi-benign/ semi-sinister authoritarian dictatorship of the majoritarian / mediocrities (which is the steady state of the bourgeois capitalist society with its one or two or three major social hierarchical assumptions in place … like the tremendous economic success of the white male dominated middle class of America in the 1950s to 1971. Arguably the ideal capitalist society which if it could only be “tweaked” by adding in some social justice to accommodate for race and gender … voila … the best version of capitalism that seems possible honestly!!! Until of course you examine how much oppression of the global south and the developing world this cost too. And how much this massive US middle class success also cost Great Britain, the US’s WWII / NATO allies, the rest of Europe, Japan, thanks to Bretton Woods). this middle class American success required to bring it off! Or worse … the slow corruption of the “ common good” that selfish interests, acted upon individually can produce as long as one person or small minority group’s interests can find ways to grow to dominate most other’s interests. What you’re describing is in practice identical to the traditional open society, radically democratic “free-marketplace of ideas” with the exception that instead of assuming people will act selfishly in their own perceived best interests (like capitalism does … the old “private vice … public virtue” argument about the large scale virtue created by masses of people acting selfishly), you must find a mechanism instead by which people’s desires for economic and political action are motivated instead by what each individual believes to be in the best interests of everyone. “Someone you can trust” has never proven to be reliable. Even if you can find “someone you can trust”, which for the sake argument here I’ll take to mean always acts in good faith for what he or she perceives to be “the common good”, inevitably some people will feel cheated, since they will disagree with this person’s action, perhaps frequently enough that this person will come to question the “good faith” assumption that we just said we needed for the system to operate. How can we know that good faith is being adhered to? We keep coming back to democracy … liberal democracy … as the best tool for organizing social decision making. But the problem really arises when we combine capitalism with democracy, since capitalist institutions aren’t democratic at all, and introduce selfishness and monopolizing consolidation of private wealth and power which quickly overwhelms the democratic political process too, as we’re seeing today. The notion of the free-market and the market place of ideas is indeed the best way to determine the success or failure of many economic and political decisions, but it needs to be divorced from the idea of private property, which quickly allows individual greed to overwhelm the self-regulating nature of the free-market. But to introduce the “command economy” system of socialism in which economic decisions are decided not by market forces, but by specialists of a variety of sorts brings up the problem of selfishness and corruption from the very outset, and again requires good faith and trust not only to be assumed, but also to be guaranteed on an ongoing basis somehow. This impasse is where most democratic socialists find themselves and argumentative traditional capitalists claim at this point there’s no way of solving this problem to produce a viable, non-authoritarian, socialist political and economic system. So, they say, let’s just stick with capitalism and make sure it’s “fair” somehow. That’s what the politicians are for, they say … as they proceed to lobby these same politicians with large donations to their campaigns. Fortunately, a brilliant American philosopher named John Rawls proposed a solution to the problem, although his solution is not widely known and little talked about (probably because it could actually work … at least better than the current oligarchic capitalist system that produces a small powerful rich elite ruling class). Rawls created a clever variation of liberalism that required all deliberations regarding political and economic decisions be made behind a “veil of ignorance” regarding the race, gender, religion, age, intelligence, wealth, etc. they will occupy in the future society ruled by his / her decisions. In this way the “veil of ignorance” acts as a guarantor of the good faith of the decisions being made for the “common good” by every member of the society, or a committee of officials .. or an elected official … whatever. It can work in a variety of traditional liberal democratic political systems. It’s complex. It’s not exactly intuitive. But with today’s interactive and interconnected computerized internet world it would be possible to organize a liberal socialist society based on Rawls thinking. Of course … there’s a lot of inertia. The rich capitalists of course being the biggest source. The education required to teach people how to think in this thoroughly “good faith” manner behind a “veil of ignorance” about what one’s future fortunes would be in the society when one contemplates decisions about what social and economic policies reflect “the common good” … or as Rawls called it “justice as fairness”. Go read his (admittedly quite long) books. First is “A Theory of Justice” (1971) where he outlines this theory. There’s also “Political Liberalism” (1993) and “The Law of Peoples” (1993). Rawls is interesting, but has weaknesses that have been discussed from most established philosophical positions. But as a way of solving the good faith problem it’s quite ingenious.

[@MasterOfBaiter]

What absolutely grinds my gears about the rationing and lines discourse is that things were literally the same everywhere else in times of crisis and scarcity cause if you don't then you will have civil unrest. The issue is that bread lines and rationing make the scarcity obvious and apparent. Middle class sensibilities don't get offended cause they don't actually get to see the consequences of poverty since the poor knowing they have no right to food and can't afford it don't even show up. Where there are lines where everyone gets something the alternative isn't in a market that everyone gets more. It's that fewer get more and others get nothing.

[@michaelwells6075]

Hi revolutionaryth0t, I'm curious, were you just being sarcastic when [in the context of saying you know heuristic testing can be learned because you learned it and use it all the time] you said, "I'm basically a professional hater"? The word "hater" came so unexpectedly at the end of that sentence, I had to scroll back and make sure I'd heard correctly. (I'm 76yo, and although I'm wearing a headset, my hearing is f'ed up. Plus, like a lot of younger folk, you _almost_ talk faster than my old brain can make sense!) But now that I've verified that is what you said, what do you mean by "hater"? I don't know you, obviously, but you don't strike me as a "hater". But that's based on the way the word is commonly used in the US-and maybe you're not in or from the US? Here it typically means someone with an aggressively prejudiced (approaching if not openly embracing violent) attitude toward minorities. So, it doesn't seem to fit. I do get the impression you're (understandably) critical of the established order and their self-serving, and self-perpetuating systems. I haven't watched the whole video, and won't, not because I disagree with what you're saying, exactly, but I know (in a general way at least) where you're headed just from glancing at the section titles. Hell, when I was coming down from an acid trip at age 19, 1967, this was the thought that went through my head: "Social reality is a construct and as such it can be deconstructed and reconstructed to create whatever social reality we want. But this begs questions, what social reality _do_ we want, and _whose social reality is _*_THIS_*_ anyway?"_ Hard to believe that was over half a century ago-not to mention that so little of significance has changed since. My age group VASTLY underestimated the opposition. Hopefully yours won't make the same mistake. But surely you know _the last thing those who exercise power over others _*_want_*_ or _*_will_*_ do is share that power willingly, without a fight._

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Hi, thank you for the question! When I say I'm a hater, I definitely don't mean in an aggressively prejudiced way, I mean it in a "I can't stop critiquing every system that I encounter" type of way, meaning that if I go to an airport, a restaurant, a train station, etc. or if I use an app, website, etc. I will usually feel compelled to critique the setup (or praise it if it's good). I'm constantly critiquing systems of all kinds because my education and work has basically trained me into that. Some people consider that to be very negative, even though my criticism is typically directed towards things like signs with confusing arrows, small fonts, a lack of feedback, poor responsiveness, etc. rather than individuals. So I'm a hater of bad systems, and definitely not of the individuals who are victims of said bad systems. Also, I have closed captions on this video in case it's hard to hear me due to the fast talking! I totally agree with everything you said in your last paragraph, I wish everyone was aware that social reality is constructed and can be made better and that the people in power will do anything to maintain their power! (Also if you feel compelled, the "how to run a country scientifically" section is all about a Bulgarian woman politician who used what could effectively be considered the usability principles that I discuss earlier in the video to change policies in Bulgaria for the benefit of Bulgarian women, which might be interesting and new to you, but obviously do whatever you want).

[@michaelwells6075]

@@revolutionaryth0t Hi revolutionarythOt, and thank you for your reply and suggestion. Yesterday I wrote a rather long reply to you here but, after posting it, I saw a minor typo I wanted to fix. After correcting it, when I attempted to repost, I got a YT error message. From having had this happen in the past, I know what I should have done was copy the edited text, reload the page, and begin again. However I stupidly didn't do that. I just reloaded the page... which (apparently) completely eliminated my reply. It may be that it was sent to you as an email (I don't know), but if so, it hasn't shown up in my YT comment history. Please let me know if you received it. If you did not, I will rewrite it and post it here. Thank you!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

@@michaelwells6075 Hi! It seems like the comment you attempted to correct disappeared into the abyss, what a strange glitch!

[@michaelwells6075]

@@revolutionaryth0t Thank you for getting back to me. It is a strange glitch but one I've encountered often enough to know I should copy the edited text before reloading the page and reposting the comment. So my brain glitched too! (Also not unusual at my age.) I've just finished watching the whole video but I haven't fully 'digested' it mentally yet. Suffice it to say I don't have any immediate or strongly felt disagreements or suggestions. You were right, I do appreciate the Yelena Ligodinova history-not something I was familiar with. Thanks for that! My primary focus right now is the political and information environment of the United States, and the overt attempt to replace even the pretense of democracy with abject white Christo-fascism. This should be a global concern. Trump is undoubtedly an asset of Putin. But that's not all. Many (both right and left) have suspected there is a "deep state"-(i.e., rogue and criminal)-element operating within, but beyond the legitimate control of, the United States government. It's clear to me that Trump cannot win in a free and fair election. But Democrats and leftists are fools if they believe voting alone will save us. Trump originally (and continues to) say he intends to end the "deep state," but there's a problem-he repeatedly equates it with the administrative state. What that (and his whole way of manipulating his followers) tells me is he IS the face of the Deep State. If elected he intends to install-is already organizing though Project 2025-loyalists (to him, not the Constitution) in the administrative state, DOJ, FBI, etc., and then attempt the same within the military. This could lead to a civil war. I say that because I know within the military there are many who take their oaths to the Constitution seriously. But I also know the 'deep state' players are also within the military and intelligence (operational since WW II) currently engaging in illegal counterintelligence activities here and abroad. If they (a trifecta alliance) succeed, the whole world-especially Europe-will be in grave danger. For fascists, social idealism isn't even an option. I shudder imagining a fascist state in full control of the media, in league with global criminal syndicates, and armed not only with the most lethal military this planet has ever seen, but an (oxymoronic) Artificial Intelligence capable of penetrating, not only encrypted messaging anywhere in the world, but analyzing and neutralizing anything it identifies as a threat. That will not be _my_ future, but it could be yours-those of your age. As I said, my generation vastly underestimated the power of the opposition-yours must not make the same mistake. Sorry to be such a downer, but I gotta say what I gotta say. :\

[@TomiThemself]

A lot of people say that "Nooo, it's not the fault of the system, but just the people that manage it", when in some much more humane, scientific and humanistic systems, they are designed that the "bad management" cannot even happen in the first place. It's so weird when they use the argument of "it's just externalities", to argue *for* capitalism, when a lot of those externalities didn't happen in socialism (for example, the Great Depression did not happen in the USSR because there literally were no markets where it could have happened, and no profit-motive to corrupt those who interact with the system, since there literally weren't any private property to allow only one person to interact with the enterprise). _"The purpose of a system is what it does."_

[@pascallubben1168]

That was incredible! You should be very proud of yourself not only are you smart but clearly have alot of passion. I sure hope you plan on making more videos. Thank you for making this

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you so much! I appreciate that :) And yes I'm definitely going to be making more videos!

[@PC42190]

Lagadinova sounds like the ultimate chadess 😎 Actually, Bulgaria is a very interesting case of socialism because if was one of the best organized. It had also a very efficient collectivized agricultural sector so they didn’t experienced what happened in Poland due to its inefficient agriculture. Also it was the biggest producer of computers in the socialist bloc, having its own thriving industry as Victor Petrov claims in his book “Balkan Cyberia”, highly recommended.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Such a chadess, I wish more people knew about her! That is very interesting! I'll def have to check that book out at some point.

[@Frolova3434]

As a physicist it has long been my dream to do exactly that: run country scientifically, gather data, analyze it, use ai chat bots to talk to people about policies… ah, I want that so bad…

[@milksafari]

Random algo w

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!!

[@CalebCarman]

I love your narrative style!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!

[@mckenziepearmain]

i’m in the emergency management field, and practitioners and researchers are not as collaborative as they could and should be. this is just a small example of i feel like a lot of what you touched on. science is not our enemy and can be used to make life better and more efficient and equitable for all. crazy thought 🤪 from a governmental perspective this is definitely eye opening and i will be looking into this more

[@Hinipe2]

Absolutely fascinating perspective.

[@KR72534]

While I don’t agree with everything you say, you are fascinating, and this channel deserves a wide audience. It’s amazing how you were able to speak so quickly with such perfect clarity. Where can I find your biography?

[@paigemcloughlin4905]

A lot of the steps to a planned economy and gov were developed out of WWII in "operations research" a field which is used a lot by corporate behemoths but could be applied to a country instead. Problems of inputs and outputs to an economy are problem which can be imperfectly solved with methods off the shelf.

[@paigemcloughlin4905]

the simplex method for dealing with inputs and outputs is one of the earlier methods on the shelf.

[@cfroberts62]

Okay, subscribed! Thank you for putting good thinking out there.

[@katiefrisk980]

the wiki page on lagadinova’s political career is something else - “coerced into taking office as secretary of the fatherland front and women’s movement”. gotta hate it when your -government- regime threatens you with a prestigious political appointment.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Oh no the brutal Bulgarian regime FORCED Lagadinova to *checks notes* use her scientific knowledge to help Bulgarian women, how CRUEL 😔 The anti-socialist bias on Wikipedia is so blatant haha

[@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45]

Well uhhh durr the only other option was her family getting sent to the SHADOW REALM GOOLAG for ten billion years!!!1!

[@isenhand]

Sounds a bit like Functional Socialism that was practiced in Sweden during the later end of the 20th century. There are also groups that aim and promote the application of science to the running countries. Like EOS in Sweden, for example. But you could also include Technocracy Inc. in the US. Both EOS and Technocracy inc also promote a moneyless society using Energy accounting. Now, how to make this happen?

[@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45]

Technocracy Inc? Holy shit Red Flood reference!!!

[@robv.8676]

It's great to be reminded of Lagadinova again. Made me think solution Chili (Allende) too and the things they tried there. I assume you are familiar with Paul Cockshott his "Towards a new socialism". Which is a great book and he has some good videos too.

[@RorysSpoonieDiaries-fh2gk]

Rad video!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!!

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

Lol gen x alert!

[@Caipi2070]

how is it ensured that the state actually serves the people/ workers? (+ Civic rights being guaranteed, no devolution towards totalitarianism and no reemergence of classes through political privileges) i think a very democratic system that puts political power in the hands of all the people is necessary for that.

[@xx_strawberry_xx9038]

i loved your video, you have articulated the things I have always thought.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!!

[@ambasutori9053]

Tbh whilst i would argue that socioeconomic systems esp initially very often arent like conciously designed with intent but form out of material condition, i do fully agree that it is in our power alone to change them after the fact, or absolve it and start anew for that matter

[@chrisstahl2653]

I think the idea of using human factors design on a state level is fascinating and what Lagadinova did shows that it works. I have a good understanding of Nielsen and Norman's theories and ideas on human factors and usability. They are really good ideas that could make everyone's lives better. However I have to admit that in my perception, the application of those ideas by big companies is often more focussed on how they can be exploited to trick people into consuming more and trick them into dependencies to better milk them. The A-B test is supposed to be scientific but it draws the wrong conclusions, because it is used to exploit rather than empower. Therefore, science alone is not enough. It is necessary to have the will to improvepeoples lives as Lagadinova had.

[@hitorswim5639]

cybersynpilled

[@revolutionaryth0t]

I had to look up what that is annnd now I'm sad about Allende again :'(

[@octothorpian_nightmare]

Rest in piss, Kissinger.

[@claudiaborges8406]

Seeing Like a State by James C Scott is a must read for discussions of this topic

[@lavendeer6290]

Amazing, thank you

[@miltonberle1594]

I'd vote for you!

[@IttyBitty412]

Wow you talk fast!!! 😂

[@bananbananowy3552]

Good video!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!

[@ariace3602]

Thought this was gonna be about cybersyn

[@christopher.2042]

I thought i had this on 1.25 but you just speak fast, nice

[@stm7810]

I'm an anarchist but this was still interesting.

[@anotherinternetperson7410]

Nice video. You should review people’s republic of Walmart which covers similar ground from a different angle.

[@howie0wowie]

Revolutionary Thot is a great name. Great video too.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Thank you!!

[@TicketLicker]

AGI speculations are my late lullabies, David Shapiro (no connection with that muppet i think, u kno) but yea, altough he has stated that he is more of a libertarian or whatever than a Socialist, but hes predictions and insane knowledge of AI and the soon coming mind blowing [possibly] AGI the mathematic supercomputer self learning AI aka LLM , Love your stuff, great find, and that other vid.. I''m also born in last couple of years of USSR within one of the Respubliki of Baltics, baad vibes. Thanks for your vids. also project Cybersyn the Chiles proto online online breadtube lol Vpered Tovarisch!

[@hansfrankfurter2903]

New sub!

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Yay! Thank you!

[@TheJayman213]

Cool, another cyberneticsy channel. However, not all systems are the product of design. Some are the product of emergence, the textbook example being living organisms. But also capitalism and to a lesser extent states are partly emergent. The biggest complication in the case of cybernetic government is that you and your goals are part of the system who's next iteration you are designing. So you have no stable ground *outside* the system you're designing from which to evaluate it. Whatever criteria you pick are already the product of the existing system and risk reproducing biases in the next design.

[@claudiaborges8406]

They are emergent of a hierarchical design, a history of colonialism, racism, etc. You’re right about not being able to simply plan the system from the top down, or even the ground up, they have to emerge. So what is required is for it to emerge from non-hierarchical community-organized structures

[@Ppolich.]

That’s cool but what if no government

[@DrAnarchy69]

While I like the idea of a decentrally planned economy based on computer data analysis and input, as an Anarchist I personally find it problematic to give so much data to any government, even a direct democratic one. I’m of the opinion that science can often be used as a tool of oppression

[@usagibun7639]

hm I'm still a baby leftist of sorts and I sympathize with aspects of both anarchism and ml's. I agree science has been and continues to be used as a tool of oppression but does that mean just not trying at all? I guess my question is who would be given the data to implement these systems in an anarchist way? would it be that much different under a direct democratic socialist society?

[@claudiaborges8406]

I mean, aren’t humans organizing with each other already factoring in human factors? We tested using the state for communist struggles and that didn’t work out. Is trying it out another 50 times going to scientifically give us the best state? Looks to me like we just made the state that is scientifically the best at maintaining the status quo. Same with companies, their purpose is similarly to colonize as many aspects of our life and as many lives as possible. Ofc we wouldn’t just do whatever and hope that “whatever” is the smartest possible technique of information gathering but we don’t not use these because we’re stupid, we don’t use these because we are not the ones deciding how things should he designed. Walmart and other companies use stuff that MLs frequently reference when talking about how to structure things, but they only do that because they have the power to and they dont have to deal with repercussions outside of their immediate reach. They are allowed to use smart designs bc they have the power to, and the oppression being done to keep their demand and supply coming is being done by other entities. That’s why it’s not a good example, because it doesn’t exist in a vacuum, but if the whole movement was designed with these principles in mind and in an environment that asks them to be healthy for the community, then we’d see how anarchist information gathering is not much different than what we see in some aspects of our government, markets and science community right now. Surveys would be surveys, researchers would be researching. Surveillance is one thing, communication is another. The state requires surveillance and oversimplification to function, capitalism requires exploitation, it’s all colonization baby! If our structures dont give disproportionate power to few things or people, it becomes incredibly difficult for it to last beyond backlash. If a position of incredible power exists, it is a critical failure point, and also means that could be easily replaced to then go on to fail again. Structures that keep propping up stuff over is over again is what allows any information at all to be for oppression. Without those, you couldn’t easily come up with a moral panic that could ripple out so dang far

[@claudiaborges8406]

@@usagibun7639that’s a weird question. Anarchism is already directly democratic socialism. It’s libertarian left. I assume the question is about how information can be used as a tool of empowerment instead of oppression, and that really depends on exactly how that information is used and in what environment it is in. A lot of people think information stolen from us by algorithms just to be used to sell us more sht will be a lot less harmful when it is in an environment that is no longer incentivizing maximizing profit and attention grabbing

[@usagibun7639]

@@claudiaborges8406 well the reason I worded that oddly is because the anarchists I've encountered see any government, even a directly democratic one as inherently problematic. so I figured when they said "even a directly democratic one" I thought they might be referring to what they think is an ML-type of direct democracy? and they said they found it problematic to give so much data to any government even a direct democratic one. so like if anarchism is direct democratic socialism, and having the data be controlled by a direct democratic government is problematic, who would have it? if it's a collective organization of the people, wouldn't that still be a governing entity of sorts just with different vocabulary? it's difficult to understand where people are coming from esp since so many individual anarchists have different interpretations of what anarchism really is so I guess I'm just generally confused lol

[@claudiaborges8406]

@@usagibun7639 I see. Yes that is indeed confusing because there be AnCaps out there and other anti-organization or nihilist anarchists with ideas conflicting with the social anarchists’ ideas (the ones that had originally been organizing just as “socialists” just like every other until sht happened and people needed to clarify what their specific ideas were). The description of government as anything “governing” is, in short, a sht one tbh because it really doesnt help at all, so the better term would be “self-governance” instead (that is, to describe what anarchists want. The definition of state and government is still very important but I assume we aint talking about that rn). Therefore, this means that there’d be no distinction of peoples in governing and non governing classes because we’d all be governing ourselves in tandem, voting for things directly and with everyone included (and it’d be like this at every scale, including how we should organize our struggles today, creating right now how we want the world to be later). This would mean that information would likely flow freely (or on a need-to-know basis if we’re talking about more _spicy_ organizing). That’s why in my response to that comment I mentioned how the information isn’t necessarily oppressive, but that the centralization of power gives those people the … power(? I guess) to do whatever they want with the information they are given. And they usually require this information to even carry out basic functions so it naturally leads to surveillance and want to control, to make people more predictable like a puzzle to be “solved” by the state, technocracy.

[@RedSntDK]

If you count economics as a science, then yeah, the world is run scientifically. But alas..

[@lindalastname6306]

Okayyy I just found a new favourite youtuber and socialist icon ❤❤

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Aww I appreciate that!!

[@gohu11]

I'm so confused / Я в недоумении. You live in the US and originate from Crimea. You're studying Socialism and have a parent (or parents) presumably moving from the USSR after its collapse, they were probably seeking more wealth and "freedom". It's really a unique case, gonna be honest. / То есть ты живёшь в Штатах, но родом из Крыма. Ты изучаешь социализм, когда как твои родители уехали из СССР после развала , скорее всего, в поисках заработка и "свободы". Случай поистине уникальный.

[@revolutionaryth0t]

Мой папа из Крыма, но мои родители учились и познакомились в Питере, и я там родилась. Никогда не жила в Крыму. Но всё остальное - правда. Я уникальный человек, большинство людей как я не интересуются социализм 😜

[@gohu11]

@@revolutionaryth0t о да, это точно :) Подписался!

[@stuntvist]

So theres an entire industry for scientifically designing systems to be as ergonomic and simple to use and easy to debug as possible, yet everything has become progressively worse and less ergonomic since the 90's.Seriously, modern cars are much worse ergonomically than 90's cars (and drive worse but that's a different story) and every UX on desktop has been turned into a glorified mobile app which only serves to make them worse to use on desktop and doesn't make the experience similar to their mobile app counterparts at all lol. Interesting world we live in.

[@Stret173]

душой я с тобой! но словно опыт союза не критически прожит...

[@Paki_nomad]

damn i had no clue

[@RedSntDK]

Some of the things discussed in this video reminds me of the technocratic movement 100 years ago around the time of the great depression. These days technocracy has a 'bad rep' due to it being associated by the efficiencies of China as a lot of engineers help run the country. Can't argue with all the high speed rail they've built though..

[@claudiaborges8406]

“Seeing Like a State” by James C Scott

[@felldoh9271]

The only silver lining of this First World system is the modern art (cinema, video games, animation, good music not mainstream Pop, books, and whatever else I missed) it produces. All else (sports, belief systems/religion, etc) can be found in tribal off grid life, and therefore that stuff is only good for supporting the economy that enables people to rebel by creating modern art as an outlet for those to escape from the captivity we are all in via the invisible walls and chains that keep us under the thumb of the system. Art is also a form of rebellion (in addition to a form of expression), so it's no wonder video games and manga/anime have gained the momentum they have. Some great examples of this are One Piece, Hunter X Hunter, Berserk, the Metal Gear Solid series, Xenogears/saga, and of course, Final Fantasy VII.

[@CarrotConsumer]

Most pop culture isn't a statement of rebellion. I'm not sure what you mean.

[@felldoh9271]

In my opinion art in itself is rebellious because it strives for an escape from the system.

[@denisu-sama]

cool ass

[@janikebolter7410]

It's a lovely video, I am just discovering your channel. I have to disagree with a few points though: supporting Ukraine is not a waste (which is not the point of the video but I want to mention it). And doing research is not as easy or objective as you make it out here, it is also difficult to combine with democracy. As a researcher myself I know that there is not really an objective truth and you can easily make your results seem better than they are. I do think more scientific approaches should be implemented though, nice observation there.

[@Unknownstatus_521]

The problem with the Ukraine conflict is that both sides are rotten imperialists. The Russian government by doing what they always point as savage imperialism (invading a country for stupid reasons) and NATO by supporting Ukraine not because they believe in their independence but just to fill their pockets with the money that war makes, and pushing their agenda in his members

[@mr.dr.frankenkeys]

As a conservative libertarian, I respect your takes, but don't confuse true capitalism for the greedy global capitalism that we all live under in the west. I can get behind some socialist ideas but i wouldn't be so nieve as to say that it too wouldn't lead to authoritarianism. Not a big fan of big government. Dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.

[@otherboi125]

sucks we live under dangerous slavery under capitalism and its "trueness" will never change that fact. Exploitation is an aspect of all class society, and only socialism can begin to abolish it. It all depends on what freedom means. Freedom to own private property, or freedom to leisure and free access to necessities?

[@qjtvaddict]

Join us if you want freedom

[@ho-sette]

what do you mean by "big government". if the government is controlled by all of us, WE'D be the government. yeah that would mean its literally big but wouldn't that mean true democracy?

[@claudiaborges8406]

That’s why anarchists are against the state, it always lead to authoritarianism, but so does capitalism. They require each other to survive in a symbiotic relationship. They’re both born from colonization and structures in their shape will always lead back to disproportionately empowering few in a way that outlasts “bad apples” and keeps corrupting the land ALL apples grow in

[@belphegor_dev]

Capitalism always decays into what you call "greedy capitalism." It's a fundamentally broken and unsustainable system which is doomed to fail.