Congratulations, republicans, you’re killing your own small towns by being insufferable and refusing to allow any culture to exist then you wonder why your kids refuse to move back to the area…
Oh they want culture to exist, but it’s a monoculture and it’s their own. Of course we all know what happens to monocultures. Or at least anybody knows anything about farming does.
Of course we all know what happens to monocultures.
Inbreeding?
Council member Christy Martinez-Garcia, who represents the north side of Lubbock where the art walk takes place, looked puzzled when the discussion started. She later said she was blindsided by it.
“I don’t think anybody was prepared for this,” Martinez-Garcia told The Texas Tribune. “More people attend First Friday than vote.”
Martinez-Garcia described the trail as a hugely successful event that attracts about 20,000 people monthly. She said it’s in the city’s best interest to be inclusive.
“We need to make it open for anybody and everybody, I’m straight but I don’t hate,” Martinez-Garcia told her fellow council members. “I appreciate your input, but it’s so important that we don’t pick who we are representing.”
Based Christy Martinez-Garcia
More people attend First Friday than vote.
WTYP
Ah yes freedom
There’s nothing that protects your right to violate your genetic dress code in the US Constitution. In fact, the government has a duty to protect children from WrongDress, because of the pedophiles.
genetic dress code
I would like a copy of the Genetic Dress Code. I need to make sure I’m compliant.
The only dress code that exists in genetics is full blown nudity.
Fuck off you insane jack ass
The only dress code that exists in genetics is full blown nudity.
A compelling argument. I’d be interested in subscribing to your newsletter.
I laughed. Apparently at least 9 people got mad though?
yeah, I checked their comment history. The fact that they’re continuing to defend their position means they’re either serious or a troll. This isn’t sarcasm missing the mark.
A satirical troll is a thing. You know what, I should probably change their tag in my app.
Luddites in Lubbock.
The Luddites had a point about the ‘de-skilling’ of work and the alienation of labor. And they regularly cross-dressed.
These people are just obsessed with enforcing misery.
General Ludd is my hero:
The Luddites weren’t wrong. Their name has been badly misused. They were skilled professionals who were concerned that they would no longer have work as a result of the industrial revolution. They were largely right in that assessment. That doesn’t mean you should try to hold up societal/technological progress like they did, but their concerns were valid. They weren’t just afraid of technology as they are generally portrayed.
Technology has not resulted in reductions in employment.
Depends on the field. Ain’t no milk man or ice box delivery anymore.
Depends on the country, but that was not my point. Overall employment has not suffered at the hands of technology; it improved efficiency, yes, and resulted in some occupations needing fewer (or no) people, however people found work in other areas.
You seem to be missing the Luddites point, which is that the benefits of industrialization all went to oligarchs and shareholders while the displaced workers suffered economically as the value of their skills evaporated.
The problem is Capitalism, having a machine do the work should liberate people from toil rather than income.
Unless efficiency increases as the population does too.
Those aren’t skills. Driving a truck is a skill, and there’s no shortage of demand for truck drivers today.
You completely missed the point.
Please highlight it for me.
The industrialization of industry under Capitalism benefits Capitalists, not Workers.
The luddites would never have been a thing if the rewards of automation were distributed among those whose labor they devalued.
Industry consolidation and outsourcing reduces the local labor demand by setting monopsony rates for workers.
This consolidation is often facilitated by legal enclosures, environmental degradation, and state subsidies/contracts for political insiders.
So you end up with working people who lose access to primitive accumulation, while big industrial owners are able to undercut skilled tradesmen with below cost merchandise in a recessionary economy.
Sure but sometimes individuals do lose their jobs so it would have been ethical to stop technological progress back in the 1800’s
It would not have been ethical with increasing populations and no means to scale up effectively to meet their needs. Individuals, sure, but not overall; technology has replaced people in specific situations, people who then went on to get employment in other areas.
So those workers who were made redundant got severance pay and training for the new jobs they were assigned to, right?
No? They got thrown out on their asses with no means to provide for themselves and their families?
Geeze, sounds like the Luddites were right.
Looking at the bigger picture… layoffs happen all the time for many reasons. Overall, technology has not increased unemployment.
layoffs happen all the time for many reasons
Layoffs are the result of primitive capital being monopolized through enclosure and the local labor force being corralled into industries that generate more goods than the deflated economy can absorb.
There’s no layoffs for yeomen farmers and independent craftsman. You only experience the phenomenon when land barons control the property and dictate how many people they wish to employ.
That doesn’t mean you should try to hold up societal/technological progress like they did
A lot of what they protested was industry consolidation and price fixing.
I love the rainbow made from shirts in the crowd
