• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 29th, 2024

help-circle
  • Poor people in Liberia also often can’t got to a market in Liberia to shop. Like i get what yall are getting at disabled, oppressed, or just plain unlucky people in the core do sometimes live worse than average people in the periphery, i understand the feeling that yall are trying to put out that being poor in the core is brutal and its true but, its not a sensible comparison, capitalism is just as brutal and oppressive to poor people in the periphery except even more so.

    Look im not saying that things arent bad in the core and especially bad in some areas and for some people, just that a little perspective is called for here, britain is rich by world standards, by any metric it is rich, in the article they weren’t comparing britain to any country in Africa, or Latin America but another country in europe. Pretending it is not rich obfuscates the reality of imperialism, there are 2 categories of capitalist countries core and periphery and britain is solidly in the core.

    Also while its clear cut when looking at things like food, its simply cheaper in the periphery (tho ill point out in my personal experience i have found food to almost always be cheaper in the core as percent of income), other necessities are more complicated, if u look at housing for example yes in the core it is expensive but its also higher quality than in the periphery, the poorest people in britain may be living in moldy apartments with roommates or several generations of their families, but the poorest people in the periphery are living in makeshift shacks with no utilities.

    As for China they call themselves a developing country and they share some characteristics with developing countries but in many regards they are closer to developed countries, so they make for a poor comparison with the core especially because it is a much more fair an equal society, to put it simply there is a reason that “second world” was a useful category and it applies here.





  • imma be real with u i can not comprehend how u can hold that view unless u only play “aaa” slop or very few games at all. because this just doesnt hold with reality, i dont think i even know of a single successful indie game where the love for the medium itself doesnt come across perfectly clear, there are indie games out there that were clearly just made for money but guess what those dont go anywhere because people can tell its soulless, its also true for most AA/small studios. And while someone just fucking around with a medium in their free time could maybe express themselves more (tho that is debatable too) i dont think it shows that they love games more than someone who made it their fucking life. Also being able to express themselves more because they arent limited by capital is a far cry from loving or caring about the medium more.

    Also this doesnt even make sense, most of the biggest open source games out there are extremely derivative, basically copies of popular games and if anything display more of appreciation for the concept of open source software than video games.

    Also also genuinely curious how does this view extend into other mediums do u regard all professional authors are hacks because they make money from what they write, what about musicians and other kinds of artists. Or is it only video games cuz u like open source stuff.