Let’s say you’re the leader of a primarily indigenous country where most people are peasants who sustain themselves through the practice of subsistence agriculture, like Peru or Bolivia. Let’s say you want to develop the country’s economy in the way development is traditionally conceived of. This involves the creation of a modern industrial economy at the expense of the indigenous peasant’s traditional ways of life. Would you say that by doing this, you would be oppressing them to an extent that is unacceptable? If so, what is the correct vision to have for the future if you’re in a country like that?

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context

How exacting does a culture have to be, if it can’t survive thousands, perhaps millions of people changing their lifestyle,

People living in premodern conditions typically consider “the lifestyle” and the institutions that surround it to be an integral part of the culture. Leftist types often follow this line because they consider those people’s experiences to be the most legitimate.

Or just build the city over the hill and leave the door unlocked for them idk

Do you think that is possible?

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@hexbear.net

Create post

Protests, dual power, and even electoralism.

Labour and union posts go to !labour@www.hexbear.net.

Take the dunks to /c/strugglesession or !the_dunk_tank@www.hexbear.net.

!chapotraphouse@www.hexbear.net is good for shitposting.

Do not post direct links to reactionary sites.

Off topic posts will be removed.

Follow the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember we’re all comrades here.

Community stats

  • 107

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 127K

    Comments