How are they ontologically "naturals" at this point?

Also, just...humans are that shape because we're made of extremely complex amalgamations of protein, operating within multiple different systems that self-perpetuate on different timescales. We have gut bacteria. If you don't need gut bactieria, you probably want to be a different shape.

Of course billionaires want slave armies, but pension funds shouldn't be making bets that only materialise if slave armies materialise. We deserve better as a species, and the planet definitely deserves better.

Low polyamorous?

It attempts to keep pushing the "White Male Epic" that underscored the American Century and the Western film genre alike, even after the values exemplified therein have completely failed to live up to their stated aims, melting out like a choc-ice in a warm palm, leaving us holding the wrapper.

Don Featherstone's flamingo is the synthesis of a 19th Century dialectic that struggled to reconcile the good and bad outcomes of manufacturing.

The kitchification of masculinity exemplified by Alex Karp, Bezos, Musk tries and fails to reconcile the climate crisis with Buzz Lightyear heroics.

Keynes is still the left's most influential modern economist, but aside from being a genius and on good terms with important parts of elite society, he was fortunate to be working at a time when the U.K. was extraordinarily wealthy and powerful as a global force.

I think "the bond markets" is important here. I'm not going to pretend here like I fully understand it, but from what I do understand, if governments try and raise taxes to increase spending, bond markets negate the benefit of that by devaluing the currency. It results in an ever-shrinking state.

The dream that you, a very rich but not very smart person, could pay money to be a smart person.