acc4everypici

but did "the middle class" exist back then?

I thought "middle class" arose out of the bourgeois class later on?

It's like when I realized that slaves under christianity were not horribly abused as they were part of the church but simply didn't own very many things

slavery became awuful around things like deciding black people were closer to animals so it was ok to exploit them but really they were competing, or rather, trying to keep up with steam-based looms which were much faster at processing cotton so pick that cotton faster *cracks whip *

nobody because the times and places either of them lived in no longer exist. surely the places and the geographical locations and buildings are still there, but the people are all different, so it's not the same place

it's not about any of that "reasoning"... what matters it the conclusions: the results.

and even more than that, what matters is the capability of the paper to sway the opinion of real power.

our experience dealing with power may vary, in mine, power does not respond to "reasoning" nor any of that stuff.

nonetheless, I agree with your sentiment. why does science demand replication? IMO, a key underlying consequence is that ideas must be transferred, given away before they can be science.

the ideology of "real" human-centric science is equivalent to open source mindset. so then, my question is what to call all that research that happens, privately, in secret and under a lot of NDAs.... it is not science; that is product development.

modules? crates??? uhmm... namespaces???

I think you're conflating the language design stuff with the tooling (packaging, and calling that 'modules') ....to be fair, you're conflating but I'm fanboying python

in any case, the point being there's a distinction between an linker and a compiler but not in interpreted languages. so comparing rust's crates with JS, python (even java) is an instance of apples-to-oranges comparisons

then again, most history consists of whitewashing back when northern countries were exploiting everywhere else in various ways: imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism, capitalism, financialization,...

typical people prefer to pretend this is simply "order" and "progress"; seemingly blind to their own ideological baggage like fish in water

or maybe it gives a voice (i.e. political representation) to a larger pool of diverse people and communities?

you've pointed out the problem with the contemporary american two party state.

it's a see saw of nobody does anything but blame their systemic rival

either USA party system gets more than two parties because they're on a steady stalemate, like other poster was saying, 35 years of gridlocked congress because of two way ties.

or look at china, my prediction is that soon enough a ballsy european monarchy is gonna go full-blown one-party democracy or something clever like that

I am bothered by the implicit assumptions around property and ownership over cultural symbols which are tacit in your thinking.

as explicitly as I can, the very notion of saying "this is my culture, why are you adopting cultural practices or beliefs or symbols (or anything) from a culture that isn't yours!?" is why I'm raising a red flag here. I have a problem with that attitude.

this is not an easy topic.