Discussion Random Discussion

[gringo2011]

the big problem i have with the left vs right debate is that a lot of people here seem to mix them up based on the discussion coming out the states. what they really mean in the states is conservatives vs liberals/progressives. which you can call the left vs right in the states due to the current political climate of the states and the two major parties. however what is lost on some is that trump is heavily influenced by the left. things like protectionism are leftist ideals.

but over here is much more complicated. you could argue that the liberal part is as conservative as the labor party, in terms of its base and its policies. i mean the liberal party right now is self confessed to be run by the "left" side of their party and see themselves as progressive.

another example was in the recent same sex marriage plebiscite it showed something really interesting. the no vote was strongest in the conservative religious areas, which in turn were strong labor voting areas. i doubt many people would have believed that would occur. people in the media seemed to be shocked by it. the discussion points from it should have been stronger:
1) how in the hell did the conservative faction of the liberal party led by tony abbott end up in power, when it's views do not necessarily line up with their base? why is it seen as a bit of a never ending power struggle?
2) why has labor been viewed as much more liberal and why has their policy around liberal issues been less bogged down by that of the liberal party when they have this stronger base of conservatives?

it feels like politics here is not as clear cut with the difference between the two major parties being much smaller than that of the states. it feels twisted depending on the topic/policy

Yeah at some point a bizarre switcheroo happened where professional educated people used to vote conservative and the left was aligned directly to the working classes. Now a working class person is more likely to be the AM radio socially conservative right wing voter and you hardly find anyone young and professional that would admit to voting conservative or having non progressive values.

 

[VDS66]

Yeah at some point a bizarre switcheroo happened where professional educated people used to vote conservative and the left was aligned directly to the working classes. Now a working class person is more likely to be the AM radio socially conservative right wing voter and you hardly find anyone young and professional that would admit to voting conservative or having non progressive values.

It comes as a result of improved living standards, the weakening of unions, the fact that we haven't had a recession in 27 years, globalisation and the right wing agenda.

 

[VDS66]

the big problem i have with the left vs right debate is that a lot of people here seem to mix them up based on the discussion coming out the states. what they really mean in the states is conservatives vs liberals/progressives. which you can call the left vs right in the states due to the current political climate of the states and the two major parties. however what is lost on some is that trump is heavily influenced by the left. things like protectionism are leftist ideals.

but over here is much more complicated. you could argue that the liberal part is as conservative as the labor party, in terms of its base and its policies. i mean the liberal party right now is self confessed to be run by the "left" side of their party and see themselves as progressive.

another example was in the recent same sex marriage plebiscite it showed something really interesting. the no vote was strongest in the conservative religious areas, which in turn were strong labor voting areas. i doubt many people would have believed that would occur. people in the media seemed to be shocked by it. the discussion points from it should have been stronger:
1) how in the hell did the conservative faction of the liberal party led by tony abbott end up in power, when it's views do not necessarily line up with their base? why is it seen as a bit of a never ending power struggle?
2) why has labor been viewed as much more liberal and why has their policy around liberal issues been less bogged down by that of the liberal party when they have this stronger base of conservatives?

it feels like politics here is not as clear cut with the difference between the two major parties being much smaller than that of the states. it feels twisted depending on the topic/policy

Both parties over here have captured the centre.

Elections are won in marginal seats not rusted on seats.

The Liberals were a different beast in the 70's and Fraser would be branded a Socialist these days.

They have been hijacked by religious conservatives and multinationals.

Labor was blue collar but moved to the centre under Hawks and Keating. With more people self employed and running small businesses, added to the decline in union members they have lost their way.

This has been a global issue.

Hence the rise in populist politics on the left and right.

My view is that there is an entrenched agenda from the elites. The right use politics of hate and division whereas the left use the politics of envy.

It will be interesting to see how it goes. The right says your life sucks because of refugees and dole blushers. The left say your life sucks because you are being bled dry by the multinationals.

The evidence seems to support the left at this stage. The thing that will bite the right in the ass is the abject failure of privatisation.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

For those who want to go down the rabbit hole and build an understanding of what truth, rights and liberty truly mean.



Enjoy

 

[Geary Is GOAT]

Whenever i see 'The Left' used as a noun i can't help but laugh

 

[NarklesHelmet]

Both parties over here have captured the centre.

Elections are won in marginal seats not rusted on seats.

The Liberals were a different beast in the 70's and Fraser would be branded a Socialist these days.

They have been hijacked by religious conservatives and multinationals.

Labor was blue collar but moved to the centre under Hawks and Keating. With more people self employed and running small businesses, added to the decline in union members they have lost their way.

This has been a global issue.

Hence the rise in populist politics on the left and right.

My view is that there is an entrenched agenda from the elites. The right use politics of hate and division whereas the left use the politics of envy.

It will be interesting to see how it goes. The right says your life sucks because of refugees and dole blushers. The left say your life sucks because you are being bled dry by the multinationals.

The evidence seems to support the left at this stage. The thing that will bite the right in the ass is the abject failure of privatisation.

I think one think you might be missing or discounting in your left/right analysis is the growing influence identity politics and intersectionality theory has had with left politics over the past 10 years (I'd say it has really taken off since Facebook and Twitter came about but that is another discussion....)

Class was traditionally the way leftist parties framed the issues of the day and it made sense. Being poor cuts across many different groups of people and it's easy to get support from more people with a simple philosophy of "vote for us if you're poor and want to improve your life or at least be protected from the rich". Identity issues? They were pretty much the domain of the right, and not in a good way: sewing seeds of division, dog-whistling to racists to get votes etc. and that's before we talk about the far-right who are obviously obsessed with identity. more traditional leftists like Bernie Sanders are sceptical of identity politics and its influence for good reason: it potentially alienates many poor voters that would always have voted for more socialist parties but are now told they are part of the problem because of their colour and/or gender (see rust-belt states in the US).

The switch to identity over class that the left has made, driven mainly from humanities academics from the States and spreading around the world like many US trends do, is for me the most serious issue that will face our generation in the coming years (and I'm saying this as someone who has always voted for left parties before this switch happened... now i abstain from voting).

You now have 2 major sides of politics obsessed with identity and neither of them have their beliefs grounded in any sound, conclusive or scientific principles. They are based on questionable theories, a lot of subjectivity and fuelled by social media echo-chambers and outrage. It's a pretty terrifying death struggle for our minds that we haven't seen the likes of since communist times.

I've found Peterson's rise in popularity particularly interesting as my father-in-law escaped communism in Czechoslovakia and fled to Sweden. He was a doctor there and when he describes what it was like going for job interviews in front of panels and the way that you would be looking at another human in the eyes and knowing that you are both saying things you don't believe in but will be killed if you stray from the orthodox line of speaking it is truly terrifying. Funnily enough, a lot of the stuff he talks about is echoed by Peterson (who himself studied totalitarian regimes extensively) about how dangerous it is becoming now with the rise of a puritanical strain of identity politics coming from the left.

I think in societies like Australia we tend not to see the threat from the left on these issues as equal as the threat from the right because we always associate dangerous identity politics with the far-right and obvious hate. But when you talk to people who lived under communism, you realise that a lot of awful things that were done under that system were justified as being good and just.

Where the danger lies now is the internet, censorship and algorithms. Do powerful companies in Silicon Valley have the courage and judgement to not favour a particular side? Or will they bow to the loud mob that justifies themselves as being the "good" side. Throw AI into the mix and we are on the doorstep of a potentially terrifying Orwellian future being censored and ultimately ruled by a powerful group obsessed with justice based on identity that will justify everything they are doing as being good and just.

That's why voices like Peterson and others need to be supported now as this is a battle for our minds that we won't know we've lost until it's too late.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

I think one think you might be missing or discounting in your left/right analysis is the growing influence identity politics and intersectionality theory has had with left politics over the past 10 years (I'd say it has really taken off since Facebook and Twitter came about but that is another discussion....)

Class was traditionally the way leftist parties framed the issues of the day and it made sense. Being poor cuts across many different groups of people and it's easy to get support from more people with a simple philosophy of "vote for us if you're poor and want to improve your life or at least be protected from the rich". Identity issues? They were pretty much the domain of the right, and not in a good way: sewing seeds of division, dog-whistling to racists to get votes etc. and that's before we talk about the far-right who are obviously obsessed with identity. more traditional leftists like Bernie Sanders are sceptical of identity politics and its influence for good reason: it potentially alienates many poor voters that would always have voted for more socialist parties but are now told they are part of the problem because of their colour and/or gender (see rust-belt states in the US).

The switch to identity over class that the left has made, driven mainly from humanities academics from the States and spreading around the world like many US trends do, is for me the most serious issue that will face our generation in the coming years (and I'm saying this as someone who has always voted for left parties before this switch happened... now i abstain from voting).

You now have 2 major sides of politics obsessed with identity and neither of them have their beliefs grounded in any sound, conclusive or scientific principles. They are based on questionable theories, a lot of subjectivity and fuelled by social media echo-chambers and outrage. It's a pretty terrifying death struggle for our minds that we haven't seen the likes of since communist times.

I've found Peterson's rise in popularity particularly interesting as my father-in-law escaped communism in Czechoslovakia and fled to Sweden. He was a doctor there and when he describes what it was like going for job interviews in front of panels and the way that you would be looking at another human in the eyes and knowing that you are both saying things you don't believe in but will be killed if you stray from the orthodox line of speaking it is truly terrifying. Funnily enough, a lot of the stuff he talks about is echoed by Peterson (who himself studied totalitarian regimes extensively) about how dangerous it is becoming now with the rise of a puritanical strain of identity politics coming from the left.

I think in societies like Australia we tend not to see the threat from the left on these issues as equal as the threat from the right because we always associate dangerous identity politics with the far-right and obvious hate. But when you talk to people who lived under communism, you realise that a lot of awful things that were done under that system were justified as being good and just.

Where the danger lies now is the internet, censorship and algorithms. Do powerful companies in Silicon Valley have the courage and judgement to not favour a particular side? Or will they bow to the loud mob that justifies themselves as being the "good" side. Throw AI into the mix and we are on the doorstep of a potentially terrifying Orwellian future being censored and ultimately ruled by a powerful group obsessed with justice based on identity that will justify everything they are doing as being good and just.

That's why voices like Peterson and others need to be supported now as this is a battle for our minds that we won't know we've lost until it's too late.

Spot on.
The only thing I would add is that Silicon Valley has already chosen a side. The systematic censorship, defunding and shadowbanning of conservatives on social media platforms has gone virtually unreported in the Australian press and is the scariest assault on freedom of expression I have ever seen.

 

[StCicatriz]

I think one think you might be missing or discounting in your left/right analysis is the growing influence identity politics and intersectionality theory has had with left politics over the past 10 years (I'd say it has really taken off since Facebook and Twitter came about but that is another discussion....)

Class was traditionally the way leftist parties framed the issues of the day and it made sense. Being poor cuts across many different groups of people and it's easy to get support from more people with a simple philosophy of "vote for us if you're poor and want to improve your life or at least be protected from the rich". Identity issues? They were pretty much the domain of the right, and not in a good way: sewing seeds of division, dog-whistling to racists to get votes etc. and that's before we talk about the far-right who are obviously obsessed with identity. more traditional leftists like Bernie Sanders are sceptical of identity politics and its influence for good reason: it potentially alienates many poor voters that would always have voted for more socialist parties but are now told they are part of the problem because of their colour and/or gender (see rust-belt states in the US).

The switch to identity over class that the left has made, driven mainly from humanities academics from the States and spreading around the world like many US trends do, is for me the most serious issue that will face our generation in the coming years (and I'm saying this as someone who has always voted for left parties before this switch happened... now i abstain from voting).

You now have 2 major sides of politics obsessed with identity and neither of them have their beliefs grounded in any sound, conclusive or scientific principles. They are based on questionable theories, a lot of subjectivity and fuelled by social media echo-chambers and outrage. It's a pretty terrifying death struggle for our minds that we haven't seen the likes of since communist times.

I've found Peterson's rise in popularity particularly interesting as my father-in-law escaped communism in Czechoslovakia and fled to Sweden. He was a doctor there and when he describes what it was like going for job interviews in front of panels and the way that you would be looking at another human in the eyes and knowing that you are both saying things you don't believe in but will be killed if you stray from the orthodox line of speaking it is truly terrifying. Funnily enough, a lot of the stuff he talks about is echoed by Peterson (who himself studied totalitarian regimes extensively) about how dangerous it is becoming now with the rise of a puritanical strain of identity politics coming from the left.

I think in societies like Australia we tend not to see the threat from the left on these issues as equal as the threat from the right because we always associate dangerous identity politics with the far-right and obvious hate. But when you talk to people who lived under communism, you realise that a lot of awful things that were done under that system were justified as being good and just.

Where the danger lies now is the internet, censorship and algorithms. Do powerful companies in Silicon Valley have the courage and judgement to not favour a particular side? Or will they bow to the loud mob that justifies themselves as being the "good" side. Throw AI into the mix and we are on the doorstep of a potentially terrifying Orwellian future being censored and ultimately ruled by a powerful group obsessed with justice based on identity that will justify everything they are doing as being good and just.

That's why voices like Peterson and others need to be supported now as this is a battle for our minds that we won't know we've lost until it's too late.

what are some good examples of the identity politics that are being used here by the left?

 

[StCicatriz]

the thing i find scary is that people seemed to be more concerned with being offended by something someone said rather than the issue that was being discussed, particularly when the issue involves peoples well being be it due to violence or some other issue

so more than happy to gather together and protest what someone said but god forbid they actually have to contribute something to address the issue its self

 

[VDS66]

Frankly, I'm more a fan of Passio. He makes serious sense.

Left or right makes no difference because we are asleep at the wheel when it comes to our political masters.

I too would like to see examples of identity politics from the left.

Australia does not have a left in the sense of communism. It has left of centre and that's about it.

The denomination of unions and the left is right wing strategy... Divide and conquer.

Both sides are puppets for their true masters... The banks.

All the rest is noise.

 

[VDS66]

Spot on.
The only thing I would add is that Silicon Valley has already chosen a side. The systematic censorship, defunding and shadowbanning of conservatives on social media platforms has gone virtually unreported in the Australian press and is the scariest assault on freedom of expression I have ever seen.

That fact that you actually believe that freedom exists is telling.

 

[VDS66]

I think one think you might be missing or discounting in your left/right analysis is the growing influence identity politics and intersectionality theory has had with left politics over the past 10 years (I'd say it has really taken off since Facebook and Twitter came about but that is another discussion....)

Class was traditionally the way leftist parties framed the issues of the day and it made sense. Being poor cuts across many different groups of people and it's easy to get support from more people with a simple philosophy of "vote for us if you're poor and want to improve your life or at least be protected from the rich". Identity issues? They were pretty much the domain of the right, and not in a good way: sewing seeds of division, dog-whistling to racists to get votes etc. and that's before we talk about the far-right who are obviously obsessed with identity. more traditional leftists like Bernie Sanders are sceptical of identity politics and its influence for good reason: it potentially alienates many poor voters that would always have voted for more socialist parties but are now told they are part of the problem because of their colour and/or gender (see rust-belt states in the US).

The switch to identity over class that the left has made, driven mainly from humanities academics from the States and spreading around the world like many US trends do, is for me the most serious issue that will face our generation in the coming years (and I'm saying this as someone who has always voted for left parties before this switch happened... now i abstain from voting).

You now have 2 major sides of politics obsessed with identity and neither of them have their beliefs grounded in any sound, conclusive or scientific principles. They are based on questionable theories, a lot of subjectivity and fuelled by social media echo-chambers and outrage. It's a pretty terrifying death struggle for our minds that we haven't seen the likes of since communist times.

I've found Peterson's rise in popularity particularly interesting as my father-in-law escaped communism in Czechoslovakia and fled to Sweden. He was a doctor there and when he describes what it was like going for job interviews in front of panels and the way that you would be looking at another human in the eyes and knowing that you are both saying things you don't believe in but will be killed if you stray from the orthodox line of speaking it is truly terrifying. Funnily enough, a lot of the stuff he talks about is echoed by Peterson (who himself studied totalitarian regimes extensively) about how dangerous it is becoming now with the rise of a puritanical strain of identity politics coming from the left.

I think in societies like Australia we tend not to see the threat from the left on these issues as equal as the threat from the right because we always associate dangerous identity politics with the far-right and obvious hate. But when you talk to people who lived under communism, you realise that a lot of awful things that were done under that system were justified as being good and just.

Where the danger lies now is the internet, censorship and algorithms. Do powerful companies in Silicon Valley have the courage and judgement to not favour a particular side? Or will they bow to the loud mob that justifies themselves as being the "good" side. Throw AI into the mix and we are on the doorstep of a potentially terrifying Orwellian future being censored and ultimately ruled by a powerful group obsessed with justice based on identity that will justify everything they are doing as being good and just.

That's why voices like Peterson and others need to be supported now as this is a battle for our minds that we won't know we've lost until it's too late.

We are already there and have been since Adam was a boy... Be it through mass marketing, Monarchy, Government or Religion.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

That fact that you actually believe that freedom exists is telling.

Of course it exists - it is just the degree.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

what are some good examples of the identity politics that are being used here by the left?

I'd say, like the Norwegian documentary I posted earlier about the gender paradox, issues surrounding gender and feminism in Australia and the world are a really good example of how identity politics is used often as a weapon.

Always be sceptical of any ideology or movement that pre-emotively tries to inoculate itself from scrutiny before it happens with slogans that its adherents should memorise and say to each other to answer any criticism. It is pretty much a cult then. Modern 3rd/4th wave feminism acts in that way unfortunately and I say unfortunately as no doubt all of us see the important role feminism has in society, agree with it or not, and because of this importance it shouldn't descend to the levels we see it at now.

If a man criticises feminism he can either be a mansplainer, a misogynist, (if he's white) have white male privilege, have "unconscious bias (this is a terrifying term that can be applied to pretty much anything they would need it for).

If a female criticises feminism she suffers from internalised misogyny (like unconscious bias, pretty terrifying term that can be applied when needed).

We have now reached a tipping point in Western societies where too many people have obtained gender studies degrees and are now in serious positions of power in the media/culture etc. It is in their interest to fuel gender wars. Hang on, you say, there are laws against treating women differently to men. "Ah", they'll answer, "but you see our culture hasn't caught up with the laws yet so we have to force this change." So instead of organic cultural change over time that may take longer but be more natural and sustainable we get the situation we are in now where we are in a constant state of cultural struggle where each side is being painted as the enemy and the war will never be won as no one knows what true equality between genders will even look like! it is absurd.

But question any of this? You'll be accused of being against equality and have more labels thrown at you.

I think that is why Peterson's interview with Cathy newman in England struck such a chord with viewers. All of us, men and women, know that we we are being bullied into towing the line on gender and wrong-footed and fed misinformation constantly by a lot of bogus studies and statistics. But how the hell do we take it on? Who in this day and age wants to be labelled a bigot? It's the modern day version of being labelled a heretic and has a hell of a stigma. It took someone with Peterson's temperament and knowldege to side-step all of the traps she laid for him and we all felt a victory, because no one likes to see bullies win. I really believe that interview will be a key landmark in the culture wars that we have ahead.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

We are already there and have been since Adam was a boy... Be it through mass marketing, Monarchy, Government or Religion.

Agree to an extent.

But I think this final push we will see in the coming years since the internet has come along and with VR and AI on our doorstep will will pretty much finish the human mind off completely which to me is terrifying even if as you rightly point out, it's not as if it has ever been perfect situation for humans with regard to freedom.

That's the scary thing. We are like frogs in boiling water playing a game we don't even understand how dangerous it is with Silicon Valley: we are literally handing them information on us all that they are going to use against us later (and are already doing). We'll have no defence as they will know us almost as well and often better than we will know ourselves. That's where the Orwellian stuff comes in.

 

[gringo2011]

Agree to an extent.

But I think this final push we will see in the coming years since the internet has come along and with VR and AI on our doorstep will will pretty much finish the human mind off completely which to me is terrifying even if as you righty point out, it's not as if it has ever been perfect.

That's the scary thing. We are like frogs in boiling water playing a game we don't even understand how dangerous it is with Silicon Valley: we are literally handing them information on us all that they are going to use against us later (and are already doing). We'll have no defence as they will know us almost as well and often better than we will know ourselves. That's where the Orwellian stuff comes in.

I agree there is more identity politics on both sides now, but I'm not so sure it's an evil thought police state, more just as societies we make up boundaries so that civil societies can operate. Post religion there is less people with the same orthodoxy and the internet's real danger is the two sides with no middle forming. Agree on silicon valley, they are fine while they are nice but hold so much power now. The biggest issue is the financial system hasn't kept up and the whole exploding of AI and mechanisation of work forces is going to mean there will be a lot of unemployed and bored people who are going to need to be controlled.

 

[gringo2011]

For those who want to go down the rabbit hole and build an understanding of what truth, rights and liberty truly mean.



Enjoy

He's a bit of a new age soup of ideas but he said a few sensible things. It's a bit of a free will argument, I think it's probably the hardest time in human history to have clear ideas and time to contemplate them with out contradictory voices battering those ideas. All these kind of thinkers are tapping into the confusion of voices and many of them are trying to be more extreme or offer points of difference to get noticed. At least this guy doesn't seem to destructive in his ideas.

The Alt Right stuff leaves me a bit cold because a lot of of it's agenda driven, there are reasonable voices with in it but a lot of the stuff they accuse others of they do themselves. Like accusations that the left are forcing their belief systems on them through bullying yet seem to have no issues labelling any one with alternate view cucks or leftards. Most people want the same things and if you think for yourself you usually don't go too far wrong.

 

[VDS66]

He's a bit of a new age soup of ideas but he said a few sensible things. It's a bit of a free will argument, I think it's probably the hardest time in human history to have clear ideas and time to contemplate them with out contradictory voices battering those ideas. All these kind of thinkers are tapping into the confusion of voices and many of them are trying to be more extreme or offer points of difference to get noticed. At least this guy doesn't seem to destructive in his ideas.

The Alt Right stuff leaves me a bit cold because a lot of of it's agenda driven, there are reasonable voices with in it but a lot of the stuff they accuse others of they do themselves. Like accusations that the left are forcing their belief systems on them through bullying yet seem to have no issues labelling any one with alternate view cucks or leftards. Most people want the same things and if you think for yourself you usually don't go too far wrong.

Spot on 100%

Right wing MO is all about division and stopping the masses from getting organised. Hence the attack on unions.

Look at the narrative. All it does is make people scared and paranoid to they point that people are in self-preservation mode.

The religious right are the perfect example.

They espouse Christian values and yet are happy to let people rot in detention camps, allow the financial system to enslave people and so on.

I doubt Jesus would be up for that...

FFS the Roman's killed him off and then started a religion that worships him as a means to control people. How ****ed up is that?

Edit: I'll also add that you are correct and the reason these opinions gain traction is because there is a void in people's and Society's existence.

The system has failed. It has been built on a lie by the elites to keep us in our place.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

He's a bit of a new age soup of ideas but he said a few sensible things. It's a bit of a free will argument, I think it's probably the hardest time in human history to have clear ideas and time to contemplate them with out contradictory voices battering those ideas. All these kind of thinkers are tapping into the confusion of voices and many of them are trying to be more extreme or offer points of difference to get noticed. At least this guy doesn't seem to destructive in his ideas.

The Alt Right stuff leaves me a bit cold because a lot of of it's agenda driven, there are reasonable voices with in it but a lot of the stuff they accuse others of they do themselves. Like accusations that the left are forcing their belief systems on them through bullying yet seem to have no issues labelling any one with alternate view cucks or leftards. Most people want the same things and if you think for yourself you usually don't go too far wrong.

Problem with labels like "alt-right" is they have been co-opted by people who use them for an agenda and they now don't represent their true origins. Most of those initially considered alt-right now reject the term coz it was highjacked by ethno-nationalist scumbags who are the turds in punchbowl of a genuinely inclusive populist nationalism.

Identity politics is a "divide & conquer" strategy - it is a cancer designed to forment hate IMHO.

 

[gringo2011]

Agree to an extent.

But I think this final push we will see in the coming years since the internet has come along and with VR and AI on our doorstep will will pretty much finish the human mind off completely which to me is terrifying even if as you rightly point out, it's not as if it has ever been perfect situation for humans with regard to freedom.

That's the scary thing. We are like frogs in boiling water playing a game we don't even understand how dangerous it is with Silicon Valley: we are literally handing them information on us all that they are going to use against us later (and are already doing). We'll have no defence as they will know us almost as well and often better than we will know ourselves. That's where the Orwellian stuff comes in.

One of the scariest things to contend with on top of everything else is the earth is so overpopulated already and like compounding interest keeps adding to the birth rate. At some point those people all need food, jobs and real estate, water etc. In India they were saying this year the government is going to have to create a million new jobs a month to keep up with people joining the work force. At the same time as more people come in to the population, food, water and real estate aren't keeping up. Governments trying to keep the books looking good sell off infrastructure we do have and don't build any new stuff.

Orwellian might be better than a world full of desperate people with broken societies and desperate for food. Might be more escape from New York than 1984.

 

[gringo2011]

Agree to an extent.

But I think this final push we will see in the coming years since the internet has come along and with VR and AI on our doorstep will will pretty much finish the human mind off completely which to me is terrifying even if as you rightly point out, it's not as if it has ever been perfect situation for humans with regard to freedom.

That's the scary thing. We are like frogs in boiling water playing a game we don't even understand how dangerous it is with Silicon Valley: we are literally handing them information on us all that they are going to use against us later (and are already doing). We'll have no defence as they will know us almost as well and often better than we will know ourselves. That's where the Orwellian stuff comes in.

One of the scariest things to contend with on top of everything else is the earth is so overpopulated already and like compounding interest keeps adding to the birth rate. At some point those people all need food, jobs and real estate, water etc. In India they were saying this year the government is going to have to create a million new jobs a month to keep up with people joining the work force. At the same time as more people come in to the population, food, water and real estate aren't keeping up. Governments trying to keep the books looking good sell off infrastructure we do have and don't build any new stuff.

Orwellian might be better than a world full of desperate people with broken societies and desperate for food. Might be more escape from New York than 1984.

 

[gringo2011]

Problem with labels like "alt-right" is they have been co-opted by people who use them for an agenda and they now don't represent their true origins. Most of those initially considered alt-right now reject the term coz it was highjacked by ethno-nationalist scumbags who are the turds in punchbowl of a genuinely inclusive populist nationalism.

Identity politics is a "divide & conquer" strategy - it is a cancer designed to forment hate IMHO.

Yeah, it's like that on both sides. Populist nationalism is huge everywhere because it appeals to a sense of nostalgia. In Italy the nationalist movement has even taken on parts the old Mussolini era propaganda but mixed it with bits of socialism where there is free health care and education for "italians"....I'm not sure how Italian you have to be or how you can actually prove your Italianess. It will get that way here eventually, I can see us finding living standards drop as corporations take all the dollars out of the economy and a dearth of jobs pushing wages lower and lower while cost of living rises due to more people wanting goods, real estate and food. At that point people start to remember the good old days and look to the immigrants that seem to be doing well to apportion blame.


One of the stories I read a few years ago was saying a whole lot of 4chan posters are actually just having fun trolling and winding people up when tracked down. Then you get people like Clementine Ford who you wonder if she's not a leftist troll...her dad is a one nation politician and some of the stuff she says is so outrageously stupid and combative you have to wonder at times. The internet has given voices to so many people it's hard to judge who is even a legitimate voice. I guess you just have to make your own sense of it.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

One of the scariest things to contend with on top of everything else is the earth is so overpopulated already and like compounding interest keeps adding to the birth rate. At some point those people all need food, jobs and real estate, water etc. In India they were saying this year the government is going to have to create a million new jobs a month to keep up with people joining the work force. At the same time as more people come in to the population, food, water and real estate aren't keeping up. Governments trying to keep the books looking good sell off infrastructure we do have and don't build any new stuff.

Orwellian might be better than a world full of desperate people with broken societies and desperate for food. Might be more escape from New York than 1984.

Reckon you might be surprised abt trends in global demographics and birth rate as they relate to global population.



Worth checking out, have not heard it debunked as yet.

 

[gringo2011]

Reckon you might be surprised abt trends in global demographics and birth rate as they relate to global population.



Worth checking out, have not heard it debunked as yet.

There are still 83 million a year more people in the world even if it evens out at some point. I think 11 billion is projected a long way into the future but it's still going to happen. Jobs going and populations increasing aren't a great combination. If the world really issuing to take human jobs and give them to computers and robots then it's going to have a detrimental effect on living standards and makes the capitalist model a bit untenable.

 

[Gangnam Saint]

There are still 83 million a year more people in the world even if it evens out at some point. I think 11 billion is projected a long way into the future but it's still going to happen. Jobs going and populations increasing aren't a great combination. If the world really issuing to take human jobs and give them to computers and robots then it's going to have a detrimental effect on living standards and makes the capitalist model a bit untenable.

Future uncertainty does create some angst but humans adapt and systems change. Computer programmers become the new tradies.