Red_Shift

This would require them being not completely paranoid about the poors stealing all their nice things and feeling like they're being ripped off by paying the poors more than they're worth. Being super rich poisons your mind and so they'll be suckered in by meritocracy and protestant work ethic type stuff that makes them think people need to work non stop to deserve a decent life. So this type of idea, while resulting in a better outcome for them, would seem unappealing because they'd see it as just paying for everyone else to jerk around.

Plus their rich friends who they compare themselves to would make fun of them for making such bad business decisions

I'm for getting rid of bourgeois "democracy" at any point, multi party elections would just benefit imperialism, the question is, is it being replaced by any form of proletarian democracy? Are there any elections within the party? Are unions and workers organizations given power within the party to vote? If they continue with a one-party socialist democracy, then I think that's exactly what they should be doing. But having no or a low amount of socialist democracy within that structure would be concerning. Right now I'm not certain that we have enough info to make that judgement call yet.

False consciousness is a hell of a drug

Because it isn't the best explanation of why things change given the available evidence. Putting aside all the other points entailed in mechanical materialism which badly fail given new discoveries in physics and cosmology, this third point rejects that what something is, what makes a thing a thing is to carry within it a contradiction that moves it to become something else. That change can be internal and necessary to its own characteristics rather than external. An atom is only an atom at a specific time, place, state, etc. There was a time when no atoms existed, and there will be a time when all atoms decay or combine into something else.

Motion does not have to be impressed upon matter by some outside force, but above all it is necessary to look for the inner impulses of development, the self-motion, inherent in all processes.

Mechanical materialists have to reject this, and it's simply a worse model that ignores internal change.

On consciousness, from my understanding the majority view is functionalism which basically states that the specific material and arrangement of the brain doesn't matter so long as it's able to produce the software required to generate subjective experience. So in a sense most philosophers would probably say that consciousness can't be directly reduced to neurons. It's sort of like, you cant see a video game by looking at the physical chips, its all been abstracted at so many levels that a direct connection to physical brain neurons only leads to loose associations with broad concepts, like memory or mood. Marxists would throw in that social factors play a huge role in what we consider consciousness and identity, so not even fully reducible to one brain and body.

What is that blue patch of solid color on the right side? It looks like someone went over it with the airbrush tool in MS paint. Would Ai leave that or has someone covered up something?

"They who can give up collecting STDs to obtain ultra HD goon sessions deserves neither syphilis nor goonery" - Ben Coomlin

Those were the good days. I also remember with Diablo and Starcraft if I lost the case I could randomly type in numbers for the CD key and it would eventually land on a real one.