You were never like this before
25.04.2025 20:30 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0@ecomp.bsky.social
Team Jacob ๐บ Recovered Brony ๐ด Reclines to the left ๐ Reincarnation of Princess Diana ๐ธ๐ผ I'm on spotify like it's twitter ๐ถ Agency Agency ๐ถ Tybg ๐จ๐พโ๐ค
You were never like this before
25.04.2025 20:30 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0Landlord removed the black mold and now I'm not funny
28.03.2025 09:14 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Etch a sketch suicide note
08.03.2025 07:20 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Guy on the left needs a couple more lbs of facial piercings and he looks just like you
06.03.2025 23:22 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0My joke was going to be "adding the youtube vids about dinosaurs that I watch to my goodreads account"
01.03.2025 18:23 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0After a conversation, I decided that listening can be considered reading, too. Apologies for my snark.
01.03.2025 18:20 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0February reading or February listening?
28.02.2025 23:51 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0I follow you in spite of any of your posts
26.02.2025 03:46 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Just ratio'd a Youtube short
19.02.2025 10:55 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Money is fake but important. Like many other social constructs. Care has to be taken in dismantling or reforming social systems after careful analysis. You're not the one with the answers.
19.02.2025 08:23 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0If you look up clips of Fight Corp by Erik Skog, that's a good one, still in development tho
11.02.2025 03:05 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Neither would I, but it's the most "multiple-heights" example I can think of.
11.02.2025 02:55 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Wind Waker is the closest I can think of
11.02.2025 02:49 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0Even then, if I find out I can haunt you, I will
11.02.2025 01:23 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Not until I die
11.02.2025 01:23 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Those are me
11.02.2025 01:17 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0We can start one
05.02.2025 01:54 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Cultivating livestock is explicitly NOT the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. What you need is a spear and a woven basket to pick some berries.
26.01.2025 16:34 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Crusader Kings 3
24.01.2025 17:49 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0You still pop up
20.01.2025 04:05 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0The people who call them "workers" are not doing so with a marxist analysis in mind. 'They did a job so they're proletariat' is a stupid qualifier. Weavers and textile manufacturers of the time were guild artisans, through and through. They were trying to avoid becoming workers. They're reactionary.
27.12.2024 04:56 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0"Spending taxes" as a shorthand. Of course taxes aren't actually ever spent.
27.12.2024 04:20 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Yeah, that's a practical consequence. The argument is that having "risk as a job" is unethical, especially when the state props you up by spending taxes again sourced from the workers. The risk is also availed to workers before owners always. The worker loses their livelihood before the owner does.
27.12.2024 04:19 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0The only reason they have any control over the profit is because they are backed by a state. Profit collected by an owner who provides no input into the production process is rent from the workers. Companies aren't tangible things, those profits are controlled and owned by people.
27.12.2024 03:29 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0The guild artisans of the early 1800s do check these boxes.
27.12.2024 03:19 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Here's the quote
27.12.2024 03:17 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0You're the one making an oversimplification. Any analysis of 18th century guild artisans would not place them as proletariat. The communist manifesto itself describes artisans as conservatives and reactionaries, only revolutionary by chance because they realize they're about to become proletariat.
27.12.2024 03:15 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0What do you think petit bourgeois are
26.12.2024 23:01 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0I'm willing to hear your perspective, but I'm not going to take "read better" as a compelling enough argument. I've read the texts myself and would appreciate some courtesy in you explaining your side and not just belittling my intelligence.
26.12.2024 19:44 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0