I mean, set aside the slavery politics for just a minute, because that's low hanging fruit.
Imagine showing Thomas Jefferson the Hoover Dam. Imagine introducing Thomas Paine to the internet. Imagine George Washington's face illuminated by a mushroom cloud. How fucking dumb do you think Benedict Arnold would feel if you dropped him onto the deck of a US Aircraft Carrier. How flabbergasted would James Madison feel if you explained that we literally call it the "White House", because we never changed the color after the British burned it down. What do you think Patrick Henry would have to say about Social Security?
Thomas Paine is the only one I could tolerate hanging out with. The rest are getting pushed back into the time machine and sent to the Devonian period.
The rest are getting pushed back into the time machine and sent to the Devonian period.
Great. Now the sudden appearance of invasive modern bacteria just caused a mass extinction in the Devonian, the entire history of life on earth is changed, and the dominant life form is an amphibian of roughly chimpanzee intelligence.
He would be very interested in the very mature milf and gilf sections we have available.
My favorite writing from any founding father is Ben Franklin writing to a younger friend urging them to take an older mistress. My man had an 8 point presentation on the virtues of fucking older ladies. My favorite saying from this is " In the dark, all cats are grey".
"Because they have more Knowledge of the world, and their Minds are better stored with Observations; their conversation is more improving, and more lastingly agreeable. "
"Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Man, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a thousand Services, small and great, and are the most tender and useful of Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an Old Woman who is not a good Woman. "
"Because there is no hazard of children, which irregularly produced may be attended with much inconvenience. "
"Because through more Experience they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your reputation; and regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be inclined to excuse an old Woman, who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his manners by her good Councils, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes. "
"Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part. The Face first grows lank and Wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower parts continuing to the last as plump as ever; so that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old one from a young one. And as in the Dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of Corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal and frequently superior; every Knack being by Practice capable by improvement. "
"Because the sin is less. The Debauching of a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her Life unhappy. "
"Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend making an old Woman happy."
Not the origin, but he did further popularize it by using it a bit more literally than anyone before. The first use of it in literature was in Don Quixote.
I'm gonna continue believing that nobody said it until the inventor of bifocal glasses and a kind of stove tried to convince a peer to fuck old women! 😁
Benjamin Franklin cries in heaven anytime you use a hundred dollar bill to pay child support. Should have just had sex with a woman of experience. Why do we not heed the wisdom of our forefathers?
My point was that the Founders would have been familiar with the idea of transgender. Also, most of them had studied the Classics, and would have known about Sappho and the initiation rituals of the Spartan warriors.
Homosexualism* wasn't invented in the 20th Century.
*I can't find the video, but I once heard William F. Buckley use that word and it's lived in my head ever since.
You immediately assumed they held a position opposite of yours for no reason and then speak condescendingly to them, why? Maybe they think the founding fathers would be horrified by the same things you are horrified by. And even if they didn't, they aren't defending them, just stating the fact that they would indeed be horrified.
Funny thing. I happen to own an electronic device that allows me to search a thing called 'the world wide webbing.'
Using my advanced OKJeeves search engine, I learned something about Ms. Crawford.
One thing I learned about Ms. Crawford is that they don't think we should respect other people's preferred personal pronouns, so to honor that I'll refer to them as 'Ms.'
Who is this person, and why do I care about them? And if they're so important, and you're so clever, why can't you keep their name consistent in your own comment?
Edit: he's the guy in the OP. Again, what does that really have to do with anything? A different person in the comment section said, "the founding fathers would still be horrified". Why are you using someone else's beliefs to justify your rude attitude toward someone who never even implied they share those beliefs?
why can’t you keep their name consistent in your own comment?
You seem confused. I referred to Ms. Crawford twice, and both times as 'Ms. Crawford.'
Also, your edit is as confusing a jumble as I've ever read. I have no idea what you're unhappy about.
Finally, I didn't 'assume' anything. I've run across Ms. Crawford's comments in the past, and happened to remember the name. I guess I overestimated you; I should have added an '/s' but I thought the using the terms 'worldwidewebbing' and 'OKJeeves' would convey my sarcastic intent.
My point is that your original comment was not to Cawthorn. It was to someone completely different. Cawthorn could have a swastika in his profile picture and call for the extinction of all trans people and it wouldn't justify your being rude to some random guy online who said, "yeah the founding fathers would be horrified".
You're acting like you're talking directly to the OP and responding directly to Cawthorn's tweet, when you're not.
Finally, I didn't 'assume' anything. I've run across Ms. Crawford's comments in the past, and happened to remember the name.
I'm not saying you're assuming Cawthorn's position. I'm saying you're assuming Dookieman12's position. What do Cawthorn's past comments have to do with the person you're actually responding to?
They would be horrified about the lack of slavery, women having rights, that we didn't completely wipe out the natives and stuff like that the founders were monsters.
Benjamin Franklin is, by far, one of the most interesting figures in American history. He's one of my favorite historical people to read about because every time he's mentioned, you end up learning something fascinating about him.
I recently had a discussion with someone on Lemmy who absolutely hated Benjamin Franklin solely because he owned slaves early in his life.
Nothing else mattered to him. It didn't matter that Franklin later became one of the earliest and most outspoken abolitionists in American history, serving as president of the Philadelphia Abolitionist Society for years and advocating publicly for the abolition of slavery.
I completely condemn the fact that Franklin owned slaves. Slavery is morally reprehensible and indefensible. At the same time, I don't believe that should prevent us from recognizing Franklin as one of the most fascinating and consequential figures in American history. His life demonstrates that people can hold deeply immoral beliefs, later reject them, and spend years working to undo the injustice they once accepted.
It's very possible moral in the context of your own time. To still be seen as a moral bastion, centuries after the public discourse has advanced beyond anything you've ever been really exposed to is astonishing, so much so that some people are remembered specifically for that.
I'm sure in a century or two, 99.99% of us here will hold at least one view that is seen as reprehensible to the future zeitgeist. Grandpa and Grandma having some dated views isn't something recent, after all XD
Though Ben Franklin owned a few slaves when he was young, he later gave them up and became an outspoken abolitionist. I don't think he'd be too mortified to find out slavery had been ended.
He might be mortified to find out that prisoners can still be enslaved, and that the US has a more people incarcerated than any other nation in history. Both by percentage of population and by absolute number. "Land of the free", am I right?
I think they'd be horrified women and black people can vote if anything. Oh and the state imposes some taxes on the rich; I bet that'd horrify them too.
Thomas Jefferson resigned as Secretary of State due to the amount of corruption in government. I guarantee they wouldn’t be surprised. I would hope they would feel shame for not writing the constitution better.
Many of them were veterans of a war against France. France was their ally at the time, but they wouldnt have any problem with the concept of shifting alliances and loyalties.
Imagine if in another 250 years, the USA still has a system of government substantially similar to its present day form, but with a population of tens of billions spread across several planet Earths in alternate dimensions. Most people are wealthy enough to own a personal spaceship. Medicine has advanced to the point where doctors can bring you back from the dead as long as your brain is more or less in one piece. But now everyone judges the people of the 21st century for eating meat - it's considered pretty much the worst thing that anyone can do. Maybe you'll be convinced that you were wrong to eat meat, or maybe you won't. Even if you're convinced that you were wrong, maybe you'll think that the people of the future should have left wild animals alone rather than intervening to eliminate predation. But overall you would probably think the future was going rather better than you expected...
Tbf, nothing in that hypothetical suggests true utopia, maybe they have occasional crossdimensional wars fought with weapons that make nukes look like firecrackers or something
91 Comments
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 117 pts · 54d
I mean, set aside the slavery politics for just a minute, because that's low hanging fruit.
Imagine showing Thomas Jefferson the Hoover Dam. Imagine introducing Thomas Paine to the internet. Imagine George Washington's face illuminated by a mushroom cloud. How fucking dumb do you think Benedict Arnold would feel if you dropped him onto the deck of a US Aircraft Carrier. How flabbergasted would James Madison feel if you explained that we literally call it the "White House", because we never changed the color after the British burned it down. What do you think Patrick Henry would have to say about Social Security?
FFS,
Slovene85@sh.itjust.works · 41 pts · 54d
What would Hamilton think about his musical?
sundray@lemmus.org · 18 pts · 54d
"I should have thrown away my shot..."
AmyAye@nord.pub · 14 pts · 54d
He wpuld write 5000 blog posts about it.
Schmoo@slrpnk.net · 14 pts · 54d
Thomas Paine is the only one I could tolerate hanging out with. The rest are getting pushed back into the time machine and sent to the Devonian period.
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 17 pts · 54d
Great. Now the sudden appearance of invasive modern bacteria just caused a mass extinction in the Devonian, the entire history of life on earth is changed, and the dominant life form is an amphibian of roughly chimpanzee intelligence.
nightwatch_admin@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 54d
Sounds like progress
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 54d
I mean, the smell alone would be pretty horrible
cmbabul@slrpnk.net · 10 pts · 54d
Hey now, Paine would be a monster on TikTok
DmMacniel@feddit.org · 2 pts · 54d
Who?
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
Benedict Arnold
DmMacniel@feddit.org · 1 pts · 53d
Never heard of him.
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today · 47 pts · 54d
He would be very interested in the very mature milf and gilf sections we have available.
My favorite writing from any founding father is Ben Franklin writing to a younger friend urging them to take an older mistress. My man had an 8 point presentation on the virtues of fucking older ladies. My favorite saying from this is " In the dark, all cats are grey".
"Because they have more Knowledge of the world, and their Minds are better stored with Observations; their conversation is more improving, and more lastingly agreeable. "
"Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Man, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a thousand Services, small and great, and are the most tender and useful of Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an Old Woman who is not a good Woman. "
"Because there is no hazard of children, which irregularly produced may be attended with much inconvenience. "
"Because through more Experience they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your reputation; and regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be inclined to excuse an old Woman, who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his manners by her good Councils, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes. "
"Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part. The Face first grows lank and Wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower parts continuing to the last as plump as ever; so that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old one from a young one. And as in the Dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of Corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal and frequently superior; every Knack being by Practice capable by improvement. "
"Because the sin is less. The Debauching of a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her Life unhappy. "
"Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend making an old Woman happy."
"8th & lastly. They are so grateful!!!"
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 53d
In contrast to our current leadership that sells vulnerable young children to fill this same desire.
dismay3915@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 53d
Oh my god this is gold :))) He's totally talking about 55-60+ My man was a horny philosopher
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 54d
New headcannon: that's the ORIGIN of the saying, so anyone who uses it owes a piece of their vocabulary to Benny F's GILF fetish 😄
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 53d
Not the origin, but he did further popularize it by using it a bit more literally than anyone before. The first use of it in literature was in Don Quixote.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 53d
Too late!
I'm gonna continue believing that nobody said it until the inventor of bifocal glasses and a kind of stove tried to convince a peer to fuck old women! 😁
Arrandee@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 53d
Ben was a playa, no doubt about it.
TachyonTele_Esq@piefed.social · 3 pts · 53d
Lol preach brother
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 52d
Benjamin Franklin cries in heaven anytime you use a hundred dollar bill to pay child support. Should have just had sex with a woman of experience. Why do we not heed the wisdom of our forefathers?
deegeese@sopuli.xyz · 44 pts · 54d
Imagine looking up to slavers from hundreds of years ago as your moral compass 🤮
Dookieman12@piefed.social · 40 pts · 54d
Ben Franklin owned seven slaves early in his life, but later got rid of them, became an outspoken critic of slavery, and worked toward its abolition.
Also, slavery or not, the point still stands. They wouldn't recognize America today and would be horrified.
deegeese@sopuli.xyz · 23 pts · 54d
Tradition is just peer pressure from dead people.
If nothing would shock your ancestors, you have stagnated.
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 53d
FYI, I recognise America and am also horrified, if that helps.
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · -3 pts · 54d
Of what?
There was a transgender Royal Governor of New York State.
Edward Hyde, served 1702 to 1708.
You'd know that if you actually studied US history.
deegeese@sopuli.xyz · 11 pts · 54d
“Bonomi concluded that Lord Cornbury’s crossdressing was likely invented by his political enemies as character assassination.”
snooggums@piefed.world · 4 pts · 54d
"They were roommates!"
deegeese@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 54d
Sometimes it’s a “Sappho and her friend” situation, but it sounds like this guy was just a straight crook.
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · 0 pts · 53d
And...?
My point was that the Founders would have been familiar with the idea of transgender. Also, most of them had studied the Classics, and would have known about Sappho and the initiation rituals of the Spartan warriors.
Homosexualism* wasn't invented in the 20th Century.
*I can't find the video, but I once heard William F. Buckley use that word and it's lived in my head ever since.
deegeese@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 53d
… and your statement is totally false.
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · 0 pts · 53d
Were you there?
papalonian@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 54d
You immediately assumed they held a position opposite of yours for no reason and then speak condescendingly to them, why? Maybe they think the founding fathers would be horrified by the same things you are horrified by. And even if they didn't, they aren't defending them, just stating the fact that they would indeed be horrified.
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · -1 pts · 53d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Cawthorn
Funny thing. I happen to own an electronic device that allows me to search a thing called 'the world wide webbing.'
Using my advanced OKJeeves search engine, I learned something about Ms. Crawford.
One thing I learned about Ms. Crawford is that they don't think we should respect other people's preferred personal pronouns, so to honor that I'll refer to them as 'Ms.'
papalonian@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 53d
More condescending commentary.. ok?
Who is this person, and why do I care about them? And if they're so important, and you're so clever, why can't you keep their name consistent in your own comment?
Edit: he's the guy in the OP. Again, what does that really have to do with anything? A different person in the comment section said, "the founding fathers would still be horrified". Why are you using someone else's beliefs to justify your rude attitude toward someone who never even implied they share those beliefs?
DagwoodIII@piefed.social · 0 pts · 53d
why can’t you keep their name consistent in your own comment?
You seem confused. I referred to Ms. Crawford twice, and both times as 'Ms. Crawford.'
Also, your edit is as confusing a jumble as I've ever read. I have no idea what you're unhappy about.
Finally, I didn't 'assume' anything. I've run across Ms. Crawford's comments in the past, and happened to remember the name. I guess I overestimated you; I should have added an '/s' but I thought the using the terms 'worldwidewebbing' and 'OKJeeves' would convey my sarcastic intent.
papalonian@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
My point is that your original comment was not to Cawthorn. It was to someone completely different. Cawthorn could have a swastika in his profile picture and call for the extinction of all trans people and it wouldn't justify your being rude to some random guy online who said, "yeah the founding fathers would be horrified".
You're acting like you're talking directly to the OP and responding directly to Cawthorn's tweet, when you're not.
I'm not saying you're assuming Cawthorn's position. I'm saying you're assuming Dookieman12's position. What do Cawthorn's past comments have to do with the person you're actually responding to?
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 3 pts · 54d
This may come as a shock to you, but the existence of trans people is not the only significant change that has happened here since the 1700s.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 53d
chewypoops@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 53d
Even then, those slavers would still hate the MAGA movement.
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 53d
Simply based on the fact that most of them consider themselves christian yet have never actually read the bible.
theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 34 pts · 54d
They would be horrified about the lack of slavery, women having rights, that we didn't completely wipe out the natives and stuff like that the founders were monsters.
AscendantSquid@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 54d
Pretty sure that's what Madison Cawthorn's saying
mechoman444@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 53d
Benjamin Franklin is, by far, one of the most interesting figures in American history. He's one of my favorite historical people to read about because every time he's mentioned, you end up learning something fascinating about him.
I recently had a discussion with someone on Lemmy who absolutely hated Benjamin Franklin solely because he owned slaves early in his life.
Nothing else mattered to him. It didn't matter that Franklin later became one of the earliest and most outspoken abolitionists in American history, serving as president of the Philadelphia Abolitionist Society for years and advocating publicly for the abolition of slavery.
I completely condemn the fact that Franklin owned slaves. Slavery is morally reprehensible and indefensible. At the same time, I don't believe that should prevent us from recognizing Franklin as one of the most fascinating and consequential figures in American history. His life demonstrates that people can hold deeply immoral beliefs, later reject them, and spend years working to undo the injustice they once accepted.
phx@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 53d
People can be great in some ways yet fallible or bad in others, particularly when looked at through the lense of time.
Follies and achievements should often be looked at with the perspective that we've had the opportunity to learn a lot from both.
Godric@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 48d
It's very possible moral in the context of your own time. To still be seen as a moral bastion, centuries after the public discourse has advanced beyond anything you've ever been really exposed to is astonishing, so much so that some people are remembered specifically for that.
I'm sure in a century or two, 99.99% of us here will hold at least one view that is seen as reprehensible to the future zeitgeist. Grandpa and Grandma having some dated views isn't something recent, after all XD
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 18 pts · 54d
He's definitely watching the GILF category.
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 54d
He's having some trouble deciding
DmMacniel@feddit.org · 18 pts · 54d
Sure the would be mortified. Woman that can vote and have rights? The ban of slavery caught up to them in the end? An orange president?
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 8 pts · 54d
Though Ben Franklin owned a few slaves when he was young, he later gave them up and became an outspoken abolitionist. I don't think he'd be too mortified to find out slavery had been ended.
He might be mortified to find out that prisoners can still be enslaved, and that the US has a more people incarcerated than any other nation in history. Both by percentage of population and by absolute number. "Land of the free", am I right?
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 17 pts · 54d
"C'mon, Franklin, we're going to Delaware."
"Why should I?"
"For the drinking and the whoring."
Ben immediately stands up "Alright, boys, we got no time to spare! We gotta get to Delaware!"
NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io · 12 pts · 54d
I think they'd be horrified women and black people can vote if anything. Oh and the state imposes some taxes on the rich; I bet that'd horrify them too.
sundray@lemmus.org · 5 pts · 54d
So modern day Republicans, basically. Fuckers still have their hands around our throats.
Pacattack57@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 53d
Thomas Jefferson resigned as Secretary of State due to the amount of corruption in government. I guarantee they wouldn’t be surprised. I would hope they would feel shame for not writing the constitution better.
applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 9 pts · 54d
wait till he learns about trans women
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 53d
They would be deeply confused by our seeming hatred for France, then be deeply confused why America is fucking around in other countries.
Thomas Paine might be a little happy about a few things though. Hard to tell.
jrs100000@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 53d
Many of them were veterans of a war against France. France was their ally at the time, but they wouldnt have any problem with the concept of shifting alliances and loyalties.
Godric@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 48d
I wouldn't say Americans hate the French, we just have a friendly rivalry based on who can be the most arrogant!
They had us during the early years, we had them during the bad years, we have a long and brotherly history with those frog eating surrender monkeys :)
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 48d
Are you old enough to remember "Freedom Fries"? I know people still stuck in that era.
Danarchy@lemmy.nz · 7 pts · 54d
The real Ben Franklin if time travel was invented “JFC another one idk fuck off back to your OWN TIME, MAYBE?!”
kif@lemmy.nz · 6 pts · 54d
Basically this skit: https://youtu.be/20ghjoX2_GE
Snapz@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 53d
Prehistoric man would be straight up FLUMMOXED, by a lunchable.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 53d
To be fair, most people not from the US (and perhaps Canada) are too, the first time we hear about that weirdness 🤷🏻
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
We had lunchables in Canada when I was coming up. No idea if we still do, though.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 53d
I feel like virtually all of The Founding Fathers would have definitely moved to ban it except Ben Franklin, who would have vehemently opposed them.
This kinda supports but also detracts from the implications that follow from the OOP:
The Founding Fathers would probably have largely agreed that such things should be banned.
Why should we fawn over all of the opinions of people two centuries dead? Surely they got some things right and some things wrong, yes?
dharmacurious@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 54d
Franklin strikes me as a ThisVid type of guy. There's fucking weird stuff on there, and he'd be so fucking into it
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 54d
Weird how, exactly? 🤔
dharmacurious@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 53d
It is the Pinnacle of weird porn. Enough so that I, someone with a super high tolerance for weird, had to be really careful not to look at thumbnails
ContactClosure@lemmus.org · 4 pts · 53d
Fuck Madison Cawthorn. Let that piece of shit slide into obscurity.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 53d
*roll into obscurity
Zannsolo@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 52d
Hopefully obscurity is a lake and he's sliding on a wet mossy boat launch ramp
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 53d
Xhamster isn't American.
Godric@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 53d
Laughing kike a lunatic right now, don't mind me XD
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 54d
Imagine if in another 250 years, the USA still has a system of government substantially similar to its present day form, but with a population of tens of billions spread across several planet Earths in alternate dimensions. Most people are wealthy enough to own a personal spaceship. Medicine has advanced to the point where doctors can bring you back from the dead as long as your brain is more or less in one piece. But now everyone judges the people of the 21st century for eating meat - it's considered pretty much the worst thing that anyone can do. Maybe you'll be convinced that you were wrong to eat meat, or maybe you won't. Even if you're convinced that you were wrong, maybe you'll think that the people of the future should have left wild animals alone rather than intervening to eliminate predation. But overall you would probably think the future was going rather better than you expected...
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 54d
we still cant even figure out if genocide is bad, i dont think human utopia is coming any time soon.
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 54d
250 years isn't that soon.
Hamartia@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
It's only two and a half Henry Kissingers away
CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social · 2 pts · 54d
Tbf, nothing in that hypothetical suggests true utopia, maybe they have occasional crossdimensional wars fought with weapons that make nukes look like firecrackers or something
magnolia_mayhem@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
Was he really an xhamster guy? I feel like he'd be the "I have an account on heavy-r" kind of guy.
dismay3915@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 53d
What's heavy-r?
magnolia_mayhem@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 48d
Oh, you sweet summer child
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 53d
The kilo of lead?
DERRALEXANO@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 53d
AI is fooled yet again
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 53d
Dunno, he could be both 🤷🏻