Doesn’t have to be one you think is true or even possible. Could be niche or mainstream. Mine is probably Mike Tyson threw that Jake Paul fight. I heavily believe Tyson did everything he could and is just old. Not to mention he’s fighting a roided up good athlete in his physical prime with a limited engagement strategy. I do like hearing people argue its all staged, understandable cope.
Not really, because “efficiently” here would include disenfranchisement, euthanasia and murder. Which must be disadvantageous if on the lower levels, in DNA, evolution has went past such in favor of a more complex system than preserves information, even if in specific iterations that information being activated makes the organism weaker.
In general I agree with you, but I would refrain from using evolution/DNA example. Because then it leads to ‘social darwinism’.
Evolution does not mean ‘more evolved is better’ but rather ‘more suited to the environment’.
Take psychopathy (or even apthy towards minority groups) as an example, in a capitalist system, psychopathy is more evolved because you get to climb the corporate ladder faster.
But this assumes that capitalism is unchanging, and final form of our society. But in reality, we can change the system. Under socialism or social democracy (with strict laws), psychopathy would no longer be ‘more evolved’.
Which is why street youth crime in USSR was almost hierarchical - all territory was divided between gangs, their culture was almost commonly accepted, their leaders were well known to everyone living in their territory and the militia, and so on. And miraculously all that crap started receding when USSR ceased to exist. Despite still having a lot of presence. There are opinions that KGB simply preferred to have known and controlled crime instead of something growing under the radar. That’s irony.
OK, what I meant - that youth culture was psychopathic enough.
I mean DNA logic, which is more complex than the “natural selection of good\bad genes” people often imagine to be evolution.
This whole statement is honestly unchanged enough since 1919. Social democrats have become a normal political force even before WWI. And socialism has led to pretty psychopathic regimes.
Marxist idea of formations and stages reeks of magic for me. It’s extrapolation of the way history books and popular imagination show what has already happened to the future that hasn’t and things not yet known. It’s not synthesis, instead it’s more like extrapolation of limited projections.
Lysenko and Lepeschinskaya in Stalin’s USSR were honestly a logical result of such perception of the world. It’s often said that Stalin’s regime was in fact fascist, and that it wasn’t correct by communist ideology, and so on, but that idea doesn’t hold when you study it closely. It was both in vibes and in ideas of the future pretty Marxist. So were Khmer Rouge. And both had that flaw of common idea that the future is known.
It’s a trait of religions, by the way.