>>7599

>not sure how relevant it is to this topic, because that history is not hidden and not secret it is all available.


My point is, the person who thinks rainbows are a sign of secret water tampering is a thing that is not hidden or secret, either, it's just demonstrably not true. The fact that she believes it wholeheartedly still doesn't make it true. The fact that mainstream media doesn't report it doesn't make it some kind of secret revelation, either.

In other words, some of these claims are hard to take seriously without any evidence to back them up.

>raw capitalism is incapable to support all that technology.


Speaking of things not making sense, there's a good one. Because not only does it not makes sense to think of technology as having to be supported by capitalism, there's actually a very easy fix if that becomes a problem.

Years ago, the US gasoline companies saw their profits fall, because there was too much product on the market. In response, they shut down many of their refineries. Doing so mean their product was produced less, resulting in scarcity and increasing prices. Sucked for the people working at those plants, but they had to go find other jobs, and the gas companies increased profits.

I don't think this was a good event for society, necessarily, but capitalism adjusts in this way all the time. What you see as oncoming collapse might simply be that kind of adjustment. And this is why I don't take seriously the idea that capitalism worldwide is on the brink of collapse, or will deteriorate to any kind of extent that communism can just walk in and pick up the pieces (and then ruin them, as they historically have done).

>and I never mentioned any utopia either.


Half of your posts describe some kind of future where communism rules and you can sit back and wallow in all the free art in an unfiltered Internet that communism lets you have, without anything more than wishful thinking to demonstrate how that might happen. That's about the exact definition of a utopia.