/cyb/ - cyberpunk and cybersecurity

what's wrong with the ones made in China?

Doesn't support US jobs as much.

>>1114
Nationalism is a red herring. The elite try to pull the wool over our eyes to get us to think of people in other places as lesser in order to exploit the tension for their own gain.

>>1115
Its less of nationalism and more of trying to support the economy of which you are a part of.

>>1116
to a large degree we live in a global economy.

this is evidenced by the avaliability of chinese built laptops.

>>1116
If you're interested in a sustainable economy of any kind, you should be buying used laptops.

>>1115
I hate this term now, but could you be any more blue pilled? All governments, all of media importance, all in power constantly push the idea of globalism and pure equality. Not all peoples can get along, and a dumb and divided nation is easier to scam than a homogenous one.

To avoid the political bullsoykaf other lains are putting here for you
Your best bet would be dig through ebay, craigslist, and maybe the lenovo website. iirc there are only certain models made in the USA; but you will pay out the nose for them. I hope this helps lain.

>>1116
if this is the reason to buy something, it seems that probably the most obvious way is to buy from someone local, as local as possible. if you dont have a thinkpad factory nearby (and frankly even if you do, as lenovo probably takes a lot of the cash elsewhere), you should probably look to buy used from someone in or near your town. this way most or all of your money is likley spent in an area that is actually close to you, rather than going off to corporate hq, which is probably very far away.

>>1155
An English language site about a Japanese cartoon with Europeans discussing things… Sounds pretty global anon.

>>1155
I'm totally with you Socket,
We cants all get a long, its not even race, its culture, and some people hold on to their culture like its a crutch.

>>1162
This site is not a global as you think, we have the odd people from outside the west, but for the most part its Australians, Americans, New Zoolanders, Europeans, and North Americans.

There are outliers but that's it. This site is representative of the western nations, a smattering of other cultures but very dominantly western.

The main diversity you see is the diversity seen in the west, like the people listed above.

The working class of the world where sold on diversity, now, now they are growing to hate it and vote against it.

>>1155
Where I live they push nationalism. It feels to me that both of those who you call "blue pilled" and those that are supposed to be "red pilled" are participating in a giant scam to make people forget that there is a third choice: international solidarity.

>>1165
The working class tend to be communitarians.

This is a great write up

Wow this thread got totally hijacked.

Anyways its left wing to support the working class in your own country. It even furthers our own interests supporting paying tech jobs.

>>1169
all threads get hijacked

>>1155
You would do well to learn that there is a difference between globalization and globalism.

>>1185
All the same soykaf,

the workers suffer to benefit the wealthy.

>>1192
That worldview is painfully narrow. The wealthy aren't the only people who benefit from globalization; the middle and lower classes do, too. Common goods are made available at much lower prices. Uncommon goods are made common. Unknown goods are made known. Scientific advances propagate through all communities, not just those whence they originate.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-population-in-extreme-poverty-absolute?stackMode=absolute&country=OWID_WRL
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.IMRT.IN

>>1194
sssssshhh, it's easier to just blame your own problems on foreigners.

>>1194
Yeah, because decades of stagnate wage growth and abuse of overseas workers to undermine our positions is just our fault?

>>1201
Wages have stagnated in all sectors, not just manufacturing.
It's less about jobs going to China and more about your wages going to landlords and Wall St.

Borders are just lines on a map. And modern states are barely related to what they were in the first place. They are more like feuds than they are actual nations.
Language binds tighter than flags.

>>1203
What about nation-states then?

>>1203
Well yes we can see the Swiss and the Germans are just so close.

France and former French Colonies. Very close.

Culture is what binds us, not language or borders.
Borders are just ways of saying "This is where this groups influence ends"

Remember though, white people dont have culture

>>1214
Europeans have culture its just you have to ask someone from a 3rd world country about it otherwise you won't know. Like people in Pakistan or New Zealand can tell you all about English culture.

>>1219
I think its denial, its not exotic, its our culture no ones interested in that!

Where the truth is, people are, every nation has a different and interesting culture, it seems there i an effort to dilute it into nothing though, since there is more profit to be made.

>>1214
>>1221
Nation-states don't have a monopoly on "Culture"; there are as many human cultures as there are human communities.

To reduce oneself to the service of whichever collection of oligarchs one happened to be born amidst is to let oneself be owned in the fullest extent of the term; claimed as a dull but readily usable tool of use by whichever power-interest dominates ones surrounding terrain at the time. If submission is one's forte then be my guest, but this clearly isn't the case for the majority of homo sapiens. To subject the vast majority to systemic hierarchy is thus not only annoying but very arguably misanthropic. From a biological perspective, one could query ecology for signs of this self-destructive behavior in the present apex predator of this planet. Yup, it ripples out from us straight into and through all other organisms on Earth, resulting in a decline in Earth-bound unique lifeforms, the toxification of the planet's water supply, accelerated climate change; resulting in an increase in natural disasters and overall ecosystem destablilization.

Look at inner country ethnic conflict that's been going on for decades or centuries.

Generally that conflict occurs because of cultural differences. The preliminary conclusion to make from the fact such differences and conflict exist is that nation or state are not determinant of culture.

>>1226
Lotta fancy words in that paragraph there. Tell me, you familiar with the difference between "State" and "Nation"? A State is the functional, legal corpus- it's everything that we'd call government, military, rulers- what have you. But a nation, now a nation is entirely different. It's the networks of people over which the State resides. In a perfect world, a nation would create a state, and a state would represent a nation. That presently isn't the case.

"To subject the vast majority to systemic hierarchy"… I'd suggest putting down the Stirner for a sec, and going out to find someone smarter than you. Hierarchy is natural- not in the State, legal-corpus sense, but in the national, organic sense. There are a lot of people out there smarter than you are. I'm not attacking you, or anyone else reading this- not calling you stupid. Normal distributions are just a fact of life, and statistically speaking, you're probably a lot closer to the center than you think you are.

Saying that hierarchy is the cause of mass extinction, water pollution, climate change, all natural disasters in general- that's cute, but it's overly simplistic, not to mention false. People are gonna create these problems en masse wherever they gather. If you'd like, you could probably start a business or a company to clean up the planet- but that would involve hierarchy, wouldn't it?

One more thing. Clean up your damn syntax. Prose ain't prettier when it's purple- use the simplest word you can when you're writing something. It took me a good half a minute to figure out what you were saying.

tl;dr you'll cowards don't even hierarchy

>>1162
I see this kind of argument everywhere, and it's one of the most outlandish things imaginable.
The idea that because some people can, in name of a given deep interest, form bonds and share ideas regardless (more or less) of their cultural and ethnic background, is in any way indicative, let alone a proof, that the entire world could someday do the same about all things, all the time, everywhere, is hard to even wrap your head around.
It's the same logic as saying that if I like one post, or some posts, a person makes online, I should just marry them for the rest of my life, and that will deffo work out.
It follows the same notion that if someone likes hiphop, for example, as a music genre, and they don't support mass immigration, they're somehow a hypocrite, or haven't thought things through.
There's just no sense of proportion in the entire reasoning.

>>1466
You are mixing two pretty different things right there. Forming bonds and sharing ideas with fellow humans is very different from liking all their ideas and adopting them, as you are suggesting with your own examples. Furthermore, we could get into a whole debate here about the true nature of humans, and whether we are bound by natural law to perpetual conflict and competition, or we can achieve balance and agreement for all.

Regardless of plausibility, this perfect future in which all people coexist peacefuly and respect each others rights and spaces is in the best interest of the vast vast majority of people around the world. Most people don't want to be kings and millionaires. Most people wanna do whatever they like and be left alone. Comparing more or less basic and common human needs and desires with tastes doesn't make any sense at all.

>>1268
Lol the only thing that's cute is your ability to construct a strawman whenever someone's gotten under your skin.

I never denied the relative difference in people's levels of specialization. What I advocated against is systemic hierarchy. Social hierarchy institutionalized in static structures. These structures create fixed imbalances in power leading to unneeded social disparity, hindering the self improvement of the general population (which is in all of our self-interest). You seem to fetishize the concept of the 'Nation', to the point of advocating systematizing it's artifical hierarchy, appealing to rather unrelated notions of the "organic" and the "natural". Hierarchy exists in nature, absolutely. But so does mutual aid. Systematizing hierarchy only perpetuates our already dominant position as an apex animal on this planet. Why? If a pack of wolf comes and ravages all the wildlife in a local bioregion, would it be reasonable for the local population to inject them with steroids? Back to mutual aid. Mutual aid (or cooperation) is a phenomenon within social organisms and allows for the most complex forms of organization that manifests on this planet. Did Herbert Spencer leave that part of Darwin out for you? If so then I'm sorry. You see the 'Nation' is nothing but an empty idea, grounded in nothing physical. To do away with nationalism would allow for the gradual integration of all humans into a a global mutual aid network benefiting each participant reciprocally, as it's in the interest of me to be of aid to my relationships of interest, which in turn helps me as I help them. This, by contrast to your organizational form that's merely a couple of centuries old and is the arbitrary abstraction of the self-interest of a bunch of business men and chauvinists, is the actually natural and organic form of organization that your mom / dad / guardian hopefully taught you when you hit puberty, in the form of "the birds and the bees".

>Saying that [systemic] hierarchy is the cause of mass extinction, water pollution, climate change, all natural disasters in general- that's cute, but it's overly simplistic, not to mention false.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170308003615/https://www.epa.gov/climate-change-science/causes-climate-change#Greenhouse
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropocene-epoch-experts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth
https://web.archive.org/web/20071209222459/http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/Publications/Corporate/NewsOnline/NewsOnline36/beef_exports.htm
https://www.idrc.ca/en/article/case-study-brazil-mercury-contamination-amazon
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/use/?cid=nrcs142p2_054028
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_garbage_patch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill
This is all caused by irrational and inefficient market and state-led systemic hierarchy. I'd love to read your point-by-point counters to these widely know facts of scientific research, pumpkin pie.
>Q_Q I'd suggest putting down Stirner
I've already consumed Stirner while now preparing recipes for libertarian communism and if that upsets you I urge you to try and stop me, icepecker.

>>>>1268
Oh I seem to have missed the last "point" you made within the mist of adhoms, strawmans and other soykafty argumentum ad passiones lacking empirical studies and reason.
>If you'd like, you could probably start a business or a company to clean up the planet- but that would involve hierarchy, wouldn't it?
Indeed it would! Participating within an irrational economy that thrives on the parasitic exploitation of the natural environment and working populations in turn for corporate non-entities to war with each other and to ideally never stop growing (functionally similar to cancers) would indeed be counter-productive if it's ecological stability you're after! Something far more worthwhile would be to undermine, attack and transcend the state and the market-based economic systems that it defends while proliferating self-management, mutual aid and production for use to finally put an end to this period of human development.