Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

takeheart wrote

I do not acknowledge "climate crisis". In fact, I believe climate politics is scarcity politics. There is less and less limit on means of production, so why all people's needs have not been satisfied yet? Wealth hoarders produce many justifications and climategate is one of them. A lot has been invested into it, and they have hard time dropping it even after many decent scientists spoke against the lie.

1

Zenen wrote

Please don't conflate the ways that climate change is coerced into a political platform with the actuality of climate change itself - they're different beasts and the reason why people's needs aren't satisfied is because the extractive resource practices that our society rely on need people with unmet needs (largely social needs) to function. What do you need?

2

smallpond OP wrote

It's amazing that there are still flat earthers and climate 'skeptics' out there. Most are just old and have decided to double-down until they die rather than admit their stupidity, but I suppose a collapsing society involves all manner of delusions.

1

takeheart wrote

Why do you think the society is collapsing? Because of liars or because of those who reject lies?

2

smallpond OP wrote

Because we are overpopulated, addicted to high-energy resources that are running out, and simultaneously destroying the natural systems that sustain us.

You strike me as someone utterly incapable of discerning lies from truth - I pity you.

−1

takeheart wrote

I do not destroy natural systems. Do you?

Overpopulation rhetoric is eugenics, it's origin are people who want others to not reproduce, to have their own genes prevail in the long run. Do you have many children? If no, you're pissing against the wind.

Only I know my capabilities. I see you're getting hostile. Why? I see no reason to get personal over these topics, especially if you value truth. You cannot tackle the truth unless you keep your head cool.

2

smallpond OP wrote

My head is cool, but there's no point in laboring conversations with fools.

1

Zenen wrote

You may not destroy natural systems but you are more than likely complicit in their destruction, by supporting businesses and systems that are extractive in nature.

Overpopulation is not a problem (yet), poor allocation of resources is the problem. However, there is truth in what OP says about the lack of sustainability in our strategies.

1

smallpond OP wrote

Only I know my capabilities.

You probably believe that. The stupidity of a fool is not restricted to the external world. They are just as incapable of comprehending themselves. A significantly smarter person knows the fool better than they know themselves.

0

Zenen wrote

Watch what you project onto the people around you - even if they're internet avatars. Pity is not a helpful sentiment :(

2

smallpond OP wrote

It is helpful/kind to tell people the truth. If they choose to ignore it, it's stupid to entertain fools who cannot acknowledge overpopulation or other things that have become quite clear over decades.

1

Zenen wrote

One of the great things about a website like this is that it offers a bridge between people who live in different realities. We live in a post-truth world, which means that what is 'true' for you is not necessarily 'true' for someone else. What we can do is establish common ground between people who carry different views than us by finding things that we agree on and building on that as a foundation.

Seems like everyone in this thread agrees that national politics and governance systems are overly bloated and unhelpful towards solving the problems that we face on a personal scale, anybody disagree with that? /u/Wahaha /u/takeheart

1

takeheart wrote

That would be an understatement. It's not enough to say that governments and policy makers are unhelpful to solve problems. They create these problems. Check out "Planet of the humans 2019"

1

Zenen wrote

I don't have the time to watch a documentary, but it seems like you're on the same page as Wahaha and smallpond in the opinion that corrupt governments are creating problems for the common population and not acting with citizen's interests in mind.

Mind giving me the thesis of Planet Of The Humans?

1

takeheart wrote

Speed up the film, Zenen, quick. Click? Pic? Look, Eye, Now, Flick, Here, There, Swift, Pace, Up, Down, In, Out, Why, How, Who, What, Where, Eh? Uh! Bang! Smack! Wallop, Bing, Bong, Boom! Digest-digests, digest-digest-digests. Environmentalism? One column, two sentences, a headline! Then, in mid-air, all vanishes! Whirl man’s mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters, that the centrifuge flings off all unnecessary, time-wasting thought!

1

Wahaha wrote

The problem with government is the blatant corruption. I think the things you perceive as bloat were things added to reduce the corruption, but it isn't working.

The core problem is that democracy is an awful system, where you essentially give power to the people that have a big influence. So essentially rule of the rich by proxy of exchangeable puppets.

To solve the core problem of government being "incompetent" you have to solve the corruption, which you cannot do in a democracy.

Compare this with a monarchy where at the end of the day you have someone actually responsible. In a monarchy you at least need to keep everyone from hating you so much that they would go out and kill you. Not in a democracy. If any puppet gets a bit of heat the puppet is exchanged and then it is business as usual.

If the puppet tries doing things itself you just assassinate it.

The core problem is democracy.

It is designed to divide a people who should stand united. To divide them on as many issues as possible.

1

Zenen wrote

Okay, while I don't know if we see democracy the same way (I think that what we refer to democracy is actually oligarchy wearing a funny hat), I definitely agree that we need to do away with systems that divide populations that need to stand together and fight for common goals - the net survival & prosperity of as much life on this planet as possible is what I'm after. What banner do you want to see people unifying under?

1

smallpond OP wrote

Yes, I probably disagree with that. It's not that they're bloated, it's that they've been completely corrupted so that they no longer serve the interests of citizens. Big government is probably the only way to attempt to tackle societal problems, but unfortunately the world seems to lack benevolent dictators.

We're here on this website, that's all we need to agree on. There is no need to establish common ground.

1

Zenen wrote

I'm reading your response like you chose to interpret what I said in a controversial way so that you might have a reason to disagree with me. Regardless - I agree with you, I think that what you call 'corruption' is a consequence of what I call 'bloat'.

I also think that governance is a useful & necessary tool to getting human beings to work together... I have just never seen it scale past a city-state level without starting to collapse in on itself.

Re: establishing common ground, finding agreement is what makes the difference between this website being a platform being an excuse to get into arguments on the internet versus a place where free speech can be used as a tool to bring disparate groups into alignment so that we can talk about things like "how do we learn to self-govern and create systems that work for everyone rather than only the wealthy?"

Question: what do you think about digitalized democracy? It seems to be a way to create a "belevolent dictator" that is resistant to some of the corrupting influences that humans fall victim to.

1

smallpond OP wrote

If we're more in agreement, all good. There are many people who consider government inherently evil, and simply want as little of it as possible.

place where free speech can be used as a tool to bring disparate groups into alignment

You seem to be on some odd do-gooder crusade... I hope that feels nice. If you want to bring groups into alignment, focus on the people physically close to you who actually matter, then slowly work outwards.

This website doesn't need to come into alignment, it just needs to be a place where people can speak. It's far better that we all disagree as much as possible. Coming into alignment means becoming just another moronic circlejerk unaccepting of outsiders.

1

Zenen wrote

Yea, working on my real life communities for the most part.

I am actually trying to influence the world in what I consider to be a positive direction, maybe this isn't a great place to be spending my time and energy

1

smallpond OP wrote

Yeah, if you want all the misfits here to hold hands so you can lead us into a brighter future, I don't like your chances.

If you just want somewhere online where people can speak freely, maybe ramble is worth a little time.

0