What Will It Take for Us to Get Back to Being a Decent Society?

MAGONS

Quote:

---

I've read through Byte's posts on this thread

---

I wish, then, that you had taken care to read thru MY posts with as much care.

And why not? I mean for you to ask yourself that question seriously, because I think you might learn something about yourself.

So. Thanks for being so very even-handed. Not. I specifically said I was posting to a comment in another thread. In fact, let's reel that back...

Quote:

---

I'm still reacting to your post, in another thread, where you VERY generationally brought up how much smarter "young people" are today. -signy

I never intended to imply that the younger generation were smarter than older generations. The younger generation tends to be more technologically hooked in, however, and also more innovative/adaptable on the technology front.-byte

---

Seriously??? WHO'S being generational?? And who completely missed the obvious? Well, that would be you. You did the same thing that we constantly accuse RWAers of doing: seeing what you want to see. Yep, you missed Capt'n Obvious standing right in front of you. You might want to look into that, because it's prolly happened more than once, and for the same reason, whatever that is. You have also completely avoided the point of nearly every thread I've posted. Yup, like I said: Thank you very much for being even-handed. But I know better now. Next time, I won't expect you to be intelligent and perceptive, and I won't be disappointed.

I think the problem is that you simply do not like what I'm posting. It's negative, it's critical, it's "Not nice". It has nothing to do with "how we feel" - which is so much easier to talk about because, after all, we FEEL the right things, right?? - and everything to do with how we are failing as a species. It bypasses that whole "We can 'control everything/are in charge of our fate' if only we change our attitude" tripe (which is SO much easier to deal with!), takes us out of the realm of the coffee klatch*, and focuses on the task at hand. And finds all of us mostly wanting. Rappy, of course. Geezer, and zit. Jongssie.

And you. Byte. Niki. Kiki. Me. Nice people. Better'n those others, but damn ineffective.

I find BYTE to be entirely self-absorbed. NIKI, bless her heart, engages in magical thinking about karma. I'm way too busy with my sick hubby and disabled daughter. KIKI is too sick and too old. You are too comfortable. That is what keeps us from dealing with the awful reality before us.

There is something good about being old. If you spend a lifetime learning... well, you learn a lot. And you have a comparatively long timespan over which to see how things have changed. So, I'm going to tell you a "When I was young" story, which i guarantee stretches back further than your stories of youth.

When I was young... there were 3.5 billion people on the globe. Pollution was specific, to a river or a city. Overpopulation was a future problem. The oceans were still abundant, farmland fertile, and aquifers brimming. The jungles seemed limitless. They are the lungs of the planet we used to tell ourselves. The problems could still be avoided.

Now, I am old. Overpopulation is a present problem, not a future one. Most of the problems that were predicted have come true, and even some that weren't predicted. GLOBAL problems have reared their ugly heads: disruption of the carbon cycle, disruption of the nitrogen cycle, continuing radiological contamination. Water shortages. Massive deforestation. Oceanic dead zones. Thru 40 years, we have marched on... despite dire warnings... directly to the cliff, and those in the front are begin pushed over. There are no solutions, people are talking about simply cutting our losses. Humans have consistently bred to- literally- the immediately available carrying capacity, leaving absolutely no cushion. So- how are we

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Also clearly, this conversation is no longer useful to anyone.

---

Then take a bow, BYTE, for making it so dysfunctional with your complete and total self-absorption. Because out of all of the words you posted? About 5% have to do with the problem at-hand.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

FREM- I hope you're right. Because, so far, the steamroller hasn't swerved much from its original path in something like 30 years.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is all about taking power from the powerful, because the powerful will never willingly give it up: That's why they're TPTB. Right?

---

There is a book out that says Millionaires run the US government. Does that matter? Book says yes.

Nicholas Carnes wrote on January 7 www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/01/07/millionaires-ru
n-our-government-heres-why-that-matters/

If millionaires in the United States formed their own political party, that party would make up just 3 percent of the country, but it would have a majority in the House of Representatives, a filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate, a 5 to 4 majority on the Supreme Court and a man in the White House. If working-class Americans — people with manual-labor and service-industry jobs — were a political party, that party would have made up more than half of the country since the start of the 20th century, but its legislators (those who last worked in blue-collar jobs before getting into politics) would never have held more than 2 percent of the seats in Congress.

Then again, government by the rich may be what the American people want.

The virtual absence of an entire class of people from our political institutions affects economic policy. Several major conservative economic victories — including the regressive 2001 Bush tax cuts (which didn’t receive a single vote from a legislator with significant experience in working-class jobs) — probably wouldn’t have passed if Congress had been made up of the same mix of classes as the nation it represents.

Government by the upper class promotes government for the upper class — and makes life harder for the classes of Americans who can least afford it.

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/01/07/millionaires-ru
n-our-government-heres-why-that-matters/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Government by the rich is not what the American people want, but it is what they are (for the most part) given as a choice.

I watched an interesting documentary about Georgia, about Mikheil Saakashvili, elected third President. He started out being a "populist" and wound up being a corrupt warmonger. After starting a war with Russian, defeat in Ossetia, and great internal turmoil, the Georgians were presented with yet another candidate: Bidzina Ivanishvili, billionaire. It gave me a stark outside view of how democracy fails: If you are consistently presented with choices that make absolutely no positive difference- like Obama versus Romney- over a few decades participation will decline.

I personally was a big believer in democracy until GWB stole the elections, and my faith in democracy declined more with Obama, who has progressed even further than GWB and Clinton into completely subverting "the will of the people" . It's clear that our political system has been completely hijacked by money, as has our media. So being older and more cynical now, I've come to the idea that democracy doesn't work in a milieu of economic disparity. As an aside: If you want to see what finger-puppets our politicians are, just look at what speech is allowed against Obama versus the corporations. It's OK to print signs of Obama in a bull's eye because that's "free speech". Try doing that with Jamie Diamon, and be branded as an "economic terrorist".

More than that, I think that the whole system is geared towards the unsustainable and unrealistic. We should never have a function called "President" or "Chairman" or "CEO". Any time you put executive authority in the hands of a single person, you are making authoritarianism inevitable.

You should not have people "running for office", because generally the more corrupt will win. How about appointment by lottery?

The media is a huge problem. The subconscious messages embedded in both the medium and the message are: Passivity. Only the most current is important. Only the rich or famous are worthy of notice. Everything is resolved in 30 (or 60) minutes. It's All About You (but only as a consumer). A Hero Will Save Us. Righteous Individual Violence Is The Answer. Positive attitude will carry you thru.

NONE of these messages are empowering or realistic for the average person.

I could go on and on, but I seem to be the only person here in this thread making any contributions to the topic What Will It Take for Us to Get Back to Being a Decent Society? (assuming we ever were one). I've done blue-sky thinking and made on-the-ground suggestions. Where is everyone else? I'm tired of being the only one coming up with ideas.

Hearts and heads not in the right place? People not REALLY looking for ideas?

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
" Therefore you're talking about being so old yet you can totally still fight."

Are you REALLY as stupid as rappy? Go and read my posts. Tell me where I said I could 'totally fight'.

I dare you.

---

Right here.

Quote:

---

Hmmm - did I say I wasn't going to be doing anything?

---

Which I never accused you of in the first place. But that is something that says "I'm still fighting."

This entire conversation has been so full of misunderstanding and strawmen that it would behoove both of us to disengage. I know that I have obviously touched a nerve. So I'm not going to argue with you at the moment because I don't know the exact basis of your vitriol.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Then take a bow, BYTE, for making it so dysfunctional with your complete and total self-absorption. Because out of all of the words you posted? About 5% have to do with the problem at-hand.

---

No problem, happy to oblige.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Are you REALLY as stupid as rappy? Go and read my posts. Tell me where I said I could 'totally fight'. I dare you.- KIKI

Right here: "Hmmm - did I say I wasn't going to be doing anything?" Which I never accused you of in the first place. But that is something that says "I'm still fighting."

---

There is a difference between "totally fight" and "I'll still be doing something". The misunderstanding seems to be on your part.

Quote:

---

Then take a bow, BYTE, for making it so dysfunctional with your complete and total self-absorption. Because out of all of the words you posted? About 5% have to do with the problem at-hand.-signy

No problem, happy to oblige.-byte

---

Of course. Because It's All About You. I will not engage in further discussions with you about yourself. OTOH, I'll be all too happy to talk ABOUT you, just like I do about rappy.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME