Giving up advancements in science and technology is stagnation.
That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting giving up some particular, potential advancements in science and tecnology, which is a whole different kettle of fish and does not imply stagnation.
Thinking it’s a good idea to not do anything until people are fed and housed is stagnation.
Why do you think that?
stagnation
Why do you see feeding and housing everyone as stagnation?
The people who are motivated by advancing technology, aren’t motivated to overcome corruption, incline equality, to replace economic systems, etc.
That seems a bit presumptuous. Why do you think people who are motivated to advance technology aren't motivated to overcome corruption, etc.?
All you’d be doing is stifling innovation, improvement, a reason for hope in the future
I disagree. I don't see why focussing on feeding and housing people implies stifling innovation. And do you not see feeding and housing everyone to be an improvement and a reason for hope in the future?
Because politics has become entertainment. Starmer is boring, Farage is entertaining.
We already have the resources and technology to do this
But not the will. Because people are focused on building spaceplanes instead of focused on what matters.
"your pet issue doesn't matter because my pet issue exists"
That's not what this is. This is more "your civil war doesn't matter because we're all going die". It's not an "issue", "pet" or otherwise. The fact that you think of it that way is why it's happening.
We're all going to die, either in wars or starving to death. Within our lifetimes. Don't you get it?
Here's an idea: why not take care of people's basic needs like water, food and shelter, and then build a spaceplane?
Watching the collapse of civilisation and seeing people murder each other in the streets over food. Ha ha, silly humans.
Provides no evidence whatsoever to back up what it's saying. What a crap article.
... with huge thighs and calves
Uhhh...