Conocí el Gore por morboso y motu proprio. Ahora México me lo receta diario y motu Príapo. Amante de letras (de cambio) y ciencia ficciòn, medioateo.

Monterrey
Joined July 2009
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Antonio Gramsci entendeu o cristianismo melhor do que muitos cristãos. É isso que o torna perigoso e não os slogans que lhe atribuem. Ele foi preso em 1926 e condenado a vinte anos, quatro meses e cinco dias. Escreveu trinta e três cadernos numa cela, entre 1929 e 1935, sob censura, num vocabulário cifrado onde marxismo virava filosofia da práxis e Lênin virava Ilitch. A pergunta que o consumia era por que a revolução não vinha onde deveria vir. Venceu na Rússia agrária. Fracassou na Alemanha, na Hungria, na Itália. Depois da morte dele, venceu na China camponesa, no Vietnã, em Cuba e em nenhuma sociedade ocidental madura. Havia algo no Ocidente que repelia o golpe. A resposta dele foi que, atrás do Estado, existia uma linha de fortificações: Escolas, imprensa, associações, famílias e, sobretudo, igrejas. Marx tratou a religião como ópio, um sintoma a ser dissolvido. Gramsci tratou-a como fortificação, uma posição a ser tomada. Chamou isso de hegemonia: O consentimento que se fabrica antes de qualquer voto, no terreno daquilo que as pessoas simplesmente consideram óbvio. O camponês italiano não se revoltava não porque estivesse satisfeito, mas porque possuía uma ordem de sentido que explicava o mundo, a dor e a morte melhor do que qualquer panfleto. Enquanto essa ordem se transmitisse de pais para filhos, não havia revolução possível. Logo, escreveu, a guerra decisiva é anterior à política e é travada dentro das instituições que formam a consciência. Estudou a Igreja Católica com uma atenção que nenhum inimigo dela dedicou. Considerava-a a mais duradoura máquina de formação de consenso já construída e o que o fascinava era exatamente aquilo que os cristãos costumam achar banal: a capacidade de manter o teólogo e o camponês dentro da mesma fé, por séculos, sem que a estrutura se partisse. Estudou a disciplina dos jesuítas como caso organizacional e concluiu que o partido precisava fazer o que a Igreja fazia: ser o Príncipe moderno, um organismo coletivo que não apenas dispute o poder, mas forme homens. Um partido contra-Igreja, com ideologia própria e ocupando o lugar de Deus. Não é força de expressão: Gramsci escreveu que o Príncipe moderno toma o lugar, nas consciências, da divindade ou do imperativo categórico, e se torna a base de uma laicização completa da vida e dos costumes. O erro de quem o combate é tratá-lo como problema econômico. Não é. A filosofia da práxis, no vocabulário dele, é historicismo absoluto e mundanização absoluta do pensamento. Ou seja: Não há ordem transcendente, não há natureza humana estável, não há lei natural, não há verdade que não seja filha da sua época. Tudo o que existe foi construído historicamente e, portanto, pode ser desconstruído. O ataque não é ao lucro, é ao ser. Se nada é dado por Deus, então família, matrimônio, sexo e pessoa são arranjos negociáveis, e a revolução não precisa expropriar fábrica nenhuma: basta reeducar. Em 1985, Ernesto Laclau e Chantal Mouffe pegaram a hegemonia gramsciana e trocaram explicitamente o proletariado por uma cadeia de demandas identitárias. Foi assim que a revolução de classe virou revolução de identidade, com o mesmo método e outro sujeito. Augusto Del Noce viu ainda mais fundo. Para ele, o marxismo terminou como o grande servo do niilismo (posição de que não existe fundamento último, nem para a verdade, nem para o valor, nem para o sentido da vida) e seu fruto real foi a sociedade esvaziada da pergunta pelo sentido. A revolução não veio de foice na mão. Veio como indiferença, como uma sociedade que não persegue a fé porque simplesmente já não consegue formulá-la. — No Front Militar
96
611
44
2,140
72,814
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Toda la gente creativa y democrática del planeta apoya a Lula, desde Madonna y Lady Gaga a Javier Bardem o Mark Ruffalo. Solo vi a los financistas apoyar a Bolsonaro. En todas partes pasa lo mismo. Es una especie de lucha entre la creatividad, el arte y la cultura, por un lado, y, por otro, el mundo financiero. Hasta fines del siglo XX (y desde Atenas, pasando por Roma, Florencia y Londres) no era así: las finanzas eran amigas del arte y la creatividad. Hoy son una especie de parásito que fagocita todo lo vital para producir guerra y muerte.
3
20
2
85
2,283
Chipigaro bot retweeted
A plausible explanation of why they want to ban cash.
8
105
11
420
38,666
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Películas que comparten el mismo periodo de tiempo
2
63
2
348
15,116
Chipigaro bot retweeted
"Nuestro pais está ganando cientos de miles de millones de dólares por lo que estamos haciendo (bombardear) en Oriente Medio... los titulares dirán que no me importa el sufrimiento de la gente mientras gane dinero, me importa un carajo". El ladrón capitalista de Trump admite que le importa un carajo que la gente sufra mientras él y los 4 parásitos de la oligarquía se llenen los bolsillos con dinero manchado de sangre inocente de Oriente Medio. Hay que reconocer solo una cosa a Trump, retrata a la perfección lo que siempre ha sido el capitalismo y el imperio, un amasijo de criminales sin escrúpulos que amontonan dinero y cadáveres de igual manera.
76
1,602
79
2,281
46,168
¡No le pierden!..hdlv 😂 25 % le estaban cobrando de propina y todavía se enoja y dice "si quiere no deje nada"
646
1,504
33
11,156
455,583
Y con la baja natalidad este tema se va a ir replicando en todo el mundo...
The ugly truth about France and some of the other European countries currently in turmoil - and which none of the politicians want to admit because it'd be political suicide - is that you can't solve the problem by going after immigrants (as the right asserts) or the rich (as the left asserts), but you could solve it by going after the old. One extraordinary statistic for you: people over 60 in France, a quarter of the population, own 60% of France's wealth, non-financial and financial (ofce.fr/pdf/revue/2025/3-192…). And here is another crazy statistic: that same quarter of the population, those above 60, receive nearly two-thirds of all social spending by the French government (previssima.fr/actualite/prot…) - which is famously among the highest in the world (France's government spending is an insane 57.3% of GDP). Last statistic: they make up about 40% of voters because they're a third of registered voters (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/266…), and they turn out far more than anyone else (franceinfo.fr/elections/sond…). Put our 3 statistics together and there's almost a bit of an apartheid situation here: the old own most of the country's wealth, collect most of the social spending and have the political power to keep it that way. Which makes them a de-facto rentier class, living off assets and transfers paid for by younger generations. And, of course, at the risk of stating a truism, the future is built by the young. Yet France keeps effectively taking money away from them to give it to those whose working lives are already behind them - and need the money far less since they already own the country's wealth. What about inheritance, I hear you ask? That's the funniest/saddest aspect: given that life expectancy has kept rising, the French now inherit a home at 54 on average. The most common case is someone in their 80s leaving it to heirs in their 50s, in effect the very old transferring wealth to the about-to-be old (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/fic…). You can add this to our earlier apartheid statement: on top of all the rest, even when the old finally let go of their wealth, it stays within their own "camp". That's my personal situation, incidentally: I'm 42, my father is 71 and he is starting to look at ways to pass things on to me and my siblings, when our professional lives are already well settled, so it'll arrive when it changes things the least, which is pretty much the French system in a nutshell. Now, I get that there'd be some unfairness in going after them: they paid into the system their entire working lives, playing by the rules of a social contract that told them if they paid up they'd collect at the end. Changing the rules now means breaking that promise, which is admittedly unfair. But there's no magic wealth tree in any society: you can only take it where it is. That's the way most major societal transformations end up happening. They're often triggered by a catastrophic event (the so-called "four horsemen": mass-mobilisation war, revolution, state collapse, plague) BUT what really drives change is a transfer: wealth gets pried from the privileged class who've been sitting on it and handed to those who'll build what comes next. So, in theory and in an ideal world, you can do without the catastrophic event and directly proceed with the transfer... The fact that in France, and elsewhere in Europe, it's the youth protesting is probably no coincidence - even though they don't frame it as a generational fight. And even though, cruel irony, the left politicians many of them march behind promise to bring the retirement age back to 60 (lcp.fr/actualites/legislativ…), which would make the situation even worse. Let's say they understand intuitively that the system is stacked against them, even if they haven't yet figured out how. And politicians are obviously doing what politicians do, meaning pandering to the people who actually vote, while pointing the young towards easier - and politically convenient - scapegoats. To be clear I'm not saying it's the only problem in France, VERY far from it. I'm also not saying that all old people in France live a lavish lifestyle at the expense of younger generations: there are also plenty of very poor retirees who, if anything, would deserve more. What I am saying is that it's probably the biggest elephant in the room: everyone can see it, nobody dares mention it - no politician, from any side, wants to run on cutting grandma's pension - and it makes every other problem harder to fix.
1
1
62
Chipigaro bot retweeted
The ugly truth about France and some of the other European countries currently in turmoil - and which none of the politicians want to admit because it'd be political suicide - is that you can't solve the problem by going after immigrants (as the right asserts) or the rich (as the left asserts), but you could solve it by going after the old. One extraordinary statistic for you: people over 60 in France, a quarter of the population, own 60% of France's wealth, non-financial and financial (ofce.fr/pdf/revue/2025/3-192…). And here is another crazy statistic: that same quarter of the population, those above 60, receive nearly two-thirds of all social spending by the French government (previssima.fr/actualite/prot…) - which is famously among the highest in the world (France's government spending is an insane 57.3% of GDP). Last statistic: they make up about 40% of voters because they're a third of registered voters (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/266…), and they turn out far more than anyone else (franceinfo.fr/elections/sond…). Put our 3 statistics together and there's almost a bit of an apartheid situation here: the old own most of the country's wealth, collect most of the social spending and have the political power to keep it that way. Which makes them a de-facto rentier class, living off assets and transfers paid for by younger generations. And, of course, at the risk of stating a truism, the future is built by the young. Yet France keeps effectively taking money away from them to give it to those whose working lives are already behind them - and need the money far less since they already own the country's wealth. What about inheritance, I hear you ask? That's the funniest/saddest aspect: given that life expectancy has kept rising, the French now inherit a home at 54 on average. The most common case is someone in their 80s leaving it to heirs in their 50s, in effect the very old transferring wealth to the about-to-be old (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/fic…). You can add this to our earlier apartheid statement: on top of all the rest, even when the old finally let go of their wealth, it stays within their own "camp". That's my personal situation, incidentally: I'm 42, my father is 71 and he is starting to look at ways to pass things on to me and my siblings, when our professional lives are already well settled, so it'll arrive when it changes things the least, which is pretty much the French system in a nutshell. Now, I get that there'd be some unfairness in going after them: they paid into the system their entire working lives, playing by the rules of a social contract that told them if they paid up they'd collect at the end. Changing the rules now means breaking that promise, which is admittedly unfair. But there's no magic wealth tree in any society: you can only take it where it is. That's the way most major societal transformations end up happening. They're often triggered by a catastrophic event (the so-called "four horsemen": mass-mobilisation war, revolution, state collapse, plague) BUT what really drives change is a transfer: wealth gets pried from the privileged class who've been sitting on it and handed to those who'll build what comes next. So, in theory and in an ideal world, you can do without the catastrophic event and directly proceed with the transfer... The fact that in France, and elsewhere in Europe, it's the youth protesting is probably no coincidence - even though they don't frame it as a generational fight. And even though, cruel irony, the left politicians many of them march behind promise to bring the retirement age back to 60 (lcp.fr/actualites/legislativ…), which would make the situation even worse. Let's say they understand intuitively that the system is stacked against them, even if they haven't yet figured out how. And politicians are obviously doing what politicians do, meaning pandering to the people who actually vote, while pointing the young towards easier - and politically convenient - scapegoats. To be clear I'm not saying it's the only problem in France, VERY far from it. I'm also not saying that all old people in France live a lavish lifestyle at the expense of younger generations: there are also plenty of very poor retirees who, if anything, would deserve more. What I am saying is that it's probably the biggest elephant in the room: everyone can see it, nobody dares mention it - no politician, from any side, wants to run on cutting grandma's pension - and it makes every other problem harder to fix.
770
1,578
321
9,216
1,205,897
Chipigaro bot retweeted
The difference between those who have everything and those with nothing in this world is heartbreaking 💔 Source: ferdychildrenfoundation1 on IG / Writer: Ian
3,820
15,357
1,212
42,984
2,622,854
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Más de dos décadas después #SinCity sigue siendo un referente visual. El rodaje sobre croma y la creación digital de escenarios, iluminación y atmósferas trasladaron magistralmente la estética del cómic a la pantalla e influyeron profundamente en la industria. #VFX
23
156
7
1,241
45,289
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Guillermo del Toro hizo una película con un monstruo con los ojos en las manos y aún así lo más aterrador de ese filme era un militar franquista. ¿Y se sorprenden 20 años después que apoye a la izquierda? Creo que les falla la comprensión de lo que consumen.
50
652
20
4,105
33,164
Chipigaro bot retweeted
La biblioteca de Ursula K. Le Guin explica bastante bien la amplitud de su ciencia ficción. De niña, Dunsany le descubrió que un escritor podía inventar mundos enteros. #CienciaFicción #UrsulaKLeGuin instagram.com/p/De6fx-rCLEX/…
1
3
41
Chipigaro bot retweeted
This ai video is an absolute masterpiece. Also I made it.
172
234
18
2,338
103,588
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Dlaczego właściwie usunięto Kaddafiego, którego znaliśmy wyłącznie jako dyktatora? 1. W Libii nie pobierano opłat za prąd, a energia elektryczna była zapewniana bezpłatnie wszystkim obywatelom. 2. Pożyczki były nieoprocentowane. Wszystkie banki były państwowe, a zgodnie z prawem oprocentowanie pożyczek udzielanych obywatelom wynosiło 0%. 3. Kaddafi obiecał, że nie zapewni mieszkania swoim rodzicom, dopóki wszyscy obywatele Libii nie będą mieli własnego domu. 4. Każda para nowożeńców w Libii otrzymywała od rządu wsparcie w wysokości 60 000 dinarów. 5. W Libii edukacja i opieka zdrowotna były zapewniane bezpłatnie. Przed dojściem Kaddafiego do władzy wskaźnik alfabetyzacji wynosił zaledwie 25%, ale w trakcie jego rządów wzrósł do 83%. 6. Jeśli obywatele Libii chcieli mieszkać na wsi, otrzymywali bezpłatnie sprzęt AGD, nasiona oraz zwierzęta hodowlane. 7. W przypadku gdy leczenie nie było możliwe w Libii, państwo pokrywało koszty leczenia za granicą oraz koszty zakwaterowania i podróży. 8. Przy zakupie samochodu rząd dofinansowywał 50% ceny pojazdu. 9. Cena benzyny wynosiła 0,14 dolara za litr. 10. Libia nie miała żadnego zadłużenia zagranicznego i dysponowała rezerwami walutowymi w wysokości 150 miliardów dolarów. (Obecnie są one zamrożone na całym świecie) 11. Niektórzy Libijczycy po ukończeniu studiów nie mogli znaleźć pracy; w takich przypadkach rząd wypłacał im średnią pensję. 12. Część dochodów ze sprzedaży ropy naftowej w Libii trafiała bezpośrednio na konta bankowe wszystkich obywateli. 13. Matka, która urodziła dziecko, otrzymywała 5 000 dolarów. 14. Cena 40 bochenków chleba wynosiła 0,15 dolara. 15. 25% obywateli Libii posiada wyższe wykształcenie. 16. Kaddafi zrealizował największy na świecie projekt nawadniający, zwany „Big Man Project”, aby zapewnić nieprzerwane dostawy wody na pustyni. Jeśli nazwiemy to "dyktaturą", to czym w ogóle jest demokracja? P.S. Kaddafi twierdził, że jeśli go zabiją, "falochron" się zawali i Afrykanie zaleją Europę 🤔
619
5,887
294
19,344
728,308
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Hallasgo en AIFA
8
24
6,319
Chipigaro bot retweeted
es una putada tener un foton asi y no poder subirlo
📷 Autoría desconocida, Francia. Octubre de 2026.
16
2,026
7
51,631
759,803
Chipigaro bot retweeted
¿Conocen un buen artículo que recopile todas las formas de identificar si un texto fue escrito por IA? En español no logro encontrar fuentes tan completas. Una cosa es identificarlos después de leer decenas o cientos de textos así, pero es necesario que más gente sepa detectarlos
3
1
1
11
1,948
Chipigaro bot retweeted
Os Boomers são a geração mais sortuda da história. -Compraram casas por valores irrisórios -Criaram um sistema onde 3 gerações sustentam a aposentadoria deles -Conseguiram bons empregos sem curso superior -Se aposentaram antes que a IA tomasse o emprego deles
123
645
49
6,138
116,892
Chipigaro bot retweeted
¡Primera publicación en chino, y en la gran revista Science Fiction World! Pueden leer este cuento En español: shorturl.at/NyOf0 (p. 128) En inglés: clarkesworldmagazine.com/ner… Un honor aparecer en esta revista, y en el especial de los 20 años de El Problema de los Tres Cuerpos
6
9
43
1,021
Chipigaro bot retweeted
A gente precisa voltar a fazer sites, blogs e conteúdos descentralizados de redes sociais. Chega de redes sociais. Chega de algoritmos e publicidades disfarçadas de conteúdos. 😭😭😭 Quero minha Internet dos anos 90 e 00 de volta.
138
1,813
163
10,142
92,701