Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
85 Posts 41 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

    New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

    David :SetouchiExplorer:D This user is from outside of this forum
    David :SetouchiExplorer:D This user is from outside of this forum
    David :SetouchiExplorer:
    wrote last edited by
    #9

    @cstross Glad that more and more people realize that the oligarchy wants to kill us. I thought I was going crazy. But billion of deaths is consistent with their vision of a livable planet destabilized by an out-of-control climate.

    ManniC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

      New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

      Angela MillerA This user is from outside of this forum
      Angela MillerA This user is from outside of this forum
      Angela Miller
      wrote last edited by
      #10

      @cstross
      I dream of new Nuremburg style trials and 'detention' for the Super Rich.
      Take their stuff, their names and their freedom. Redistribute.

      ElaineM 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • FeòragF Feòrag

        @cstross While I am in France, I still fall short of that. There again, there’s a joke in there about guillotines and falling short.

        KoochulainnK This user is from outside of this forum
        KoochulainnK This user is from outside of this forum
        Koochulainn
        wrote last edited by
        #11

        @feorag @cstross Sure, but if you want to get ahead, get a guillotine

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • FeòragF Feòrag

          @cstross It seems the solution to the question the billionaires ask is to take their ill-gotten gains and redistribute the money so everyone has a decent standard of living.

          Hugo MillsD This user is from outside of this forum
          Hugo MillsD This user is from outside of this forum
          Hugo Mills
          wrote last edited by
          #12

          @feorag I suspect that when it eventually comes to that, you'd be lucky to get 5% from the liquidation.

          At least the $1bn ballroom could be used as a warehouse, but even then it's probably got terrible transport links.

          An awful lot of the "money" is either in the form of objects which are expensive to make but of limited utility to non-billionaires, or largely illusory -- how much is Tesla actually worth as a company, if there's no billionaires to buy it? Probably not the current market cap.

          Robert Pluim 🇪🇺R 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

            Footnote: the outcome of the Epstein/Gates email itself is immaterial—what's interesting is the mind set underlying it, which seems to have strong explanatory power for our current mess: there are too many poor people, and Epstein and his mates would like to get rid of us.

            gjmG This user is from outside of this forum
            gjmG This user is from outside of this forum
            gjm
            wrote last edited by
            #13

            @cstross I wouldn't put anything past Epstein, but Gates has given enough evidence of somewhat-benevolent intentions that I'd at least _consider_ the possibility that he just picked a very bad way of saying "how do we get rid of _poverty_?".

            I too would like a world in which there are no poor people, provided we can get there by making the currently-poor people not-poor and stopping new people becoming poor, rather than killing existing poor people and preventing anyone being born who might turn out poor.

            (Of course there might be elements of both. It could be that Gates genuinely wants to eliminate poverty but some bit of his brain wants to do it because poor people are an untidy nuisance rather than to benefit those people, and sometimes that leaks out into his words, and all that could be true even if he wouldn't ever actually go for mass murder as the, er, final solution to the problem of poverty.)

            Obligatory link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE

            JavierJ 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

              New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

              Danielle CrawfordA This user is from outside of this forum
              Danielle CrawfordA This user is from outside of this forum
              Danielle Crawford
              wrote last edited by
              #14

              @cstross and that’s why I’m an anarchist. System needs a reboot with a degaussing for good measure.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • Angela MillerA Angela Miller

                @cstross
                I dream of new Nuremburg style trials and 'detention' for the Super Rich.
                Take their stuff, their names and their freedom. Redistribute.

                ElaineM This user is from outside of this forum
                ElaineM This user is from outside of this forum
                Elaine
                wrote last edited by
                #15

                @Alternatecelt @cstross make them outlaw: confiscate their assets and rescind their human rights, make it an offence to associate with them and restrict their movements. I'd give them a monthly dole of food, clothes and secure accommodation, and ban access to communications. It's more than they'd give us.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                  Footnote: the outcome of the Epstein/Gates email itself is immaterial—what's interesting is the mind set underlying it, which seems to have strong explanatory power for our current mess: there are too many poor people, and Epstein and his mates would like to get rid of us.

                  Walter van HolstW This user is from outside of this forum
                  Walter van HolstW This user is from outside of this forum
                  Walter van Holst
                  wrote last edited by
                  #16

                  @cstross So, Mitchell & Webb were prescient? https://youtu.be/s_4J4uor3JE

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                    New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    trademark
                    wrote last edited by
                    #17

                    @cstross The problem is not the billionaires, in a democracy it's the most numerous who win, not the richest. The reason the left almost always loses is purely self-harm and splittism for instance: https://bsky.app/profile/georgemonbiot.bsky.social/post/3mfcdb62pp22r the left has been doing this to itself since the 1917 March revolution. Fix the left instead of going "booho billionaires rule both parties". Hitler himself won in large part because of "nach Hitler kommt wir" ideas of the communists.

                    T Charlie StrossC jslJ 3 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • David :SetouchiExplorer:D David :SetouchiExplorer:

                      @cstross Glad that more and more people realize that the oligarchy wants to kill us. I thought I was going crazy. But billion of deaths is consistent with their vision of a livable planet destabilized by an out-of-control climate.

                      ManniC This user is from outside of this forum
                      ManniC This user is from outside of this forum
                      Manni
                      wrote last edited by
                      #18

                      @David @cstross also: a colony of people slaving away on Mars before they can convert the complete solar system into energy to fuel exponential growth.
                      Still most people will think you are a raving, mouth-foaming conspiracy theorist when you inform them of the published intentions of those morons.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • T trademark

                        @cstross The problem is not the billionaires, in a democracy it's the most numerous who win, not the richest. The reason the left almost always loses is purely self-harm and splittism for instance: https://bsky.app/profile/georgemonbiot.bsky.social/post/3mfcdb62pp22r the left has been doing this to itself since the 1917 March revolution. Fix the left instead of going "booho billionaires rule both parties". Hitler himself won in large part because of "nach Hitler kommt wir" ideas of the communists.

                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        trademark
                        wrote last edited by
                        #19

                        @cstross why not study the countries where the moderate left actually won? E.g. Scandinavia, the moderates were very brutal in excluding the nutcases. Lots of bad blood on the left to this day.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                          Footnote: the outcome of the Epstein/Gates email itself is immaterial—what's interesting is the mind set underlying it, which seems to have strong explanatory power for our current mess: there are too many poor people, and Epstein and his mates would like to get rid of us.

                          Svavar the NeurospicyS This user is from outside of this forum
                          Svavar the NeurospicyS This user is from outside of this forum
                          Svavar the Neurospicy
                          wrote last edited by
                          #20

                          @cstross

                          The fact that Gates wanted to give his wife STD medication without her knowledge tells you everything you need to know about Microsoft's and the tech industry's approach to consent.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                            Footnote: the outcome of the Epstein/Gates email itself is immaterial—what's interesting is the mind set underlying it, which seems to have strong explanatory power for our current mess: there are too many poor people, and Epstein and his mates would like to get rid of us.

                            GinevraCatG This user is from outside of this forum
                            GinevraCatG This user is from outside of this forum
                            GinevraCat
                            wrote last edited by
                            #21

                            @cstross And the thing to understand about being "poor", is that that includes everything up to the very tippy top of upper middle class!!

                            CallistoC Kayla Allen 🏳️‍⚧️ 💉x8K 2 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • T trademark

                              @cstross The problem is not the billionaires, in a democracy it's the most numerous who win, not the richest. The reason the left almost always loses is purely self-harm and splittism for instance: https://bsky.app/profile/georgemonbiot.bsky.social/post/3mfcdb62pp22r the left has been doing this to itself since the 1917 March revolution. Fix the left instead of going "booho billionaires rule both parties". Hitler himself won in large part because of "nach Hitler kommt wir" ideas of the communists.

                              Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                              Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                              Charlie Stross
                              wrote last edited by
                              #22

                              @trademark Democracy does not run on victory to the most numerous these days, it runs on victory to the most indoctrinated. Which goes with the money.

                              T 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                                Footnote: the outcome of the Epstein/Gates email itself is immaterial—what's interesting is the mind set underlying it, which seems to have strong explanatory power for our current mess: there are too many poor people, and Epstein and his mates would like to get rid of us.

                                HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
                                HighlandLawyerH This user is from outside of this forum
                                HighlandLawyer
                                wrote last edited by
                                #23

                                @cstross
                                It is the intersection of the degrees of selfishness & foresightedness. If your level of selfishness is "the good of all mankind" you want to eliminate poverty by giving everyone enough food, accomodation, etc; if "me and my family" you get traditional aristocratic behaviour; if "me & nobody else" you treat everyone else as objects, which can be disposed of at your whim- mass disposal of the poor on a par with a neat close-cropped lawn.

                                lemgandiL Medea Vanamonde 🏳️‍⚧️M Darwin WoodkaD 3 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • T trademark

                                  @cstross The problem is not the billionaires, in a democracy it's the most numerous who win, not the richest. The reason the left almost always loses is purely self-harm and splittism for instance: https://bsky.app/profile/georgemonbiot.bsky.social/post/3mfcdb62pp22r the left has been doing this to itself since the 1917 March revolution. Fix the left instead of going "booho billionaires rule both parties". Hitler himself won in large part because of "nach Hitler kommt wir" ideas of the communists.

                                  jslJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  jslJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  jsl
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #24

                                  @trademark @cstross In the 2025 Reith lecture, Rutger Bregman makes the point that if somebody agrees with you 70%, that person ought to be your ally. The left is demanding levels of purity far, far higher and that harms their position.
                                  Look at Evangelical Fundamentalists and Tech Bros. They have about as much in common as (as you mentioned Hitler) the German Adel had with the Socialist part of the NSDAP. Their only common goal was to get rid of the democratic institutions. That's not even close to 70% agreement.
                                  So, how can the Left get jointly behind the idea of saving the western democratic model instead of bickering with the people's front of Judea?

                                  Charlie StrossC CallistoC 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                                    New blog entry: More in Sadness than in Anger: https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2026/02/more-in-sadness-than-in-anger.html

                                    S This user is from outside of this forum
                                    S This user is from outside of this forum
                                    DeterioratedStucco
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #25

                                    @cstross
                                    IIRC per your journal you've previously come to the conclusion that the planet is about 100% beyond its maximum sustainable carrying capacity (given our current tech base).
                                    It appears that they may agree.

                                    Charlie StrossC 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • jslJ jsl

                                      @trademark @cstross In the 2025 Reith lecture, Rutger Bregman makes the point that if somebody agrees with you 70%, that person ought to be your ally. The left is demanding levels of purity far, far higher and that harms their position.
                                      Look at Evangelical Fundamentalists and Tech Bros. They have about as much in common as (as you mentioned Hitler) the German Adel had with the Socialist part of the NSDAP. Their only common goal was to get rid of the democratic institutions. That's not even close to 70% agreement.
                                      So, how can the Left get jointly behind the idea of saving the western democratic model instead of bickering with the people's front of Judea?

                                      Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Charlie Stross
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #26

                                      @jsl @trademark You're missing nuances not specific to the US (you mentioned a Reith lecture!). Here in the UK, the Labour party is de facto politically the Conservative party of 20 years ago: they're absolutely not remotely on the left any more, and they're pursuing dangerously authoritarian policies in many areas. I submit that it's not "purity" to oppose Tories in pink ties, it's realism.

                                      T 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S DeterioratedStucco

                                        @cstross
                                        IIRC per your journal you've previously come to the conclusion that the planet is about 100% beyond its maximum sustainable carrying capacity (given our current tech base).
                                        It appears that they may agree.

                                        Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Charlie StrossC This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Charlie Stross
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #27

                                        @SoftwareTheron No, our planet is beyond its *long term* carrying capacity. We've already passed peak birth rate and even without pandemics or billionaire-induced genocide there will be more than a billion fewer people on earth in 2126 than there are in 2026. It's a self-correcting problem within a period of a couple of centuries, and we can probably survive that long on our current tech base.

                                        Colman ReillyC LisPiL 2 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • Charlie StrossC Charlie Stross

                                          @SoftwareTheron No, our planet is beyond its *long term* carrying capacity. We've already passed peak birth rate and even without pandemics or billionaire-induced genocide there will be more than a billion fewer people on earth in 2126 than there are in 2026. It's a self-correcting problem within a period of a couple of centuries, and we can probably survive that long on our current tech base.

                                          Colman ReillyC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Colman ReillyC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Colman Reilly
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #28

                                          @cstross @SoftwareTheron we could also do a lot of things a lot cheaper if we actually assigned the costs properly. Excess air travel would be self correcting if it had to cover the full costs for example.

                                          Woozle HypertwinW Darwin WoodkaD 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups