Conversation

Notices

1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Wednesday, 16-Mar-2022 07:24:10 UTC Strypey

   • hypolite

   @hypolite
   It occurs to me we may have fallen into a classic materialism vs. idealism dichotomy. Let me be clear, I'm not arguing that changing communication changes material (ie systemic) reality all by itself. Rather that improved communication can open up new possibilities for organizing to effect systemic change. These changes then open up new possibilities for communicating. At the macro scale, the two feed into each other. But communication is easiest to change at a human scale.

   • Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 likes this.
   • hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Wednesday, 16-Mar-2022 07:24:33 UTC hypolite

     in reply to

     • hypolite
     @strypey Thanks for revisiting the topic, I do fully agree with you this time.
     Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 likes this.
   • Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Wednesday, 16-Mar-2022 07:25:48 UTC Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅

     in reply to

     • hypolite
     @strypey @hypolite Do you mean Xi, Trump or both?
   • Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Wednesday, 16-Mar-2022 07:25:49 UTC Strypey

     in reply to

     • hypolite

     @hypolite
     In your example, the Chinese had to make major changes to the way they communicated about and with the "capitalist" world, before they could participate in the post-WW2 world trade system. Without those changes, we would not have seen the cross-border business integration that then fed into the changes you mention in US attitudes towards China. I note that this qualified acceptance reverted to suspicion and sabre rattling within a one term presidency, with no major systemic change.