• 0 Posts
  • 78 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 20th, 2023

help-circle
  • This happens to me pretty frequently.

    I think is alright, language is a bridge and sometimes we feel more comfortable speaking our native language than others. But I don’t really mind speaking in English or Spanish with people I meet in Brazil. But the moment of realization that you are talking with another native speaker is always full of joy.

    #feels-nice to speak with other bilingual or polyglots :)




  • It seems to be that your question is a misinterpretation of past philosophies and theologies. Believing in an afterlife isn’t even natural for human beings and you can check that out in the work of anthropologist who trace our ancestry to hunter gatherers. Most of them have a really straightforward relationship with death.

    What you mean is the thinkers of civilizations, and that’s a topic that Lewis Mumford covered in his book The Myth of the Machine. That thinking in the afterlife and all those tools like spirits and gods were used along history for… Power. You can think of that like proto-science or just trying to make sense of the reality, but to assume that all smart people of the past believed in gods, spirits, “the little people” and the afterlife is to picture a really homogeneous (probably greek or egyptian) past of humanity.

    I wouldn’t say “What’s wrong with us modern people?” since today I find really reasonable to be critical of one’s and other beliefs. Not for the sake of destroying it, but in search for better philosophical answers. If you say something exists, you better try to explain what it is and how did you conclude that it exists and, if possible, show some empirical evidence. Today we’ve got science that is to date our best shot at nailing some comprehension of our material realities, yet, it all exists in a socio-political context, so to assume that something is “scientific” and therefore “real” is to have things mixed.

    I suggest you to check the history of philosophy, that work of Mumford that I find it to be a masterpiece in sociology that everyone should know, and if possible, maybe understand how serious thinkers think: some are believers, some are not, but a sure thing is that a conversation about the validity of some positions exists somewhere. Like Spinozas god or Descartes god, how magical thinking works, why we believe what we believe, etc.




  • Fuck it, from where I come from: people in agriculture get smacked just by existing or trying to build common cause with “let’s end hunger in the world”. I’m with you, salutations from America Latina ! And let’s make those fuckers get what they deserve.






  • I always thought that artificial languages always needed more stickiness. I learned some Esperanto, but it is easily forgotten if there is no need to use it.

    Solarpunk, like many Libertarian Socialist paradigms, really shines with diversity, so languages focused on Solarpunk sound quite weird, like having homogeneous aesthetics. Usually, language changes, like the way Zapatistas talk in Spanish, pursue specific goals that can be done within a language rule set or some mixture between different languages like Spanglish (Spanish + English) or Portuñol (Portuguese + Spanish). The whole point is to be able to communicate a concept.

    Now, like the examples you have shown, it seems easier to frame the “Solarpunk language” not as a language per se but as a dialect. Since some geographies share more common communication than between language speakers, it happens in English, Arab, Spanish, French, and Chinese… When you learn to speak those, there is always the question of whether you sound like a foreign person or a native from someplace.








  • Just a clarification:

    You will not be called a “bootlicker” because you support think cops are there to protect you. That’s something reasonable to believe.

    You will be called a “bootlicker” because you are in support of the state, which defends the interest of those in power (aka. political class, “the rich,” bourgeoisie, etc) and its soldiers, which are cops.

    I mean no harm; I’m not calling you a “bootlicker.” You are a decent human just sharing your experience. I want to bring “the other side” perspective in a friendly way. I was thinking like you until I was at the other end of their macanas for helping other decent people.

    The ACAB is a widespread movement in South America and has good reasons to exist since it is adjacent to Antifa. But the overall reason to hate cops is based on the argument that I explained before in a very brief way.

    Since I abide by the movement, I invite you to check it out so you can engage more deeply in the conversation. For a starter, I may interest you in:

    And sorry for not sharing other voices outside the anglosphere who cover the topic. It is just that they don’t speak English, so we can’t understand each other.

    Take care, fellow stranger.