>collapses higher-order questions about what kind of world were building into first-order value
But then
>you'd interrogate not what the system produces, but what it refuses to ask, and who gets to decide. That silence is precisely my point.
The reply your interlocutor provided is aligned with your incoherence. In a first move you point out that capitalism flattens everything into first-order land, and yet in a second move you tell us there are things it can't talk about. I guess your silence is precisely what articulates these two aspects of your discourse.
>collapses higher-order questions about what kind of world were building into first-order value
But then
>you'd interrogate not what the system produces, but what it refuses to ask, and who gets to decide. That silence is precisely my point.
The reply your interlocutor provided is aligned with your incoherence. In a first move you point out that capitalism flattens everything into first-order land, and yet in a second move you tell us there are things it can't talk about. I guess your silence is precisely what articulates these two aspects of your discourse.