You know, it’s rare you come across something that puts all the pieces of everything together concerning the post modern puzzle when describing the ongoing existential catastrophe of civilization. Recently I’ve been reading a subject that rests upon the terminology known as precariat. Apparently what is described as the rise of the precariat class around the world is considered dangerous where even shadowy secret cabal committees like that of Bilderberg are chiming in on the subject it is rumored.
I’m glad you said that Kriswest, the more people that think like you only guarantees the destructive inevitable final outcome of civilization. It is that kind of apathetic indifference that will usher civilization’s inevitable demise which for me is very much desirable. By all means, let us throw huge population numbers of individuals in a constant state of insecurity and force them to crawl on their very knees onto the government burdening it financially until collapses. So be it, the final outcome will be the same.
Any social system has an element of unpredictability about it, and the prediction uaually is a harbinger of a later overt uncertainty causing instability.
When the idea the logic manifests as unstable, social unrest becomes evident.
The social planners considered effects amd give certain slack foe a possible back-slide. Appearances count more in contracted, compacted and insecute times , and the modum of the existential poseaur is a hold over representation of insecurity since WW2. The period from the 19 hundreds through the rise and fall of systems accentuate Marx’s failed expectation
The systemic revival amd replay of social process can not yet be validated in terms of delineation or prolongation of the process im terms of either, the word is out on that , and being
that there ia at least a formal repetition in thw Kierkegardian
senses of social familiar resemblances inthe Wittgensteinian understanding, the ideological union can only be understood im terms of resembling and held anomalous structural progressions.
As such, illusion, pretence can gaim political viability
This ia why communism failed in England, whereas triumphed
In a metalogocal ideological society as was Russian.
The absence of Russia from any sort of union, especially the dangerous situation Ukraine finds itself, is significant.
Communism is a grand failure everywhere. It and Marxism never succeeded anywhere it was planted. Any attempt by neo Marxists and communists in the west to revive either will be met with equal failure. Of course I’m not giving capitalism a free pass either because it is clear that it is a grand failure everywhere as well especially this global capitalism we find ourselves living under.
It’s not just instability we’re facing as it is also disequilibrium of our systems that allegedly are on a mission of ascertaining equilibrium globally.
There is no apathy or indifference in my reply. If you guarantee comfort then you create passive pets. Nothing will change, life will lose drive. If civilization falls , so what, it will emerge again, hopefully lessons learned.
Perhaps, if however you create so much discomfort or insecurity no kind of system and organization of the social variety can function either. You assume a reemergence would be possible…
Passive comfortable creatures do not fight for life or change, there is no evolution, no adapting. Humans are all over this world, there will be humans. Civilization on a large scale may take a thousand or more years but, like I said , hopefully lessons will be learned.
With the failure of communism and the predicted collapse of capitalism, is there a form or antiform type pf social aggregate, that’ll work apart from the only system with precedence -faacism–which is conceivable?
I agree about the first part - ensuring financial security for everybody, making it a right, is bound to cause stagnation.
On the other hand, government imposes itself on everybody and forces people to act in accordance with its rules. It has power over people, and since I think power and responsibility should go hand in hand, it follows that the government should also be responsible for its own people as long as it has power over them.
The lack of frontiers is the biggest problem I think.
When a majority lives in poverty and can’t even take care of themselves good luck acquiring taxes or making corporate profits when consumption goes stagnant. Can’t wait til we ride this bitch of a society into economic oblivion…
We the people are responsible for the government. We employ the government. If we allow the government to perform against us then it is our fault. You can rail against the government but, that is the wrong target. Rebuild government not remove. I don’t trust a trillion humans to be honest, do you? We need governing. We do not need to be dependent on the government for essentials. If we do that then sheeple we will become.
Community spirit, help thy neighbor, brother’s keeper, charity begins at home. Start at home and then work out. Anarchy only produces more hate, anger, resentment, greed and selfishness. It eventually produces what we have now. Full passiveness produces what we have now. Intelligence, cooperation between all factions , and commitment will lead to true change. You want anarchy to bring change, for what reason? I want evolution.
this is really saying whatever, in 10 years from now, robotics and even more powerful computers will take over ALL jobs. Or maybe do you mean it is right that only 10% or less will have rights to financial because they were able to save millions/billions (while having destroyed the ecosystem earning their financial security)?
the drawinian mindset that led us there and is getting close to a full fledged state of precariat itself.
