• redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think the connection they’re going for is this is the kind of hair brained distopian bullshit that eventually comes trying to achieve "infinite growth"in a finite world.

    • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Well it’s not like socialist countries don’t need growth to achieve their goals and that growth needs new workers

      • tuff_wizard@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 minutes ago

        I think the implication is that in a socialist/communist utopia there would be no need for continual growth. their only goals would be to make their populations comfortable and I guess further the arts/technology.

        Obviously one or two non capitalist countries need to try and grow at the same rate as their capitalist neighbours so they can try and fend off the “democracy” that capitalist countries so often like to bestow on non-capitalist and/or oilfield owning countries.

        How those types of societies would operate when not trying to compete with aggressive capitalism is unknown. No doubt human nature would take its course and we’d be back here in 50 years or so.

    • tornavish@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I can see China inducing comas in Uyghur women and forcing them to be incubators for the billionaires in the Chinese Capitalist Party who don’t want to deal with pregnancy.

      • twopi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        If the Chinese do it is double plus ungood but if the west does it, it is by definition, double plus good. Thank you fellow pleb for teaching me this understanding. I’m double plus looking forward to the 2 minutes of hate this morning.

          • twopi@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            It’s Newspeak from Orwell’s 1984:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak#Prefixes

            It’s purposefully stupid.

            I personally use it to highlight issues on China. It seems to me that, like the Conservative/Liberal Party divide, the The West/China divide is more a “it’s good if my side does it but bad when my opponent does it”.

            Use of Newspeak high lights this obserdity by replacing good with good and bad with ungood (i.e. not-good or opposite of good)

              • twopi@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                15 hours ago

                That’s my point though. It isn’t good if anyone does it. Doesn’t matter the country, party of political ideology.

                Why be upset at China if we’re doing it as well? At least we have control over our laws, not China’s.