Will the new saeculum start after the pandemic is over?

[Eric the Green]

(04-29-2020, 02:39 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(04-29-2020, 12:41 PM)David Horn Wrote: Equating SJWs with the general concept of Progressive is a ploy used by folks on your side

It's the leftist mainstream media that's equating these.  That's most certainly not my side.

No, equating the SJWs with progressives is a ploy by Republicans and right-wing commentators.

[Eric the Green]

(04-29-2020, 09:23 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(04-28-2020, 11:58 AM)David Horn Wrote: If AGW wasn't already knocking loudly on the door, I might agree -- but it is. The neoliberals won't take that seriously until it impacts them personally, and the SJWs don't think about issues like that.  So another, more science based phalange will have to emerge, be taken seriously and gain power, or AGW will become a crisis far too early.  Society needs some down time to regroup, and COVID-19 is still the crisis de jure.

Wait... aren't the SJWs obsessed with global warming? I already see Environmentalism replacing Inclusivity as the most important Leftist idea, Eric surely will agree.

Sure, but SJWs per se are usually more concerned with social justice issues; it's in the name. But many SJWs I know are pushing intersectionality, combining the two issues. AGW and pollution have greater negative impacts on communities of color, for example, as does COVID. And the power of the oligarchy is responsible for both issues. So, we'll see how far the combo goes. Bernie certainly pushed this.

2T visionary Murray Bookchin already combined them, influencing the new age and green counter-cultures. He wrote:

“Whatever has turned human beings into “aliens” in nature are social changes that have made many human beings “aliens” in their own social world: the domination of the young by the old, of women by men, and of men by men. Today, as for many centuries in the past, there are still oppressive human beings who literally own society and others who are owned by it. Until society can be reclaimed by an undivided humanity that will use its collective wisdom, cultural achievements, technological innovations, scientific knowledge, and innate creativity for its own benefit and for that of the natural world, all ecological problems will have their roots in social problems.”
― Murray Bookchin, Remaking Society

[Blazkovitz]

(04-29-2020, 03:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-29-2020, 09:23 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(04-28-2020, 11:58 AM)David Horn Wrote: If AGW wasn't already knocking loudly on the door, I might agree -- but it is. The neoliberals won't take that seriously until it impacts them personally, and the SJWs don't think about issues like that.  So another, more science based phalange will have to emerge, be taken seriously and gain power, or AGW will become a crisis far too early.  Society needs some down time to regroup, and COVID-19 is still the crisis de jure.

Wait... aren't the SJWs obsessed with global warming? I already see Environmentalism replacing Inclusivity as the most important Leftist idea, Eric surely will agree.

Sure, but SJWs per se are usually more concerned with social justice issues; it's in the name. But many SJWs I know are pushing intersectionality, combining the two issues. AGW and pollution have greater negative impacts on communities of color, for example, as does COVID. And the power of the oligarchy is responsible for both issues. So, we'll see how far the combo goes. Bernie certainly pushed this.

2T visionary Murray Bookchin already combined them, influencing the new age and green counter-cultures. He wrote:

“Whatever has turned human beings into “aliens” in nature are social changes that have made many human beings “aliens” in their own social world: the domination of the young by the old, of women by men, and of men by men. Today, as for many centuries in the past, there are still oppressive human beings who literally own society and others who are owned by it. Until society can be reclaimed by an undivided humanity that will use its collective wisdom, cultural achievements, technological innovations, scientific knowledge, and innate creativity for its own benefit and for that of the natural world, all ecological problems will have their roots in social problems.”
― Murray Bookchin, Remaking Society

Global citizenship and global governance would mean no human being is "alien" anywhere on the planet, and it would also be awesome for the environment. Otherwise Big Business will be able outsource its production to a rogue nation that doesn't care about the environment.

Quote:equating the SJWs with progressives is a ploy by Republicans and right-wing commentators.

So where are the non-SJW people you would call progressive?

[Eric the Green]

(04-30-2020, 05:12 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: So where are the non-SJW people you would call progressive?

SJW is generally a pejorative term. Some of them are abrasive and militant, thus provoking opposition. The name itself represents something fine and dandy; to oppose social injustice and support social justice. So it depends on the behavior of the SJWs whether they might be called progressive or not. If well-behaved and not too offensive and rigid, then I don't see a difference between SJW and progressive; all progressives are SJWs in that case. Progressives may not all be "warriors" in the sense of provoking conflict. If SJWs are also too narrowly focused on one or a few social justice or identity issues, then they may not be environmentalists, and maybe not even be concerned with class and economics. So you could say progressives are broadly-focused and more-polite SJWs.

[David Horn]

(04-29-2020, 02:39 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(04-29-2020, 12:41 PM)David Horn Wrote: Equating SJWs with the general concept of Progressive is a ploy used by folks on your side

It's the leftist mainstream media that's equating these.  That's most certainly not my side.

Of course, there is some of that, but it's Fox News and commentators like Rush Limbaugh that pound that trope to death.  It's the same with Antifa, which has the benefit of "balancing" the neo-Nazis that make the alt-Right totally toxic.  There have always been one-issue zealots in both parties, but the GOP started to embrace theirs (e.g.the Tea Party, gun nuts of all stripes and the hyper religious fundamentalists), and needed to stalking-horses on the left to deflect from that.  That doesn't make SJWs universally bad or good, just committed.  Whether that is positive or toxic is up to the people involved.  Most seem to be rational if a bit extreme.  It's hard to see the alt-Right in the same light.

[David Horn]

(04-30-2020, 05:12 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Global citizenship and global governance would mean no human being is "alien" anywhere on the planet, and it would also be awesome for the environment. Otherwise Big Business will be able outsource its production to a rogue nation that doesn't care about the environment.

That's a nice thought, but a saeculum or two too early. We have to solve the problems gnawing away at us today, before we take-on universality.

[pbrower2a]

Soon after, as such is how the cycle goes from 4T to 1T. We have just endured the most mass death in a short time from one cause since the outbreak of the Spanish Influenza of a century ago.

[Blazkovitz]

(04-30-2020, 05:59 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-30-2020, 05:12 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: So where are the non-SJW people you would call progressive?

SJW is generally a pejorative term. Some of them are abrasive and militant, thus provoking opposition. The name itself represents something fine and dandy; to oppose social injustice and support social justice. So it depends on the behavior of the SJWs whether they might be called progressive or not. If well-behaved and not too offensive and rigid, then I don't see a difference between SJW and progressive; all progressives are SJWs in that case. Progressives may not all be "warriors" in the sense of provoking conflict. If SJWs are also too narrowly focused on one or a few social justice or identity issues, then they may not be environmentalists, and maybe not even be concerned with class and economics. So you could say progressives are broadly-focused and more-polite SJWs.

So, both would fit in the purple sector of my diagram, just SJWs are the extremists and "progressives" are the moderates?

Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

[David Horn]

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: … I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

Pressing ahead with Basic Universal Income is Progressive and communitarian, but outside the SJW domain. It has a good chance of being enacted in the US. No one is more surprised than me.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

I would consider the arrow of progress to be alive and well. Do you oppose autocracy? Seek equality? Favor human rights? Some do. The left has not abandoned striving towards progress, though from Nixon to Trump at least they have been fighting an up hill battle.

[Warren Dew]

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

The left today wants to go back to the 1930s and call it progress, at least that part of the left that isn't neoliberal.

[Blazkovitz]

(05-01-2020, 08:05 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: … I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

Pressing ahead with Basic Universal Income is Progressive and communitarian, but outside the SJW domain. It has a good chance of being enacted in the US.  No one is more surprised than me.

Good point

But in terms of culture, there are points of agreement between today's Left and primitive tribal societies:
-The emphasis on group identity and upholding its honour.
-Nature worship (climate alarmism comes close)
-Wanting to protect some ideas from criticism in name of avoiding victimization

(05-01-2020, 11:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

I would consider the arrow of progress to be alive and well. Do you oppose autocracy? Seek equality? Favor human rights? Some do. The left has not abandoned striving towards progress, though from Nixon to Trump at least they have been fighting an up hill battle.

I prefer meritocracy to equality. Human rights are fine, though the Left seems keen on expanding the list endlessly, so that they start restricting other people's freedoms.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-01-2020, 11:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

I would consider the arrow of progress to be alive and well.  Do you oppose autocracy?  Seek equality?  Favor human rights?  Some do.  The left has not abandoned striving towards progress, though from Nixon to Trump at least they have been fighting an up hill battle.

I prefer meritocracy to equality. Human rights are fine, though the Left seems keen on expanding the list endlessly, so that they start restricting other people's freedoms.
[/quote]

If I thought the elites had much merit I might sympathize a bit. As is there is too much 'he who has, gets.' The elites have so much that protecting a floor below which one does not sink seems possible. I would suppose equality of capital is more than one should expect, but equality under law is worth aiming for. Tribal thinking overcoming minorities is not right.

[Isoko]

Actually I'd say that the Corona virus is the true start of the 4T. The other events were controlled too easily and just became 3T events. If this event leads to a great depression, then it is a 1929 event and means nothing is over yet. Not by a long shot, like some on here believe.

[David Horn]

(05-02-2020, 03:16 PM)Isoko Wrote: Actually I'd say that the Corona virus is the true start of the 4T. The other events were controlled too easily and just became 3T events. If this event leads to a great depression, then it is a 1929 event and means nothing is over yet. Not by a long shot, like some on here believe.

I'll have to disagree.  The 4T started cool and slow, but events like 9/11, Hurricane Katrina and the Great Recession can't just be ignored as too early and too tame.  They stood the knife on edge, and we've been sitting on the edge of the blade ever since.  When COVID-19 hit, it was a trigger long awaited.

[pbrower2a]

(05-02-2020, 10:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-01-2020, 11:09 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-01-2020, 04:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Though I doubt if the term progressive is useful, since the Left has abandoned the idea of progress. Richard Dawkins is probably a proper progressive Leftist. In general the sceptic community stands for progress as it was understood in the previous saeculum, and as I still understand it, but most of them criticise the Left quite harshly like Sam Harris.

I would consider the arrow of progress to be alive and well.  Do you oppose autocracy?  Seek equality?  Favor human rights?  Some do.  The left has not abandoned striving towards progress, though from Nixon to Trump at least they have been fighting an up hill battle.

I prefer meritocracy to equality. Human rights are fine, though the Left seems keen on expanding the list endlessly, so that they start restricting other people's freedoms.

If I thought the elites had much merit I might sympathize a bit.  As is there is too much 'he who has, gets.'  The elites have so much that protecting a floor below which one does not sink seems possible.  I would suppose equality of capital is more than one should expect, but equality under law is worth aiming for.  Tribal thinking overcoming minorities is not right.
[/quote]

One accepts equality in politics because anything else gets absurd results. In economics, meritocracy must prevail so that things work. A sound economy rewards competence and discourages inadequacy.