My friend, you are still confused.

I was giving the framing that comes from the billionaire owned western media oligopoly position.

that isnt my position

What gave you the idea that I’m dismissing them? I think you’re confused.

Good quote tho

I think the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” idea is overstated, most people I interact with have a somewhat negative outlook on the economy and their future wealth.

I think the real issue is that no viable alternative is presented to most people.

The alternatives presented are Russian-style authoritarian oligarchy, Islamofascism, or a Venezuela-style “socialism” in which the narrative only focuses on poverty.

It’s not about the production cost, its about the opportunity cost.

A quick google search tells me a national ad costs $200k-$1m for a 30s slot. That means 5 seconds of screen time costs $30k-$150k.

When I started dealing drugs, I did it because my friends and I were smoking trash weed and we wanted to secure a good supply of quality product. It worked out well. My car was clean. I didn’t sell much.

A few years later when I turned 23 I was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. My life fell apart, I was bedridden, I went through a medical bankruptcy. That is when I began to deal drugs to survive. For a few years I paid my bills by selling weed, ecstasy, adderall, mushrooms, acid from the bed where I spent 95% of my time. My car was dirty.

Was I just a regular person? I dont know

It’s a broad generalization, I’m not suggesting some new law of nature.

I think you have to ask: why are people dealing drugs?

Some people sell drugs because they are desperate. These people are dealing with extreme poverty, trauma, mental and physical health issues, etc. Their cars are messy.

Other people sell drugs because of the economic opportunity. In my experience, these people pride themselves on cleanliness, timeliness, and customer service. They have clean cars.

I’m a little surprised that this comment has gotten so many upvotes.

Would you apply this same logic to the real world? For example, imagine if a manufacturing facility for Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics was bombed and thousands of working class Americans died. These people are building bombs that are being used in an ongoing genocide.

Would you consider this a heinous terrorist act, or a noble strike in the fight for freedom?

But what about the terror group known as IDF? They have unlimited free reign to spread their genocidal message and recruit followers. They also buy ads, and have a budget larger than all the terror groups you mentioned combined.

Saying “maybe people are the problem” is reductive and unhelpful. But I agree with you broadly, religion is just a system or a tool, it can be used for good or evil.

To judge if religion is a good system or a bad one, we can use a cost benefit analysis. This is what we have been attempting to do in this thread.

But when it comes to sensitive subjects like religion, many people have a tendency to avoid, overlook, and deny the associated costs.

Anti-science, misogyny, etc may be bad independently of religion, but they aren’t independent of religion. Religion is a source of these problems.

You can imagine a hypothetical religion that is simply a “social club” or whatever, but here in the real world religion comes with baggage.

Religion is why my cousin’s children have never seen a doctor in their life. Religion is why my gay friend in high school tried to kill himself. Religious indoctrination has led to lifelong shame and trauma in many of my friends.

And this was just from a “moderate” sect of Christianity- the millions living under fundamentalist religion have it even worse.

What you said is all true, but you are ignoring the negative aspects of religion.

Religious influence, both on their followers and on government, is anti-science, misogynistic, and anti-LGBT.

Religions are funded like pyramid schemes, with the most desperate and vulnerable as their victims.

Religious indoctrination is child abuse.

But that explanation is lost to time.

One translation I read suggested a probable explanation.

Rasputin’s phone advice was the same as many modern quacks: keep the patient away from modern medicine and doctors.

So the hemophiliac prince was no longer given his normal cocktail of drugs, which probably included a new medicine for the time: aspirin.

Stop giving a blood thinner to a hemophiliac and his condition (temporarily) improved. The best explanation for the people at the time was “magic”.

One of the major issues in this case is that Obama set a precedent when he assassinated 16 year old American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki without a trial.

The reality is that the Democrats go low, and Republicans use that as a new standard to go even lower.

I would start with MLK, collected essays, no one writes about protest more eloquently.

A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn gives a great broad overview.

Death in the Haymarket by James Green is a great history of the first decades of the labor movement.

Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Leadership in Turbulent Times goes in depth on LBJ and the civil rights movement.

On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau for the classic philosopher’s take.

We’ve Got People by Ryan Grim details the successes and failures of the movement in the last decade.

You should educate yourself on the history of protest. The media has always been a serious impediment. There was never an “entire population” uniting or a “simple goal that others could get behind”. It was always extremely difficult. It often looked hopeless. Many people were killed in the streets, and others were brave enough to replace them.

Overall I think feeling helpless in the face of monumental challenges is normal. But closing your eyes and telling yourself “nothing can ever change, so why bother” is self-soothing and pathetic.

Things can change, and you can be a part of that positive change if you put in real effort.

What are we gonna do, vote?

“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal” - Emma Goldman

In the last 100 years, protest movements have given us women’s suffrage, workers rights including the weekend and overtime pay, gay rights, civil rights, etc. History shows us that we can have positive change, but it’s not as easy as just voting.

We can see right now how protest movements are moderating the Democrat’s support of Israeli war crimes.

But don’t you feel a responsibility to the rest of the world?

Say if, for example, your tax dollars were funding an ongoing genocide and starvation campaign, wouldnt you feel a bit responsible to change that?

Imagine the returns if that wealth was invested in education and healthcare instead of yachts and empty luxury housing.

If every pro-GameStop post on r/WSB and r/Superstonk was actually a joke then they have achieved levels of sarcasm far beyond what I thought possible.