9-Oct-18 World View -- UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe

Discussion of Web Log and Analysis topics from the Generational Dynamics web site.
FishbellykanakaDude
Posts: 1313
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 8:07 pm

Re: 9-Oct-18 World View -- UN: We have just 12 years to prevent global warming catastrophe

Post by FishbellykanakaDude »

CH86 wrote:
FishbellykanakaDude wrote:
shoshin wrote:John confuses horse shit (local catastrophe) with ecosystem collapse (systemic catastrophe). But that's ok, our lord and savior technology will redeem us....or something....
Ecosystems donʻt collapse.

They re-equilibri-ize, or somesuch makeshift term that means ...
Boomers, Your generation collectively just does not get it.
The "it" that you claim is not the "it" on the table.

The "it" referring to "allowing the 'young' to choose how society shall work" (posited as "tyranny or blissful ignorance") is CLAIMABLE by those with the power to do so.

If you HAD the power to do so, you'd (not necessarily "your generation" but certainly you) do so.

You don't, as you haven't, because it's not your time yet. Patience laddie, patience... :)

You mention a choice between "tyranny" and "happiness" but your generation has mocked the natural freedoms by witholding the "right to choose" which of the above options from the younger generations. We want our ACTUAL rights back, in which the millennial makes the choice of "tyrant" or "blissful ignorance" and have that choice be entirely theirs.
My wording was a little clumsy, so I can see where you might have seen my "choice" statement as a choice between tyranny and happiness.

Tyranny is not a choice at all except for a rather small cadre of wannabe tyrants who somehow amass enough "political power" to force it on a "nation" (or other group).

Happiness is a non-contingent choice, as you can choose it regardless of ANY circumstance you find yourself in.

So, you can choose one, or both, or neither, if you are powerful enough to make the "tyranny" choice. And if you're not powerful enough, you can still choose happiness or not-happiness in ANY case.

...The Boomer then implemented tyranny in order to preserve their childish worldview. Where threats from rival nations are mentioned they are mentioned only to demand those nation's democratization. Xers and Millies DO NOT want to see democracies in Russia and China.

We DO NOT want a global order in which the every country in the world is a democracy, in which national governments would be little more than electoral regions inside a larger world government. YOU (boomers) might like and want such a world order but WE (younger generations born after 1960) do not.
The "old" globalist bunch wanted a one-state world. They're dying off rapidly.

The "new" globalists are seeing the asymptotic reality of "one world government", and are either changing their minds, or are appearing more and more comical and irrelevant (and ineffective).

The "old" fascisto-tyrants "hid behind" their militaries.

The "new" fascisto-tyrants "hide behind" so-called "international law".

What matters, though, is who can convince "the masses" within their "sphere of influence" that said "convincer" represents the said masses impulses, as governed by the masses generational mix, and can lead them to "victory".

The Leader is the "occupational therapist" who relieves the fear of the future of the masses by giving them a direction in which to "vent".

The Leader must be convincing, at first, and "all powerful" shortly after the masses start moving.

The form of directional movement is largely irrelevant. This is where wisdom finds it's place in this process.

Wisdom is less likely to be found in "the young" than elsewhere.

The boomers claim the west still the bastion of freedom, however the fundamental choice any person must make is the choice whether to be good or evil. Everything else stems from the results of that fundamental choice. The west has not be free under the boomers watch because under their stewardship; westerners no longer have freedom of choice regarding the question of being good or being evil.
The choice between good and evil is the basic choice, agreed. That is the essence of free will.

But the choice OF evil (or rather "unnecessary evil"), in place of good, is never a sensible choice.

And of course we here descend into battling definitions of good and "unnecessary evil"! :)

..but the simple facts are that those with power use it while those without power can't use it, and that there is a higher likelihood of finding wisdom in "the old(er)" than in "the young", and that "the masses" are an unwieldy ship to direct.

Good luck with your revolution!

Image

:) <shaka nui!>

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 66 guests