🤡 Foul Fotchos 🤡
BREED: Moscow Jokester
IDEOLOGY: Utopianism-localism
WEAPON: Chunky Shotgun
BREED: Moscow Jokester
IDEOLOGY: Utopianism-localism
WEAPON: Chunky Shotgun
February 16, 2026 at 1:31 AM
🤡 Foul Fotchos 🤡
BREED: Moscow Jokester
IDEOLOGY: Utopianism-localism
WEAPON: Chunky Shotgun
BREED: Moscow Jokester
IDEOLOGY: Utopianism-localism
WEAPON: Chunky Shotgun
Was watching a yt video essay defending the grimness of modern Trek with thesis that utopianism of TNG-era Trek was an artifact of '90s "End of History". Fukuyama's term is dumb, but I get it.
So, proposal: period from fall of the Berlin Wall to 9/11 shall henceforth be the Intermission of History.
So, proposal: period from fall of the Berlin Wall to 9/11 shall henceforth be the Intermission of History.
February 15, 2026 at 9:00 PM
Was watching a yt video essay defending the grimness of modern Trek with thesis that utopianism of TNG-era Trek was an artifact of '90s "End of History". Fukuyama's term is dumb, but I get it.
So, proposal: period from fall of the Berlin Wall to 9/11 shall henceforth be the Intermission of History.
So, proposal: period from fall of the Berlin Wall to 9/11 shall henceforth be the Intermission of History.
It really speaks to where his mind is, framing every pet issue as 'survival', 'defence', 'warfare', 'fighting', et cetera.
He seems incapable of imagining the very post-conflict utopianism he claims to champion. I mean what happens to post-Earth 'culture' in every sci-fi ever? It homogenized.
He seems incapable of imagining the very post-conflict utopianism he claims to champion. I mean what happens to post-Earth 'culture' in every sci-fi ever? It homogenized.
February 15, 2026 at 8:44 PM
It really speaks to where his mind is, framing every pet issue as 'survival', 'defence', 'warfare', 'fighting', et cetera.
He seems incapable of imagining the very post-conflict utopianism he claims to champion. I mean what happens to post-Earth 'culture' in every sci-fi ever? It homogenized.
He seems incapable of imagining the very post-conflict utopianism he claims to champion. I mean what happens to post-Earth 'culture' in every sci-fi ever? It homogenized.
In the same vein, TOS Trek's technological utopianism resembled other SF of its era: less innocent than it seems at a distance, an idea that through collective force of will, machines invented to kill during WW2 (jet engines, radar, rockets, atomic power) could be plowshared into a better tomorrow.
February 15, 2026 at 8:32 PM
In the same vein, TOS Trek's technological utopianism resembled other SF of its era: less innocent than it seems at a distance, an idea that through collective force of will, machines invented to kill during WW2 (jet engines, radar, rockets, atomic power) could be plowshared into a better tomorrow.
Even in that first season though, they're clearly doing a This is why we need Utopianism/Progressivism prequel thing, it just culminates in that stupid planet bomb thing
February 15, 2026 at 3:10 AM
Even in that first season though, they're clearly doing a This is why we need Utopianism/Progressivism prequel thing, it just culminates in that stupid planet bomb thing
Like sorry to sound like the Most Annoying Essayist rn, but that specifically Cold War Liberal utopianism, that feel of "the atom bombs are gonna kill us all, but we'll rebuild and abandon religion and money and nations" is so old but also so unique in this day and age, and I'm greatful for it.
February 15, 2026 at 2:55 AM
Like sorry to sound like the Most Annoying Essayist rn, but that specifically Cold War Liberal utopianism, that feel of "the atom bombs are gonna kill us all, but we'll rebuild and abandon religion and money and nations" is so old but also so unique in this day and age, and I'm greatful for it.
Tbh I know the utopianism isn't as clean cut in Trek as we talk about, but that utopian edge I feel *needs* to be there, even more so in this day and age with so much of sci-fi engaging in dystopia, or unable to escape Captalism.
February 15, 2026 at 2:54 AM
Tbh I know the utopianism isn't as clean cut in Trek as we talk about, but that utopian edge I feel *needs* to be there, even more so in this day and age with so much of sci-fi engaging in dystopia, or unable to escape Captalism.
But again, that's not necessarily a "rigged" economy. It might be just the "free market" because contra free market utopianism from bad economics in the conservative style, also reflected in its secondary "neoliberal" formulation, nothing about markets ensures a certain share will go to labor.
February 15, 2026 at 2:25 AM
But again, that's not necessarily a "rigged" economy. It might be just the "free market" because contra free market utopianism from bad economics in the conservative style, also reflected in its secondary "neoliberal" formulation, nothing about markets ensures a certain share will go to labor.
New Deal Utopianism
February 15, 2026 at 1:49 AM
New Deal Utopianism
Lol quick backpedal from AI will solve climate. Even utopianism has its limits I guess.
Here's a Fox News segment where contributor Marc Thiessen explains that we don't need to regulate greenhouse gases because "AI will help us find lots of ways to adapt to a warming climate so we can live with it."
Special Report with Bret Baier 2/12/26 Thiessen: "we can't destroy the free market economy in order to stop the planet from warming" | Media Matters for America
www.mediamatters.org
February 13, 2026 at 10:34 PM
Lol quick backpedal from AI will solve climate. Even utopianism has its limits I guess.
switch utopianism. which, works btw
February 13, 2026 at 9:55 PM
switch utopianism. which, works btw
(As Plato:) There is nothing superstitious about forcing bad consequences for the hubris of paternalistic utopianism. Humanity should never be frozen into a vision of the best. A creative society must be willing to tolerate some degree of instability because creativity is inherently unstable.
February 13, 2026 at 7:41 PM
(As Plato:) There is nothing superstitious about forcing bad consequences for the hubris of paternalistic utopianism. Humanity should never be frozen into a vision of the best. A creative society must be willing to tolerate some degree of instability because creativity is inherently unstable.
…impulses in Utopianism and what we will not permit within them, how easily Solving A Problem and Annihilating A Group can bleed in and out of eachother in our imaginations…
I’m having a really hard time putting this into words. But… like… just the way we would see “NO WHEELCHAIRS!!!” as a…
I’m having a really hard time putting this into words. But… like… just the way we would see “NO WHEELCHAIRS!!!” as a…
February 13, 2026 at 6:58 AM
…impulses in Utopianism and what we will not permit within them, how easily Solving A Problem and Annihilating A Group can bleed in and out of eachother in our imaginations…
I’m having a really hard time putting this into words. But… like… just the way we would see “NO WHEELCHAIRS!!!” as a…
I’m having a really hard time putting this into words. But… like… just the way we would see “NO WHEELCHAIRS!!!” as a…
If anything Star Trek is essentially about woke utopianism and what's bad about many recent iterations is trying to replace earnest wide-eyed hope with a tired idea of "gritty" borrowed from less interesting sci fi
February 13, 2026 at 12:08 AM
If anything Star Trek is essentially about woke utopianism and what's bad about many recent iterations is trying to replace earnest wide-eyed hope with a tired idea of "gritty" borrowed from less interesting sci fi
Every time Stoller has explicitly expressed his political vision it's a reactionary small-town americana utopianism that implicitly erases minorities. He's dumb, he's a grifter, but he's also a reactionary
February 12, 2026 at 8:25 PM
Every time Stoller has explicitly expressed his political vision it's a reactionary small-town americana utopianism that implicitly erases minorities. He's dumb, he's a grifter, but he's also a reactionary
no utopianism. the opposite.
states are sometimes (imo inevitably) terrible 'custodians' of a money supply. and monopoly control means there's no corrective mechanism when they are. "people want state-backed money" is true until it's not. and at different places and times it's regularly not.
states are sometimes (imo inevitably) terrible 'custodians' of a money supply. and monopoly control means there's no corrective mechanism when they are. "people want state-backed money" is true until it's not. and at different places and times it's regularly not.
February 12, 2026 at 8:52 AM
no utopianism. the opposite.
states are sometimes (imo inevitably) terrible 'custodians' of a money supply. and monopoly control means there's no corrective mechanism when they are. "people want state-backed money" is true until it's not. and at different places and times it's regularly not.
states are sometimes (imo inevitably) terrible 'custodians' of a money supply. and monopoly control means there's no corrective mechanism when they are. "people want state-backed money" is true until it's not. and at different places and times it's regularly not.
Talk of building a good society is often met with the charge of utopianism. But this is wrong, argues @profkepickett.bsky.social of @equalitytrust.bsky.social.
The blueprint for a fairer society lies in front of us – but it requires moving away from “trickle-down” economics
#LSEInequalitiesBlog
The blueprint for a fairer society lies in front of us – but it requires moving away from “trickle-down” economics
#LSEInequalitiesBlog
Why my vision of a Good Society is evidence-based, not utopian
We have a choice about the kind of society that we build. A fairer, more prosperous society is possible, but requires moving away from “trickle-down” economics.
blogs.lse.ac.uk
February 11, 2026 at 10:13 AM
Talk of building a good society is often met with the charge of utopianism. But this is wrong, argues @profkepickett.bsky.social of @equalitytrust.bsky.social.
The blueprint for a fairer society lies in front of us – but it requires moving away from “trickle-down” economics
#LSEInequalitiesBlog
The blueprint for a fairer society lies in front of us – but it requires moving away from “trickle-down” economics
#LSEInequalitiesBlog
Delighted that my current project on Thomas Merton and Cold War America is scheduled to appear in 2027 as part of Palgrave Macmillan’s series on Utopianism link.springer.com/series/15242
Palgrave Studies in Utopianism
Utopianism is an interdisciplinary concept which covers philosophy, sociology, literature, history of ideas, art and architecture, religion, futurology and ...
link.springer.com
February 11, 2026 at 10:09 AM
Delighted that my current project on Thomas Merton and Cold War America is scheduled to appear in 2027 as part of Palgrave Macmillan’s series on Utopianism link.springer.com/series/15242
I found myself questioning if the author of the game’s story was right leaning due to how hard the narrative leans into tech Utopianism and how much it equates environmental anxiety to zealotry. But that doesn’t seem to be the artistic intent.
February 10, 2026 at 7:29 PM
I found myself questioning if the author of the game’s story was right leaning due to how hard the narrative leans into tech Utopianism and how much it equates environmental anxiety to zealotry. But that doesn’t seem to be the artistic intent.
Tldr: Yes! #postgrowth
- Even the UN is now advocating post-growth. 🇺🇳
- Techno-utopianism isn't going to solve this. 🥼
- Apparent de-coupling of growth and emissions in some countries is masking scope 3 emissions. ⛴️
- Carbon isn't the only pollution that matters. 🏭
share.google/Lt2TaUbeoA3s...
- Even the UN is now advocating post-growth. 🇺🇳
- Techno-utopianism isn't going to solve this. 🥼
- Apparent de-coupling of growth and emissions in some countries is masking scope 3 emissions. ⛴️
- Carbon isn't the only pollution that matters. 🏭
share.google/Lt2TaUbeoA3s...
Economic growth is still heating the planet. Is there any way out?
Rising GDP continues to mean more carbon emissions and wider damage to the planet. Can the two be decoupled?
share.google
February 10, 2026 at 4:05 PM
Tldr: Yes! #postgrowth
- Even the UN is now advocating post-growth. 🇺🇳
- Techno-utopianism isn't going to solve this. 🥼
- Apparent de-coupling of growth and emissions in some countries is masking scope 3 emissions. ⛴️
- Carbon isn't the only pollution that matters. 🏭
share.google/Lt2TaUbeoA3s...
- Even the UN is now advocating post-growth. 🇺🇳
- Techno-utopianism isn't going to solve this. 🥼
- Apparent de-coupling of growth and emissions in some countries is masking scope 3 emissions. ⛴️
- Carbon isn't the only pollution that matters. 🏭
share.google/Lt2TaUbeoA3s...
You make some good points. I suppose I concentrate mostly on intellectual supports for fascism in the form of "greed is good," anti-democracy free market utopianism, fake anarchism, because it's also surely there, and well, because I'm an economist, and it does rather stand out like a sore thumb.
February 9, 2026 at 8:31 PM
You make some good points. I suppose I concentrate mostly on intellectual supports for fascism in the form of "greed is good," anti-democracy free market utopianism, fake anarchism, because it's also surely there, and well, because I'm an economist, and it does rather stand out like a sore thumb.
I would love to indulge in tech utopianism and say that an internet without guardrails for everyone with an internet connection is one in which we are all freer and safer but I don't know how you can be alive in 2026 and think that.
February 9, 2026 at 4:46 PM
I would love to indulge in tech utopianism and say that an internet without guardrails for everyone with an internet connection is one in which we are all freer and safer but I don't know how you can be alive in 2026 and think that.
What kind of an American are you? Standing for
1) rule by humane laws, democracy, free speech, pluralism, open civil debate, scientific inquiry
or
2) authoritarianism, vapid universalism, naive utopianism, censorship, fringe pseudo-science
?
1) rule by humane laws, democracy, free speech, pluralism, open civil debate, scientific inquiry
or
2) authoritarianism, vapid universalism, naive utopianism, censorship, fringe pseudo-science
?
February 8, 2026 at 7:19 PM
What kind of an American are you? Standing for
1) rule by humane laws, democracy, free speech, pluralism, open civil debate, scientific inquiry
or
2) authoritarianism, vapid universalism, naive utopianism, censorship, fringe pseudo-science
?
1) rule by humane laws, democracy, free speech, pluralism, open civil debate, scientific inquiry
or
2) authoritarianism, vapid universalism, naive utopianism, censorship, fringe pseudo-science
?
![in the pages of The Atlantic Monthly that he would not “publish any future work of mine
which may do damage in the hands of irresponsible militarists.”°° He remained
ambivalent about the transformative power of new technologies, indulging in neither the
boundless hype nor the digital utopianism of later pundits.
“Progress imposes not only new possibilities for the future but new restrictions,”
he wrote, in Human Use. He was concerned about human-made restrictions as well as
technological ones, especially Cold War restrictions that threatened the flow of
information so critical to cybernetic systems: “Under the impetus of Senator [Joseph]
McCarthy and his imitators, the blind and excessive classification of military
information” was driving political leaders in the United States to adopt a “secretive frame
of mind paralleled in history only in the Venice of the Renaissance.” Wiener, echoing
many outspoken veterans of the Manhattan Project, argued that the postwar obsession
with secrecy—especially around nuclear weapons—stemmed from a misunderstanding of
the scientific process. The only genuine secret about the production of nuclear weapons,
he wrote, was whether such bombs could be built. Once that secret had been revealed,
with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no amount of state-imposed secrecy
would stop others from puzzling through chains of reasoning like those the Manhattan
Project researchers had followed. As Wiener memorably put it, “There is no Maginot
Line of the brain.”
To drive this point home, Wiener borrowed Shannon’s fresh ideas about
information theory. In 1948, Shannon, a mathematician and engineer working at Bell
Labs, had published a pair of lengthy articles in the Be/l System Technical Journal.
Introducing the new work to a broad readership in 1949, mathematician Warren Weaver
explained that in Shannon’s formulation, “the word information...is used in a special
sense that must not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular,](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ndjyym3ihrqu3g25gdztefrv/bafkreidt63kize4fcoica4y4rphc75qhnlrbnh7ztwp6vofnnobnexewqa@jpeg)
February 7, 2026 at 10:55 PM
![in the pages of The Atlantic Monthly that he would not “publish any future work of mine
which may do damage in the hands of irresponsible militarists.”°° He remained
ambivalent about the transformative power of new technologies, indulging in neither the
boundless hype nor the digital utopianism of later pundits.
“Progress imposes not only new possibilities for the future but new restrictions,”
he wrote, in Human Use. He was concerned about human-made restrictions as well as
technological ones, especially Cold War restrictions that threatened the flow of
information so critical to cybernetic systems: “Under the impetus of Senator [Joseph]
McCarthy and his imitators, the blind and excessive classification of military
information” was driving political leaders in the United States to adopt a “secretive frame
of mind paralleled in history only in the Venice of the Renaissance.” Wiener, echoing
many outspoken veterans of the Manhattan Project, argued that the postwar obsession
with secrecy—especially around nuclear weapons—stemmed from a misunderstanding of
the scientific process. The only genuine secret about the production of nuclear weapons,
he wrote, was whether such bombs could be built. Once that secret had been revealed,
with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no amount of state-imposed secrecy
would stop others from puzzling through chains of reasoning like those the Manhattan
Project researchers had followed. As Wiener memorably put it, “There is no Maginot
Line of the brain.”
To drive this point home, Wiener borrowed Shannon’s fresh ideas about
information theory. In 1948, Shannon, a mathematician and engineer working at Bell
Labs, had published a pair of lengthy articles in the Be/l System Technical Journal.
Introducing the new work to a broad readership in 1949, mathematician Warren Weaver
explained that in Shannon’s formulation, “the word information...is used in a special
sense that must not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular,](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ndjyym3ihrqu3g25gdztefrv/bafkreiep7c5ur76h6d4neps5mrfau5mli4cy62pqhdkoy5finfoheqdypm@jpeg)
February 7, 2026 at 8:43 PM