1
submitted 1 year ago by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/gop@lemmy.world

It would argue that the technology of industrialization that brought Capitalism was not an accident. Capitalism was the natural outcome of the times. It would also argue that to try to force socialism onto the same society would be inefficient and essentially unnatural.

Technological deterministic thought sees technology as the driving force of social, economic, political, and even artistic change. In it's weak form, it is undeniably true--technology effects the form that society and economy take. In it's stronger form, it would claim that, barring enormous effort, Capitalism was the inevitable outcome of the technological development of the time.

It also explains why high automation and AI, that can do all or most of the work that humans do, will make Capitalism impossible.

Technology makes new jobs only until it also takes all those jobs. After that, wealth is no longer distributed through a Capitalist system and something else will emerge. Must emerge.

1
submitted 1 year ago by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/gop@lemmy.world

I know there are still people within the GOP who have not been caught up in the ugly direction that it has gone. It is actually very good to find evidence of their existence.

I would love to see an honorable, democracy embracing, non-discriminating branch of the GOP rise up become popular. In fact, half the Democratic party would probably be more aligned with the GOP. Yet, the GOP looked to the extreme right, bigots, racists, and even fascists to expand their voter base. This is not only wrong, but unsustainable.

Anyway, the only voice in this community right now is this “technological determinist”, social democrat. Statistically, one in a hundred members actually comment. I’m actually rooting for you guys to become an active community and until then, it looks like I’m your spokesman. Hehe.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

Actually, the conversation would go like this. Kid: Dad, someone on the internet said Jesus dies for our sins. Dad: What do you think of that? Kid: I'm not sure but it's weird. How can someone dying have anything to do with the bad things that other people do? Dad: It only makes sense if you understand that back then, they used to kill animals as a sacrifice to God. They believed that God will show them more favor, the larger the sacrifice. If you do something God doesn't like, killing something will make God happy with you again. Kid: This is getting more bizarre, and sick. Dad: So, Christians believe that Jesus was sacrificed to forgive all humans for all the bad things they do so God will be happy with them again. Kid: O...K... So, we're all forgiven for everything we do. Dad: Not exactly. You have to feel bad about it and ask Jesus to forgive you. If you're Catholic, you have to go through a priest. Kid: David cries when he has to go talk to the his priest. Dad: Yeah, that's a different topic, but that's what they believe. Kid: Why does God want them to kill things? Dad: It seems that he changed his mind. Somehow, since killing his "son" was such a big deal, that he's happy with us without further killing. Kid: Is God supposed to be smart? Dad: They believe that he knows everything and makes everything happen. Kid: Isn't he suppose to help good people and punish bad people? Dad: We'll get there later, your question was about sacrifice. Have you heard of communion? Kid: Isn't that when they drink juice and eat a cookie. Dad: That's right. The cookie is supposed to be the body of Jesus, and the juice is supposed to be his blood. Kid: Seriously?! Dad: Yes. It's symbolic cannibalism. According to the bible, Jesus told them to do it. Kid: Like half the kids as school and all of their families do that! Dad: Yup. Pretty weird.

12

Great idea for a community. I hope to see it take off.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

For some reason, Republicans accuse their advisaries of the things they themselves are actually doing. My guess is that OP was Republican, has come to see that the Republicans are full of shit , bit still believes the lies they told about Democrats.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Scaremongering is by definition fabricating or playing up dangers. These are real.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

This really calls for a picture, or there's not much to say.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What is the Democratic scaremongering and propaganda?

Democrats are shitty because they are generally corporate sellouts. Republicans do the scaremongering and propaganda.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

If someone gave me 700mil, I'd probably retire too.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Rightward politics correlates with low intelligence.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Define Asian. I live in "Asia" and have never seen this.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 176 points 1 year ago

Make the coordinates public and let curiosity run its course.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

🥕 3 shredded carrots 🍋 juice of one lemon 🧂 a little bit of salt

An amazingly fresh and delicious summer salad.

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/english@lemmy.ca

The em dash is called the em dash because on old typewriters it was as long as an M. Why do I feel closer to this punctuation mark than the others? It could be partly because I ignored it for so long that it is the last punctuation mark that I got to know, and when I found it, I learned that it could do the work of several other punctuation marks, especially my archrival, the semicolon!

I mean, semicolons have their place. In my opinion, two places: lists within lists can be indicated with semicolons, and when you want to show your English teacher that you were listening in class. That's about it.

I was taught that if I want to show that two independent clauses (an independent clause is a complete simple sentence) have a stronger connect than just being right next to each other, we can add a semicolon. And then they proceeded to show us examples of full, complex, sentences with semicolons between them. So, they weren't wrong, but they could have just said that they link two sentences to show a stronger connection--other specific syntactic units have nothing to do with it.

See what I did there? I used an em dash where a semicolon would have been. If you don't know where it is on your keyboard and your app doesn't make it automatically when you write a double dash, then a double dash (--) will do fine.

If you are among the continentally-challenged users of English, you may use a single dash ( - ) to achieve the same thing as a double dash. If you use the en dash, leave a space before and after the dash, but not with the em dash.

The em dash can also replace (parenthesis) or commas to set apart a phrase in the middle of a sentence.

"My best friend—the one who moved to Australia last year—just sent me a postcard."

So, we've now replaced the semicolon, parenthesis and commas in at least some of their uses. We're coming for you now, ellipsis.

The ellipsis (...) does a lot of things: omission, pause, cutting off a sentence part way through, and suspense. The em dash can be used for all but omission. So, if you leave out some text from the middle of a sentence, replace it with an ellipsis, but otherwise, you may want to use the em dash. When constructing an ellipsis, shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three.

When using an em dash to cut off a sentence, it comes across as a bit more harsh. "If I have to come in there again--" When you want it to kind of trail off more gently, maybe an ellipsis is called for. "But I thought Christie was..."

I've seen them replace quotation marks and colons, but that's not something I do with them.

I would be happy just to have them rid us of the semicolon and Kurt Vonnegut agrees with me. He said, "Here is a lesson in creative writing. First rule: Do not use semicolons... All they do is show you've been to college."

Thoughts?

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/english@lemmy.ca

My Microsoft account at work made me re-think this because it is pushing me to add more commas that I usually do.

I'm of two minds here. On one hand, punctuation is for clarity. If a sentence is clear without additional hyphens or commas, you could argue that they are not needed. For example:

I want ice cream too. (Acceptable in informal writing.)

I want ice cream, too. (Expected in formal writing.)

I want to eat, mom. (Always a good idea.) I want to eat mom. (Or the police could be involved.)

Or with hyphens when putting two adjectives before a noun, as with: "a well-known author" or "a high-speed chase." With both of these, leaving out the hyphen would not change the meaning or cause confusion.

However, with "high-school students" vs "high school students" the police could get involved again over omitting the hyphen.

I tend toward leaving it out unless it improves clarity or changes meaning.

Now for the Oxford comma. Have we all seen the memes?

However you feel about strippers, is would probably be less confusing if "the strippers, Kennedy, and Stalin" suddenly arrived, than it would be if "the strippers, Kennedy and Stalin" arrived.

Not using the Oxford comma can make the phrase ambiguous, but when it doesn't become ambiguous, as with, "Get me the carrots, potatoes and celery", we can really leave it out without problems.

I go back and forth on these. Even the most careful writers and editors can fail to see the ambiguity in their phrases, so choosing to always include the punctuation is a good way to go. Then again, if you feel confident and want to remove the clutter, I can respect that too. If you have a style guide you must follow, do that, if not, then stay consistent with whatever you choose.

Thoughts? Or more fun examples are welcome.

1
Less vs. Fewer (lemmy.world)

Of course the official rule is that for countable things, like apples, we say fewer, as in, "Why are there fewer apples?" And for things that you can't really count, you use less, as in "We need more dream time and less screen time."

But recently, even from native speakers who've been to university, you can hear people using 'less' when the grammar books say they should use 'fewer'. Language changes and there are many examples of things that we say differently than we write. What are your thoughts?

Should we grammar nazi this until everyone gets back in line? Should we just let language evolve and enjoy the ride? Do you think it will settle in with spoken and written forms being different? Do you think this will become the norm in English?

By the way, I blame supermarkets with their "9 items or less" signs.

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/english@lemmy.ca

I see there are no comments here yet.

I am an English professor, and have experience in magazine, book, and test editing. I often comment on grammar related subs on "that other social media site", but I'm trying to help Lemmy grow by contributing here instead. But to do that, there ~~needs~~ need to be posts. : )

The way to get a community growing is to start posting. I'm going to start some seed topics, so please comment on them and add your own. Questions are good too.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

I taught my daughters the usual logical fallacies from a young age. While doing that I learned that while occasionally, they appear in pristine form (looking at you, Slippery Slope and No True Scotsman), usually, they come rather nuanced, often clustered together, and difficult to identify.

A great way to get good at them is watch Fox News and identify them as they come. You can watch other networks and find them, but for a constant stream, Fox is a goldmine.

39
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by OsakaWilson@lemmy.world to c/startrek@startrek.website

spoilermoneyless socialist utopia
I mean, we all know that's what it is, but I'm pretty sure that's the first time they've said it straight out in universe. And then the plot reminds of it several times as that very thing is put in danger.

[-] OsakaWilson@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

Please remove countries I've been to.

I've been to these African countries.

94

I am listed as Subscription Pending on AskLemmy. It's been that way for a long time. I was told the glitch may be just the subscription message. So. We'll see.

60

After nearly a week, none seem to be accepting new members.

15

I got banned on a parallel world sub because a kid was outed by his parents as communist and he was going to be kicked out of the house and I told him to lie and say whatever he needed to until he could support himself.

Now that you know my horrible crime, am I still welcome?

view more: next ›

OsakaWilson

joined 1 year ago