Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls
And how do you suppose we do that? I say expect more from ourselves and each other, you say "meh, I'm stuck"...
OH can rip me all he wants for appreciating the 3rd grade poster quote about being the change you want to see, but as far as I can tell it is the single best option to change the world and society. Idc, how much I get **** on for it, I'm not going to give up, and I don't care if I never get to witness it or if it never happens. I'm trying and not making excuses. You think I want to not eat delicious animals? No, but it's what I believe is right and I'm working towards it, and I approach ever facet of life this way.
FTR, I don't even disagree with Elph. I know very little about the kind of work environments he's talking about. I just felt like throwing a little jab at you.
|
How do we change things? Well we certainly don't do it by incrementally changing human thought patterns when the power structures which have for thousands of years depended on a subservient class are still in power without any incentive to allow that change. Eventually those structures will have to be decisively challenged. Not compromising your principles is neither commendable or worthwhile when you're simply pissing in the wind, and I think you know this and are washing your hands of the whole affair to live your life for yourself while throwing up fake solutions so that you don't have to admit that you've given up on the human race. In your own way your ideas are as insipid as elph's tbh.
As to what my solution would be?
She-it there probably isn't one and it only makes sense to wash your hands of the whole thing and either consciously become a parasite who exploits his fellow man cause TVs and cars are more fulfilling than the rest of these dunces, or opt out of civilization either physically by living in a cabin off the grid or a small scale co-operative society growing tomatoes and weed, or opt out mentally (like yourself I imagine, or me) and just live your life for your own personal fulfillment while trying to hurt as few people as possible. I think this is perfectly reasonable, just be honest about it.
But if we're really gonna try then I imagine we have to wait for society to deteriorate to an extent where the populace reaches a breaking point and forces the powers that be to make radical changes through daffy, relatively benevolent elites such as existed during the Enlightenment who actually give a **** about something other than maintaining power, and hope you get Jefferson rather than Robespierre. I certainly don't think that the populace is going to be the architect of a changing society though, for the same reasons I don't think your principles make sense.
I doubt we'll get that though, and societal deterioration either won't be great enough to produce meaningful change or society will deteriorate too much and we'll get bulldozed by megalomaniacal psychopaths like Mao and Robespierre.
Best case scenario afaic is to wait for Human+ to finally happen so human consciousness can be forcefully changed so that all of humanity can be made into something capable of governing themselves without relying on depressing monarchs and oligarchs, and of course hope that the elites don't hoard the science and essentially create two human sub-species. Which is likely. Or maybe our best hope is AI taking the conceptual side of governance out of our hands so we can have good ideas spoonfed to us until we stop sucking.
But by all means keep clicking your heels.
Linear Mode
