kivork [he/them]

I’ll agree about the rigid format of movies but to say that’s why I think movies have the greatest impact on me of any media.

A movie is a very tightly packaged combination of art forms that has to hit all the right brain pieces at all the right times because they have such a limited amount of space to do it in.

The greatest movies are those that can keep you completely focused for two hours and affect you for days after. They are able to masterfully execute on all art forms at once.

Even for great books I generally read them in multiple sittings which at least temporarily takes me out of their world. Games are an even greater collection of arts in that they also add an interactove element, but they’re often so long that I never quite get fully into the stories. I ran into a soft-lock in Disco Elyseum that caused me to have to re-load a save and redo some pieces. That experience isn’t too uncommon in gaming but it’s something that would never stand in a movie.

Basically I think the greatest movies are those that manage to affect me so so much with such tight constraints.

The fundamental problem with your question is the perception that there are these prescribed stages of development and each stage is an advancement on the previous.

Instead, the indigenous peoples in the world were just as “advanced” as the colonizers who slaughtered and enslaved them. They were not on different stages of a tech tree like in a game, they just developed different societies.

So of course slavery was not necessary because there is no such thing as necessary advancement. Even if you argue that advancements in medicine requires more modern modes of production, places like Cuba or the Soviet Union skipped or sped through or skirted around or limitidly used Capitalism and still developed incredible health programs. So then capitalism isn’t even necessary for technological advancement in that way, let alone slavery.

Pretty much in my experience. I’m sure there were some people who worked with companies to help with DEI initiatives who were doing so in good faith, but ultimately the system doesn’t work in a way that would allow change.

HR departments are naturally responsible for any diversity training and practices, but HR is beholden to the interests of executives and investors who don’t care at all.

That’s why the only reason any inclusive practice is ever adopted is because of regulation or because companies think they can get an edge in marketing.

It just makes chud whining even dumber because if they understood how the businesses they pretend to worship work then they’d know that these practices are just capitalism doing capitalism things, which they claim to support.

They’re not real. I’ve worked at multiple places with DEI initiatives. They amount to a yearly training where white people get to vent their bigotry and a position within HR devoted to focusing on more inclusive recruitment tactics.

For the most part we still hired almost exclusively white people.

In reality DEI was just a way for companies to pretend they’re cool places to work and DEI was dropped the moment it started getting backlash.

I remember when people were saying that texting and abbreviations like LOL were the end of books and language as we know it.

A lot of this is just old people looking to blame the woes of society on a group they are definitively not part of. Can’t be because of capitalism that people are living with their parents, if that were the case then maybe old people would have to accept some blame.