This is true. Another issue is that it depolitizes complex matters by reducing them to merely technical problems, and then it leaves them on the hands of "experts". For instance, instead of addressing the social and economical reforms needed in order to reduce criminality, we place surveillance cameras on every possible corner of our cities and link them to biometric databases operated by security agencies; instead of addressing the need to scale down our economies in order to avoid the incoming environmental disaster, we encourage corporate investment in things like carbon markets and forest finance, while indoctrinating people about the wonders of electric cars and smart recycle bins which award "green points", redeemable at local stores, to people who use them; instead of asking the tough questions of food sovereignty, we encourage a net increase in agricultural production through GMOs, monoculture and heavy use of pesticides and herbicides, and so on. It's all about efficiency here: ethical and political questions are thrown away as needless talk. Once these technological solutions are implemented, they are extremely difficult to pull back, they acquire the barnish of the obvious, of the "one-best-way". What is worse, technological developments do not exist as isolated objects but are embedded in a tightly-knit sociotechnical network, by virtue of which a new development may trigger a large series of related developments, and modify vast areas of our daily life, in a way and to a extent that nobody really intended in the first place. This is not an ode to technological determinism: it's just noting that, as a philosopher of technology once put it, artifacts have politics. In other words, there are no politically-neutral technologies, so we should be very careful whenever one of these alleged panaceas is offered to us, and err on the side of caution rather than shrugging at the possible consequences of a given project. It's about bringing politics and ethics back and question the pretense of "experts" of reducing all quarters of social life to quantifiable problems.
No, that guy just happened to read Jacques Ellul's work on technology and got it all wrong.
You can be an environmentalist, question the ubiquitous belief in salvation through technology and call for a better and more balanced understanding of those matters, and that doesn't mean you'll become the Unabomber. Just like you can be a socialist and question capitalism and not become Stalin. Or a Christian, and not become Torquemada.
Let's avoid the "appeal to extremes" fallacy, shall we?
Welcome to Bananaistan, it's a pleasure to have a nation with such an esteemed reputation in WA visiting our fair region. I hope you enjoy your stay.
Darths and Droids is ranked 87,797th in the world and 262nd in Forest for Most Developed, scoring 52.12 on the Human Development Index.
Also NS: The Ascendant Hive is ranked 23,280th in the world and 130th in Forest for Most Developed, scoring 72.66 on the Human Development Index.
U wot m8
I dunno, seems like something that would be impractical to deliver internally, and you could probably do almost as much gynaecological damage with a high-calibre firearm, without needing to get that close to the target.
Oh wait, I see what you mean.
This shows how many "dead" nations NS has. Can someone explain to me why people have a multitude of nations that do little else that just continue to exist and gather population? I understand the use of (some) puppets for various reasons but to be honest it is starting to bother me when I open a pack of cards hoping to find some interesting nation just to find out that at least 3 out 5 haven't answered an issue in over a year and are basically dormant puppet states or "museum" nations of the MT army or their like. Can't they find i different way to remind people of the nasty things humanity in general and fascism in particular can do because it is starting to reek a little like a perpetual attempt at blowing their own horn?
Those trophy nations belong to some of the most active, committed, and long-standing players on NationStates. The way it works is that anti-fascist forces capture fascist or fascist affiliated regions, put a password in place and then eject everyone. The region is subsequently refounded to prevent the original founder regaining it if they return. It opens an embassy with one or more regions that represent the invading force and so takes its place on the trophy list. Such regions typically contain just one nation which has to log in periodically to prevent the region ceasing to exist and the name becoming available again to the fascists.
There would be no point answering issues on such nations because (a) that just isn't what they're for (b) the player probably has so many of them that doing so would be very hard for someone already pretty busy (c) gameplay nations typically avoid issues so that the activity feed in a contested region can be read for significant events without being clogged by "following new legislation in..."
You don't have to approve of this activity or want to take part, but I wanted to point out that there are solid gameplay reasons why there are so many of these nations. They spring from activity rather than inactivity. Junk the cards or sell them to those from the anti-fascist groups who actively collect them.