That’s a pretty bleak scenario to focus on. And it’s definitely very negative. Yes, you are being very negative.
I’m ok with some assholes and elbows in friendly pick-up basketball.
Regarding the article, it’s a classic debate tactic to present open questions as settled facts. I noticed Prez Teleprompter used the term “I think we all agree” right before not engaging meaningfully with the reporters question.
The cliche “you can fool some of the people…etc” is apropos. Even if it shuts down discussion, usually you other party is left feeling slimed. Not a constructive dialog mode.
The gaslighting comes into play when instead of continuing the dialog, the character/motivation arguments ensue . We might think of this as looking to drive others out of an Exterior Individual or Exterior Collective quadrant into their Interior Individual realm.
Might go something like:
you don’t agree with me so…
your shadow has been programmed by the Hierarchy/Establishment which we know is X,Y or Z.
Case in point with our interactions. There are things that our by-design adaptive liberal democracy might want to change. Even with perceived faulting, no one has actually shown an implimentable and better system, ever in history. But if we don’t agree that, using your example, maybe we should force it all to crumble. It’s not a polar opposite approach when, using my example, let’s utilize the best system humanity has ever developed to adapt and evolve (legislation by consent) and maybe transform (Consitutional Ammendment, again by consent) to continue building a SUSTAINABLE conveyor belt for grow and development of humanity.
The allure of “just torch it all” is seen by many as just being lazy, ill equipped and selfish . Or as may be the case a power dominance attempt.
Our system is adapting year over year but seems many are attached to “its my way or the highway”. Hence the gaslighting tactics.
1 - I don’t focus on it, but you seem to more than I do.
2 - It’s only bleak if you are an addict. If you are not an addict, there is no need to even change much less hit rock bottom.
The irony is that your unconscious brain knows you are addicted to an unhealthy and unsustainable culture. Otherwise you’d just say “Yeah, sucks to be them, eh?” Instead you subconsciously identified with the addict and know you need to change, but are fearful of facing that.
I’m completely willing and able to use a different mode of communicating. My challenge for you would be to not do this for a week.
I’ve countered this before, and we can have this discussion again. Essentially, you’ve led me to believe that you think having “stuff” is a “better” society, and I completely disagree. There are a few things modern society has done very well, like universal vaccinations (prior to 2010’s) and acute medical treatment - we can sew a penis back on after it’s been cut off, for example), but other than that it’s only from your perspective that things are better and I have brought in lots of facts showing things are not actually the best ever from what people would consider quality of life perspective - unless you only selectively choose certain periods of history while refusing to recognize you are being selective and claiming it is “in all history”.
Again - I never said anything about forcing anything. It’s allowing things to run their natural course. “Die of natural causes”, so to speak. If I say people will die earlier due to smoking, that does not mean I’m going to go out and kill all smokers or “torch it all” and burn them at the stake.
Again, you are not actually reading what I am saying but reacting to some kind of projection that I believe is based in fear you have unconsciously but refuse to acknowledge consciously.
I’ll repeat myself - Modern society is unsustainable and has the behaviors of an addicted society. It is not only addicted to material things, but also to unhealthy mindsets like American exceptionalism and entitlement - and backed by an eagerness to use violence to solve all it’s problems. Add in an inability to think rationally as we see in the increasing numbers of Q-Anon and conspiracy theories / Ancient Aliens / global cabal / whatever.
This is just a formula for disaster and compounded by the fact that every effort to reduce their addictions on the supply side results in hostility and THEIR desire to burn everything down - as we see in Trumps popularity and the Jan 6 insurrection (a violent attempt to overthrow democracy because they refuse to admit they lost). This is like starting a fist fight whenever you are beaten in a sport and complaining that everyone who ever beats you cheated. Unfortunately this is not 5 year olds playing a game, but people who have access to deadly weapons.
Nothing about this is me forcing anyone to do anything, lol.
Yes, and @FermentedAgave - do you see now how your post is complete misdirection?
Trump knew what he had done (but we did not because the documents were caught up in a legal battle)
Trump and the Conservative media did an all-out blitz against the Democrats to accuse them of the very things they were doing but were not yet proven.
Documents are now being reviewed that prove the actual intent and strategy of Trump was far worse than anything anyone had dreamed up before now.
His mistake was his complete lack of understanding of career Military Officers and believing the Pentagon would just go along with his orders. What is astounding is that this isn’t just something he tweeted a=or just blabberred out in one of his speeches. No, someone else in a position of authority and responsibility actually listened to what he was saying and ordered a staff member to create a written draft, so this was beyond the “idea” stage and into the “planning / implementation” stage.
Big week for all of us to regarding disinformation.
According to Gramps “Get off my Lawn” everything is right on track! Actually everything is ahead of schedule!
Kids are ok
Covid - “I got this” - it just takes massive Exec Branch trampling of Citizens’ Rights…
Ukraine - I guess if Putin just invades a “little bit” it would be ok
China - What’s the problem? Hunter’s on the case
Border - What border? We don’t need to stinkin’ borders
Crime - The criminals are the REAL victims
Elections - an IL fav - 2020 election was pristine, materially perfect, except for losers whining. BUT clearly some major reform is needed ASAP to keep the evil cheaters well, from evil cheating in 2022 - INSURRECTION!
Seemingly all the “crazies” that were using common sense - hmmm - Wuhan Virology Lab doing SARS research co-located at the epicenter for a deadly global pandemic “might” be the source of COVID19. So let’s follow the CCP into a mobile app tracking, drug lacing, survellance state. Don’t agree - you’re anti science-ish…
Florida is committing genocide - Red States are killing themselves hand-over-fist - even a CANADIAN says so, so it must be true. Will NPR retweet?
As usual, you completely forget or ignore prior discussions that you bailed on. We had this discussion before, and you deflected, redirected and distracted onto another topic.
You set a really low bar for me that is easily met. ANY civilization that was better in ANY way? lol
1 - Polynesia prior to Captain Cook. People literally worked only a few hours a week, had plentiful food resources, no starvation and no outbreaks of nasty plagues. Very few rules regarding sex, acceptance of gender fluidity and even giving transgendered respected roles in society. No taxation. A very libertarian society where the government had very limited roles. The society was sustainable - it had to be because it was on Islands.
2 - Native Americans in the Pacific Northwest. If you value material possessions as a criteria for “better”, Native Americans in this region had so much excess wealth that they would have competitions called “Potlatches” where they would intentionally destroy their stuff and whoever destroyed the most stuff was the “winner” and gained status. It would be like you and your neighbor sitting across from each other burning $100 bills, and whoever burned the most had the right to decide what kind of fence is built and where the line goes. Can you imagine the social security of such a society? Where you do not have to fear you will be starving and homeless, and can just burn all your stuff for a competition of prestiege and status?
3 - The civilization in Egypt that built the pyramids. The idea that the Pyramids were built by slaves or paid labor is now pretty much completely debunked. Can you imagine that not only were the pyramids built using technology that we cannot figure out now - and for purposes that we cannot figure out now - but it was also built by volunteer labor? Again, can you imagine the social security that Egyptians enjoyed during that period where they did not have to worry about struggling at working 60 hours a week just to pay off debt on their dwelling they don’t fully own or their family would be kicked out and sleeping in the marshes? No - they had so much social security that they could contribute a large portion of their lives as volunteer labor to construct Megaliths that we cannot even comprehend today.
4 - Ancient Greece in the Golden Age of Greece. You said ANY way, so let’s talk about Philosophy. All the philosophers and religions through the ages are still unable to come up with anything better than “the basics” of the Greek philosophers. For example, people can still find Stoicism far far far more useful than Nihilism or current philosophies based on Postmodernist Metaphisyics. Many also find Stoicism much more practical in their daily lives than religions like Judeo-Christian traditions, for example.
Those are all debatable, but also good examples for each their own reasons.
Now how can we scale each of these, or at least aspects of each, into populations of 50M, 100M, 320M or 7B people?
What from each of these HAS already been assimilated, become mainstream?
Of course - If we are to compare apples to apples we have to define or describe “better / worse”
What three criteria would you give for the “best”?
Is a large population even desirable? Is 7 billion people the “best”, or is it “best” to reduce and then keep the earth’s population at less than a billion? (through peaceful means, of course). Is it “best” for all men and all women to participate in building a nuclear family with 2.5 children, or was it “best” when alternative outlets for sexual needs and community fulfillment were available such as in the ancient world?
When you say this is the best culture ever in history, without defining what “best” means, a circular and pointless discussion is inevitable.
I ponder the same question as I drive through 100 year old citrus groves and lush corn fields that have “Starting at $300,000 Coming Soon” signs on the corner.
Or taxi through Guangzho or take the 300kmh bullet into Shanghai.
Well, I’m not saying to remove anyone who already exists, lol.
Nor to forcibly sterilize anyone, nor anything like that.
But the question is - Is mom, dad and 2.5 kids the “best” model for the core of the community for all throughout history? How would society best encourage other lifestyles so they are preferable to this model (which my opinion is unsustainable).
We can look at historical societies for some ideas. In many cultures, the first son was given the inheritance, the second son joined the military (and probably died) and the third son went to God (and didn’t produce offspring). This was pretty significant. Masses of people in nonwestern civilizations were engaged in a lifetime spiritual pursuit. A monk wasn’t a strange thing, but on every street corner. These masses of had minimal needs - just food and water, really. They were also well behaved and not drug addicts nor criminals. And also they were not the terrible blight that is homelessness in America. Somewhere we went very terribly wrong in dealing with the “surplus” humans of western society. Modern Christianity does not respect followers of a spiritual path unless they also pay rent and have a job.
To me it would be a very minimal investment for society to provide support for people who do not want to follow the traditional lifestyle - by providing them with free food and comfortable access to personal development resources - or even public baths for anyone who wants to wash themselves up, sit in a hottub or exercise, or eat a healthy meal.
This is what many ancient civilizations did, and in many ways it was better than what we do.
Last I checked you were in favor of destroying the Western hierarchies, traditions, that support the homeless, psychologically infirm.
You paint with a very broad and dark paint brush Christianity. Seemingly societal all the ills are “due to” and all of the goods are “in spite of” Chirstianity, or Capitalism, or or or… lol
What do we currently provide through both government and NGO (including religious groups) today, and what is the gap you think we need to close?
And what % of people today are supported through religious organizations?
The Catholics are easiest to find large scale info on. 1B global adherents (sort of), 440,000 priests, and then how many Brothers and Music Directors and Janitors and Office administrators and school teachers and school administrators and contemplative nuns. How many of these would be equivalent to your Buddhist monks begging on the corners?
How many people are in their old folks homes, or hospitals, or or or…
And looking at the not so glam side. Are Meth and Fentynal and Crack a problem in Thailand, Malaysia, Phillipines, India, Myanmar, Russia, China or Pakistan today, right now as we speak? To think no would be naive at best and disingenoius at worst. Our problems are hardly unique only to Capitalism or Christianity or or…
@FermentedAgave
Look man, I already explained to you twice why I’m not “in favor of destroying” anything.
If you can’t let that simple concept sink into your fucking head I don’t really see the point in discussing further.
Do you actually have a legit mental disability that you really cannot understand people when they explain their own point of view? Does this disability prevent you from processing any new information and as a result you maintain points of view regardless of new data? Are you somehow medically disadvantaged and have a learning disability?
If you do, then I apologise and will be more patient.
If you dont then - yeah it’s a waste of time interacting with you.
Not that the TOPICS are not important -but that discussing them with you is a waste of time.
