Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
SJW's, Identity politics, Alt-Left and Alt-Right
#1
I have been trying to get my brain about the phenomenon which have occurred in the political sphere in the last decade. I have personally been going about with my life and not being too concerned about what is happening politically. Although I have been going through an existential crisis over the last year or so, after a long-term relationship I was in fell apart.
 
My life so far has been a curious mixture of one of those nerds from the film “Revenge of the Nerds” and the classic Nomad “wild youth” type as Strauss and Howe described. I know ever since I first read “The Fourth Turning” a long time ago, I never identified with the Millennial generation, instead I identified strongly with Generation X. Right now, I am in the process of becoming a “young fogey”, I am surprised how Conservative in my world outlook I have gotten compared to many in our society When I was young back in the turn of the millennium I would have never seen myself as Conservative in any way. For example; as a teenager I would never voted for a Far-Right party like One Nation, however now I am more than prepared to vote for a similar party.
 
As I have stated earlier I was born in 1983, however Australian generations are a little bit behind America's and don't see my age cohort being a part of the Millennial generation. However, I do see those born about say 4 years later as part of another generation.
 
The Fourth Turning started with the Global Financial Crisis here in Australia, however it wasn't a dramatic way like it did in Europe. Rather the transition in hindsight has been rather gradual, which is different from the last Fourth Turning here which had a much more dramatic transition. I believe has to do with Australia having escaped the Global Financial Crisis so far.
 
Lately I have been getting myself up to speed about political developments which have occurred and only recently I have noticed these phenomena happening here in Australia. 
 
I am wrapping my brain about various phenomena and putting them into a generational context such as identity politics, social justice warriors, the alt-left and alt-right. Personally, as a decent minded British style Liberal, I have to say I do not approve of developments and consider identity politics in any form extremely toxic to body politic and I am worried about the increasing restrictions on free speech all in the name of offending as few people as possible. 

Also, some of the stuff the left wing SJW's are arguing runs what we know about human behavior from evolutionary psychology. Since I believe that human behavior can be explained through our evolution as a species. For example; gender identity is not a social construct and it is obvious that male and female brains are structured differently. When it comes to transgender people I have read scientific research which showed their brains were structured in the way of the gender they identified with.

I could wrong, however as I see it the leaders of the alt-right or white identarian movement are Mid Life X'ers for the most part, with the alt-left they are more dominated by Millennial's. Although the followers of both movements seem to be predominately Millennial. Also, I see the whole Social Justice Warrior phenomenon seems to me as a female Millennial phenomenon. 
 
I know in YouTube and elsewhere I am often attracted to Gen X'ers who are of a similar mind to me in being critical of identity politics and SJW's, along share passion for defending free speech even if it offends people. People for example; such as Jordan Peterson (b.1962), Carl Benjamin or Sargon of Akkad (b.1979) and others.
Reply
#2
I am on the cusp of X and Millennial generations,

I despise both SJWs and the far-right, and I'm also sceptical of classical liberalism. Human nature is way from perfect and thus personal freedom needs to be limited in some ways, behaviours like drug dealing, pornography and arguably prostitution have to be curbed so that a civilized society could prosper. My political views could be described as moderately leftist (GW Bush's compassionate capitalism) when it comes to economics and moderately conservative (but not traditionalist) when it comes to culture. I agree that identity politics is toxic. I don't see anywhere a political movement I could identify with. I liked neo-conservatism, but its mostly gone.

SJWs seem to be mostly millennial, but inspired by boomer countercultural movements like radical feminism from the 70s. The identitarian movements and classical liberalism are dominated by Xers. They seem to identify most not with what they support, but what they oppose. The most important thing for them is being against "political correctness".
Reply
#3
(09-17-2018, 07:15 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: I am on the cusp of X and Millennial generations,

I despise both SJWs and the far-right, and I'm also sceptical of classical liberalism. Human nature is way from perfect and thus personal freedom needs to be limited in some ways, behaviours like drug dealing, pornography and arguably prostitution have to be curbed so that a civilized society could prosper. My political views could be described as moderately leftist (GW Bush's compassionate capitalism) when it comes to economics and moderately conservative (but not traditionalist) when it comes to culture. I agree that identity politics is toxic. I don't see anywhere a political movement I could identify with. I liked neo-conservatism, but its mostly gone.

SJWs seem to be mostly millennial, but inspired by boomer countercultural movements like radical feminism from the 70s. The identitarian movements and classical liberalism are dominated by Xers. They seem to identify most not with what they support, but what they oppose. The most important thing for them is being against "political correctness".

Skeptical of classical liberalism is good. It's really the economic neo-liberalism that deserves the most skepticism. A moderately left position would work well in a European or other non-American setting. In the USA, "freedom" has come to be used as a tempting, deceptive slogan for what is really meant: freedom for the bosses to do whatever they want at our expense. That means lower taxes, fewer regulations, dismantling social programs, etc. It has become the religion of the Right-wing, along with fundamentalist Christianity.

I don't see what is wrong with being a warrior for social justice. Social justice is a good thing, and political correctness is fine as long as it just means not offending people of color and such. Admittedly, people who are fanatics can be annoying, especially if they are stuck on one or two issues; we need to see that the interests of diverse races, genders cultures, sexual preferences AND the interests of non-rich white and other working people are the SAME interests; and as Obama said, just focusing on one group over another is not the way to win elections and serve the people. In that sense, identity politics is not wise. But people do need to stick up for how society identifies them, when that identity is used oppressively against them.

Drug dealing can be toxic to the extent that the drugs are toxic, but I don't see that pornography and prostitution, though they can be irritating, can really threaten civilization; they are the world's oldest profession, so they say. But there needs to be a culture of respect for real energy and fulfilling, creative work, I think; not just mere pleasure. 

To the extent that "neo-conservatism" was support for USA empire building, as for example in the invasion of Iraq, it was very toxic and deadly.

The New Age is a very valuable worldview. It has declined, unfortunately, largely because of determined propaganda and derision directed against it, and some commercialization of it; but I don't think the world can prosper and progress now without it. Those who took it on, won't forget it, although many millennials and Xers might. But it will be back, because it is our real destiny going forward, and it's worldview is largely correct and useful. The transhumanist views, on the other hand, cannot work unless they are balanced with the New Age views that understand spirituality, free from the outdated dogmas of the past, both scientific and religious. The consciousness revolution's revolution in consciousness WILL continue. And it has its place in science revolutions as well. Science itself has moved beyond materialism in many respects, and thus, to that extent, is itself "new age." But many boomers, millennials and Xers are blithely unaware of these trends today. As Trump might tweet, "sad"
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#4
(09-05-2018, 05:49 AM)Teejay Wrote: I have been trying to get my brain about the phenomenon which have occurred in the political sphere in the last decade. I have personally been going about with my life and not being too concerned about what is happening politically. Although I have been going through an existential crisis over the last year or so, after a long-term relationship I was in fell apart.
 
My life so far has been a curious mixture of one of those nerds from the film “Revenge of the Nerds” and the classic Nomad “wild youth” type as Strauss and Howe described. I know ever since I first read “The Fourth Turning” a long time ago, I never identified with the Millennial generation, instead I identified strongly with Generation X. Right now, I am in the process of becoming a “young fogey”, I am surprised how Conservative in my world outlook I have gotten compared to many in our society When I was young back in the turn of the millennium I would have never seen myself as Conservative in any way. For example; as a teenager I would never voted for a Far-Right party like One Nation, however now I am more than prepared to vote for a similar party.
 
As I have stated earlier I was born in 1983, however Australian generations are a little bit behind America's and don't see my age cohort being a part of the Millennial generation. However, I do see those born about say 4 years later as part of another generation.
 
The Fourth Turning started with the Global Financial Crisis here in Australia, however it wasn't a dramatic way like it did in Europe. Rather the transition in hindsight has been rather gradual, which is different from the last Fourth Turning here which had a much more dramatic transition. I believe has to do with Australia having escaped the Global Financial Crisis so far.
 
Lately I have been getting myself up to speed about political developments which have occurred and only recently I have noticed these phenomena happening here in Australia. 
 
I am wrapping my brain about various phenomena and putting them into a generational context such as identity politics, social justice warriors, the alt-left and alt-right. Personally, as a decent minded British style Liberal, I have to say I do not approve of developments and consider identity politics in any form extremely toxic to body politic and I am worried about the increasing restrictions on free speech all in the name of offending as few people as possible. 

Also, some of the stuff the left wing SJW's are arguing runs what we know about human behavior from evolutionary psychology. Since I believe that human behavior can be explained through our evolution as a species. For example; gender identity is not a social construct and it is obvious that male and female brains are structured differently. When it comes to transgender people I have read scientific research which showed their brains were structured in the way of the gender they identified with.

I could wrong, however as I see it the leaders of the alt-right or white identarian movement are Mid Life X'ers for the most part, with the alt-left they are more dominated by Millennial's. Although the followers of both movements seem to be predominately Millennial. Also, I see the whole Social Justice Warrior phenomenon seems to me as a female Millennial phenomenon. 
 
I know in YouTube and elsewhere I am often attracted to Gen X'ers who are of a similar mind to me in being critical of identity politics and SJW's, along share passion for defending free speech even if it offends people. People for example; such as Jordan Peterson (b.1962), Carl Benjamin or Sargon of Akkad (b.1979) and others.

Physical evolution has long since run its course. What has happened in civilization is social and spiritual evolution. Brains may shape people, but people also shift their brains, and culture shifts brains. The statement "gender identity is not a social construct and it is obvious that male and female brains are structured differently" seems too dogmatic to me.

It seems a virtue to try not to offend, and it seems a virtue to not be too easily offended. I am seeking, somewhat, to learn to deal with both vices.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#5
(09-17-2018, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Skeptical of classical liberalism is good. It's really the economic neo-liberalism that deserves the most skepticism. A moderately left position would work well in a European or other non-American setting. In the USA, "freedom" has come to be used as a tempting, deceptive slogan for what is really meant: freedom for the bosses to do whatever they want at our expense. That means lower taxes, fewer regulations, dismantling social programs, etc. It has become the religion of the Right-wing, along with fundamentalist Christianity.

I don't believe there is such a thing as neo-liberalism. It was just classical liberalism in 1980s setting. Thatcher and Reagan are dead, and few people would like to see their policies back. So I'm not worrying about that. But today's "classical liberals" like Sargon of Akkad are more sinister, even if they don't have influence comparable to the 1980s market fundamentalists. Types like Sargon seem to operate with the same "mental map" the alt-right uses. They believe leftist elites are the greatest threats to freedom. Also, they appeal to the same demographic: socially awkward millennials whose worldview was shaped by video games and internet porn. Sargon, for example, called Weinstein's victims whores. I don't think Reagan or GW Bush would ever resort to that.

Quote:I don't see what is wrong with being a warrior for social justice. Social justice is a good thing, and political correctness is fine as long as it just means not offending people of color and such. Admittedly, people who are fanatics can be annoying, especially if they are stuck on one or two issues; we need to see that the interests of diverse races, genders cultures, sexual preferences AND the interests of non-rich white and other working people are the SAME interests; and as Obama said, just focusing on one group over another is not the way to win elections and serve the people. In that sense, identity politics is not wise. But people do need to stick up for how society identifies them, when that identity is used oppressively against them.

What I dislike about PC and SJWs is that they can recognize evil only when it's done by white men. For example, they defend Islam despite its violent nature. They claim that tribal societies lived in "peaceful anarchy", even if the reality was incessant tribal warfare. They also deny innate differences between men's and women's brains. To some extent, this is well-meant, because women were subjugated in traditional societies and this was rationalized by "natural law" (like in Thomistic Christianity, but also in Judaism, Islam, and many indigenous societies)
But progress can only be pursued by those who see the world as it is.

Quote:Drug dealing can be toxic to the extent that the drugs are toxic, but I don't see that pornography and prostitution, though they can be irritating, can really threaten civilization; they are the world's oldest profession, so they say. But there needs to be a culture of respect for real energy and fulfilling, creative work, I think; not just mere pleasure. 

Because of Internet porn, many young men all over the world struggle with porn addiction and compulsive masturbation. They have problems to achieve erection during normal sex. I'm not a puritan, but Internet porn is a real problem:
https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/

Quote:To the extent that "neo-conservatism" was support for USA empire building, as for example in the invasion of Iraq, it was very toxic and deadly.

To the extent it was about ridding the world of monstrous criminals like Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, it was noble. Iraq was in a rather good state around 2010, until Obama pulled the troops out, which caused the rise of ISIS.

Quote:The New Age is a very valuable worldview. It has declined, unfortunately, largely because of determined propaganda and derision directed against it, and some commercialization of it; but I don't think the world can prosper and progress now without it. Those who took it on, won't forget it, although many millennials and Xers might. But it will be back, because it is our real destiny going forward, and it's worldview is largely correct and useful. The transhumanist views, on the other hand, cannot work unless they are balanced with the New Age views that understand spirituality, free from the outdated dogmas of the past, both scientific and religious. The consciousness revolution's revolution in consciousness WILL continue. And it has its place in science revolutions as well. Science itself has moved beyond materialism in many respects, and thus, to that extent, is itself "new age." But many boomers, millennials and Xers are blithely unaware of these trends today. As Trump might tweet, "sad"

I would say science and technology need philosophy above all. To the extent New Age philosophy was "cosmic humanism", it WAS a good thing, but I'm against its superstitious and anti-technology parts, as well as against hippies' sexual licentiousness.

My favourite philosopher is Missionary generation Briton, Olaf Stapledon, known as the author of "Last and First Men" and "Star Maker", considered by many as classics of science fiction. Stapledon believed that the goal of life is to advance in intelligence and creativity so that we could advance harmony and complexity in the universe. This is the cornerstone of philosophy called extropianism, invented by Max Moore in the 1980s (probably under the influence of Stapledon). Transhumanism is a logical result of it, since there are limitations of the natural human mind.

(Thank, Eric. You've made me write a description of my worldview)
Reply
#6
(09-18-2018, 05:59 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: I don't believe there is such a thing as neo-liberalism. It was just classical liberalism in 1980s setting. Thatcher and Reagan are dead, and few people would like to see their policies back. So I'm not worrying about that. But today's "classical liberals" like Sargon of Akkad are more sinister, even if they don't have influence comparable to the 1980s market fundamentalists. Types like Sargon seem to operate with the same "mental map" the alt-right uses. They believe leftist elites are the greatest threats to freedom. Also, they appeal to the same demographic: socially awkward millennials whose worldview was shaped by video games and internet porn. Sargon, for example, called Weinstein's victims whores. I don't think Reagan or GW Bush would ever resort to that.
Well, I would agree, but I think Trump's policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. It's true though that neo-liberalism is basically classical liberalism, but without anything liberal in it.

Quote:What I dislike about PC and SJWs is that they can recognize evil only when it's done by white men. For example, they defend Islam despite its violent nature. They claim that tribal societies lived in "peaceful anarchy", even if the reality was incessant tribal warfare. They also deny innate differences between men's and women's brains. To some extent, this is well-meant, because women were subjugated in traditional societies and this was rationalized by "natural law" (like in Thomistic Christianity, but also in Judaism, Islam, and many indigenous societies)
But progress can only be pursued by those who see the world as it is.

While there was some tribal warfare, war as we know it was invented by the original Sargon of Akkad (I've never heard of the new one). I agree about Islam, and SJW's should be able to see its bad expressions, although many Moslems are not violent and tout its peaceful aspects and denounce terrorism.


Quote:Because of Internet porn, many young men all over the world struggle with porn addiction and compulsive masturbation. They have problems to achieve erection during normal sex. I'm not a puritan, but Internet porn is a real problem:
https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/
You are probably more well-informed on that score. There certainly is a lot of internet porn.

Quote:To the extent it was about ridding the world of monstrous criminals like Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, it was noble. Iraq was in a rather good state around 2010, until Obama pulled the troops out, which caused the rise of ISIS.

I didn't mind getting Osama, because he was likely the 9-11 villain. But we had no business deposing Saddam, as evil as he was. He was on the road to reform. We had no business "spreading democracy around the world" through war to create a "new American century." Neo-con imperialism caused untold needless deaths and debilitating injuries in Iraq and the USA. ISIS was the direct result of US intervention in Iraq, not of our pullout. We don't need neo-cons at all. We do need a well-conceived foreign policy that is not isolationist, because American power can be a useful check on rogue nations and tyranny, and defending our own freedom from attack is needed. An alliance system is needed, with multi-lateralism and the UN. But rampant preventive intervention and imperialism causes many more problems than it solves. We need the 2T ideal of a world without war; I stand by it.

Quote:I would say science and technology need philosophy above all. To the extent New Age philosophy was "cosmic humanism", it WAS a good thing,

Good

Quote:but I'm against its superstitious and anti-technology parts, as well as against hippies' sexual licentiousness.

My favourite philosopher is Missionary generation Briton, Olaf Stapledon, known as the author of "Last and First Men" and "Star Maker", considered by many as classics of science fiction. Stapledon believed that the goal of life is to advance in intelligence and creativity so that we could advance harmony and complexity in the universe. This is the cornerstone of philosophy called extropianism, invented by Max Moore in the 1980s (probably under the influence of Stapledon). Transhumanism is a logical result of it, since there are limitations of the natural human mind.

(Thank, Eric. You've made me write a description of my worldview)

Of course I am very much in favor of much of what materialists and techies call "superstition" nowadays, such as psychic abilities and occult and esoteric studies, but there is a dangerous trend among some supposed "new agers" to discard reason and common sense in order to believe in lots of conspiracy theories without adequate facts, as well as not question some new age exaggerations. When spiritual ideas are applied to the material world, empirical checks are wise, and this may lead to new knowledge of consciousness extension beyond the body and this life. Science and Spirit can be allies. Millennials and late wave Xers probably love sci-fi much more than I do. To me, worship of tech is a 1T throwback.

I am not familiar with Stapledon or Max Moore. It sounds fine, but I am very skeptical of humans becoming machines. I want instead an extension of the organic. Tech solutions should be subordinate to our original gifts of spirit and body. On that level, I am in favor. Also note that the tech revolution started in the 2T, and partly as a result of hippie influence. I am much less against "hippies' sexual licentiousness" than you. Obviously there are dangers though, when anything is taken to excess and without care for basic ethics and consideration.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#7
(09-18-2018, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: While there was some tribal warfare, war as we know it was invented by the original Sargon of Akkad (I've never heard of the new one).

A relevant image from an anthropology book, War before civilization:

[Image: wardeaths.jpg]

Primitive war certainly was not organized well, and the warriors did not have high-tech weapons. But there was more violent deaths among hunter-gatherers than in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.

Quote:But we had no business deposing Saddam, as evil as he was. He was on the road to reform.

Show me your sources!

Quote:We had no business "spreading democracy around the world" through war to create a "new American century." Neo-con imperialism caused untold needless deaths and debilitating injuries in Iraq and the USA. ISIS was the direct result of US intervention in Iraq, not of our pullout. We don't need neo-cons at all. We do need a well-conceived foreign policy that is not isolationist, because American power can be a useful check on rogue nations and tyranny, and defending our own freedom from attack is needed. An alliance system is needed, with multi-lateralism and the UN. But rampant preventive intervention and imperialism causes many more problems than it solves. We need the 2T ideal of a world without war; I stand by it.

A world without war is world without tyranny. Democracies almost never go to war with each other.

The UN is a fine thing in theory, but it lost all moral authority by treating dictators and democratic leaders in the same way. Also, it did not prevent Saddam from gassing the Kurds. It didn't prevent Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons. It didn't do anything to make North Korea close its gulags.

What the current 4T could accomplish is to reform the UN to make it more moral, like its Missionary founders wanted.

Quote:To me, worship of tech is a 1T throwback.

We are heading towards another 1T and this part is needed too. I don't like it when core millennials live their lives on Inslagram and Faceborg (my nicknames for social media, you may be familiar with what "slag" means in British slang)

Quote:I am not familiar with Stapledon or Max Moore. It sounds fine, but I am very skeptical of humans becoming machines. I want instead an extension of the organic. Tech solutions should be subordinate to our original gifts of spirit and body.

You'd like Stapledon Smile In Last and First Men he described how future humans built gargantuan brains, which turned out to be disasters because they lacked bodies and hearts. They had only intellects and could not experience love, which gives life meaning. Not necessarily sexual love, but also love of all that is beautiful in the universe. The Earth's final civilization in Stapledon's fiction was normal human beings, only with bigger brains, longer lifespans and "Martian units" in brain cells which gave them telepathic abilities. Those units were probably something we'd now call nanobots. Imagine that, a Missionary person foresaw nanobots!

Max Moore is a boomer so I guess he shares Stapledon's life-affirming sentiments. But many millennial extropians probably do want humans to become machines.

If you're curious about extropianism, you can read the manifesto:
http://vency.com/EXtropian3.htm

Political extropianism could be the big thing for the new idealist generation! The cows of liberalism, conservatism and leftism have been already milked.
Reply
#8
(09-18-2018, 01:45 PM)Bill the Piper Wrote: A world without war is world without tyranny. Democracies almost never go to war with each other.

The UN is a fine thing in theory, but it lost all moral authority by treating dictators and democratic leaders in the same way. Also, it did not prevent Saddam from gassing the Kurds. It didn't prevent Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons. It didn't do anything to make North Korea close its gulags.

What the current 4T could accomplish is to reform the UN to make it more moral, like its Missionary founders wanted.

I don't see that as likely, because the first world is transitioning to a new version of itself, the second world is trying to be the first world of the immediate past, and the third world is still mired in chaos. That's not a recipe for general betterment.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#9
(09-18-2018, 01:45 PM)Bill the Piper Wrote:
(09-18-2018, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: While there was some tribal warfare, war as we know it was invented by the original Sargon of Akkad (I've never heard of the new one).

A relevant image from an anthropology book, War before civilization:

[Image: wardeaths.jpg]

Primitive war certainly was not organized well, and the warriors did not have high-tech weapons. But there was more violent deaths among hunter-gatherers than in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.

I don't know about that book, and I might look at this further. But the population of these societies was certainly not on the level that could have resulted in many millions of war deaths.

Quote:
Quote:But we had no business deposing Saddam, as evil as he was. He was on the road to reform.

Show me your sources!

For now, I just remember from the news that he was dismantling his weapons and releasing political prisoners. His Sec. of State Tariq Aziz just asked us to leave them alone. They were no threat, so therefore there was no justification for any invasion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne...jails.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/0...index.html
https://www.un.org/press/en/2003/sc7664.doc.htm

Quote:
Quote:We had no business "spreading democracy around the world" through war to create a "new American century." Neo-con imperialism caused untold needless deaths and debilitating injuries in Iraq and the USA. ISIS was the direct result of US intervention in Iraq, not of our pullout. We don't need neo-cons at all. We do need a well-conceived foreign policy that is not isolationist, because American power can be a useful check on rogue nations and tyranny, and defending our own freedom from attack is needed. An alliance system is needed, with multi-lateralism and the UN. But rampant preventive intervention and imperialism causes many more problems than it solves. We need the 2T ideal of a world without war; I stand by it.

A world without war is world without tyranny. Democracies almost never go to war with each other.

The UN is a fine thing in theory, but it lost all moral authority by treating dictators and democratic leaders in the same way. Also, it did not prevent Saddam from gassing the Kurds. It didn't prevent Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons. It didn't do anything to make North Korea close its gulags.

What the current 4T could accomplish is to reform the UN to make it more moral, like its Missionary founders wanted.

As David suggests, I think such a mission is beyond the current ability of the UN to establish. I wouldn't mind it, but much more consensus is needed, given the number of tyrannies today. Still, the UN is useful and it's always better to go to war multi-laterally than alone, because then the world is with you and it has greater legal sanction. Greater success by revolutions among the people is needed. The US acting together with others can help them. It didn't quite work in Libya, but it may yet work out there if the people there can make it work. Imposing democracy from outside doesn't work; the people need to rise up. But they always will whenever the astrological cycles come around. They always have, every time, right on time; ever since the Fall of the Bastille. Ours is an age of revolution, and it's powered from the bottom up.

Quote:I don't like it when core millennials live their lives on Inslagram and Faceborg (my nicknames for social media, you may be familiar with what "slag" means in British slang)

No, not familiar.
Right.

Quote:You'd like Stapledon Smile In Last and First Men he described how future humans built gargantuan brains, which turned out to be disasters because they lacked bodies and hearts. They had only intellects and could not experience love, which gives life meaning. Not necessarily sexual love, but also love of all that is beautiful in the universe. The Earth's final civilization in Stapledon's fiction was normal human beings, only with bigger brains, longer lifespans and "Martian units" in brain cells which gave them telepathic abilities. Those units were probably something we'd now call nanobots. Imagine that, a Missionary person foresaw nanobots!

Max Moore is a boomer so I guess he shares Stapledon's life-affirming sentiments. But many millennial extropians probably do want humans to become machines.

If you're curious about extropianism, you can read the manifesto:
http://vency.com/EXtropian3.htm

Political extropianism could be the big thing for the new idealist generation! The cows of liberalism, conservatism and leftism have been already milked.

I don't think those cows have been milked, but who knows. Extropianism will need a lot more PR!
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#10
(09-18-2018, 05:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I don't know about that book, and I might look at this further. But the population of these societies was certainly not on the level that could have resulted in many millions of war deaths.

He used percentages, not absolute numbers, to measure level of warfare in a society.

Quote:For now, I just remember from the news that he was dismantling his weapons and releasing political prisoners. His Sec. of State Tariq Aziz just asked us to leave them alone. They were no threat, so therefore there was no justification for any invasion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne...jails.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/0...index.html
https://www.un.org/press/en/2003/sc7664.doc.htm

Saddam knew that America, Britain and allies aren't joking. He did what he could to save his tyranny. This wouldn't happened if no pressure was put on him. Without military intervention, he could rebuild his arsenals. It's rather similar to what is currently going on in North Korea. There was already one denuclearization in 2008, but Kim changed his mind.
Reply
#11
(09-19-2018, 05:23 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote:
(09-18-2018, 05:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I don't know about that book, and I might look at this further. But the population of these societies was certainly not on the level that could have resulted in many millions of war deaths.

He used percentages, not absolute numbers, to measure level of warfare in a society.

Quote:For now, I just remember from the news that he was dismantling his weapons and releasing political prisoners. His Sec. of State Tariq Aziz just asked us to leave them alone. They were no threat, so therefore there was no justification for any invasion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne...jails.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/0...index.html
https://www.un.org/press/en/2003/sc7664.doc.htm

Saddam knew that America, Britain and allies aren't joking. He did what he could to save his tyranny. This wouldn't happened if no pressure was put on him. Without military intervention, he could rebuild his arsenals. It's rather similar to what is currently going on in North Korea. There was already one denuclearization in 2008, but Kim changed his mind.

Yes, containment and pressure was called for, but not invasion.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#12
My conclusion on the SJW's, while they good intentions. However their activism does go a bit overboard at times.
Reply
#13
(10-08-2018, 04:35 AM)Teejay Wrote: My conclusion on the SJW's, while they good intentions. However their activism does go a bit overboard at times.

SJW's bring out my rotten inner child.



---Value Added Cool
Reply
#14
GO, SJWs!!

(I'm already irritated a lot by certain people; what's one more type?)
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#15
(10-08-2018, 10:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: GO, SJWs!!

(I'm already irritated a lot by certain people; what's one more type?)

Dunno, man. Why be irritated when you can mock what irritates you?  Humor is the best medicine after all. You know, just log into your Facefuck account and shitpost on some Trump thread.
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#16
(10-08-2018, 11:53 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:
(10-08-2018, 10:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: GO, SJWs!!

(I'm already irritated a lot by certain people; what's one more type?)

Dunno, man. Why be irritated when you can mock what irritates you?  Humor is the best medicine after all. You know, just log into your Facefuck account and shitpost on some Trump thread.

Yeah, I've just been doin' that. I like to dump on drump climate science deniers.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#17
(10-08-2018, 10:07 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: GO, SJWs!!

Get a load of the shit we get to put up with thanks to the SJWs.  Naturally with Dims running city hall there is no chance of the police actually doing something useful for a change.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#18
(10-08-2018, 07:10 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:
(10-08-2018, 04:35 AM)Teejay Wrote: My conclusion on the SJW's, while they good intentions. However their activism does go a bit overboard at times.

SJW's bring out my rotten inner child.

Most hyper-involved people can't imagine others being less involved than they are. Most uninvolved people can't fathom others being so involved that they ruin other people's <insert innocent or guilty pleasure of choice>. That's why all movements generate backlash, until the full weight of the issues involved become unavoidable by almost everyone. We're getting there, but not quite yet.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#19
(10-09-2018, 02:27 AM)Galen Wrote:
(10-08-2018, 10:07 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: GO, SJWs!!

Get a load of the shit we get to put up with thanks to the SJWs.  Naturally with Dims running city hall there is no chance of the police actually doing something useful for a change.

Your whine is bad Twitter karma?  Really?  If they were putting you in jail, you would have a real gripe -- assuming you did nothing to justifying some jail time, of course.

Are you now an Xer Snowflake?
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#20
(10-09-2018, 11:36 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-09-2018, 02:27 AM)Galen Wrote:
(10-08-2018, 10:07 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: GO, SJWs!!

Get a load of the shit we get to put up with thanks to the SJWs.  Naturally with Dims running city hall there is no chance of the police actually doing something useful for a change.

Your whine is bad Twitter karma?  Really?  If they were putting you in jail, you would have a real gripe -- assuming you did nothing to justifying some jail time, of course.

Are you know an Xer Snowflake?

I think violent acts like the one in that tweet should be grounds for jail.  I bet folks would howl to no end if some  KKK folks did that sort of thing.  The fact is, antifa is a cancer.
---Value Added Cool
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Authoritarianism and American politics pbrower2a 72 23,558 02-16-2019, 01:51 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)