|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| wintermute wrote: |
Constructing alternative systems based on a more evolved paradigm of life on earth is the only way forward. When the time is right, and we are ready, there will be a seamless transition.
|
I can't get on board with this. Central planning will only strengthen the elites.
Compared to 100 years ago, we are living heaven on Earth. We know exactly how we got to this point, all we need to do is keep doing what we were doing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
Compared to 100 years ago, we are living heaven on Earth. We know exactly how we got to this point, all we need to do is keep doing what we were doing. |
Actually our modern lifestyles are unsustainable, built on a lot of short-term destruction and exploitation of our planets natural environment.
We're in a honeymoon phase now but it can't last. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wintermute wrote: |
they are doing what they do with our consent. We are as much a part of the problem as they are.
...
Alex-Jones-style confrontational opposition will play into their hands by giving them cause to militarize, dig in, and demonize the opposition. |
So what is your better idea of how to manufacture non-consent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
IF I were a conspiratorial person, I'd see the video as part of a disinformation campaign by vile bankers and similar thugs.
The way the money system functions is accurately depicted but is included with a hodge podge of nutty nonsense about nothing of importance. So the association is that an truthful depiction of X is associated with Crazy Y. |
This basically explains all of the conspiracy theorist videos I've ever watched. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wintermute
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| wintermute wrote: |
they are doing what they do with our consent. We are as much a part of the problem as they are.
...
Alex-Jones-style confrontational opposition will play into their hands by giving them cause to militarize, dig in, and demonize the opposition. |
So what is your better idea of how to manufacture non-consent? |
Education, for sure - people do need to wake up and collectively take responsibility for the society they live in.
The most important thing is the mindset that must underly the change for it to be effective.
I see the evolution of society away from the current elite-dominated model as a move from a segregative mindset - (we are all individual animals and we and our own kind must survive and prosper even at the expense of others) to an integrative mindset (all human beings have the same intrinsic worth, and should all be equally free to follow their passions as long as they don't interfere with others' freedom of choice)
If we hate the elites, and see them as some "other" that has cruelly imposed this system on us, then we are reinforcing a segregative mindset, and projecting onto this "other" problems that are actually inherent in society as a whole.
If we see them as an aspect of ourselves expressing itself in a particular way, and, without judgement, recognizing that we do not agree with that view of the world, and choose other wise, that will be what takes the power away from the elite, and creates room for alternative ways of interacting on a social level to develop.
This is pretty vague and wishy washy, I know, and I don't have any answers, just feelings and opinions, but I do think this is an important point.
Alex Jones does great work bringing information to peoples' attention, but if he is leading people down the road to a "revolution", he's doing more harm than good. Any sort of chaos will be a big win for the elites who know more about how things really work and have infinite resources and will immediately exploit such an opportunity to further their agenda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whatever else you may think of Alex Jones, he sure does educate a lot of people to what is going on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
Compared to 100 years ago, we are living heaven on Earth. We know exactly how we got to this point, all we need to do is keep doing what we were doing. |
Actually our modern lifestyles are unsustainable, built on a lot of short-term destruction and exploitation of our planets natural environment.
We're in a honeymoon phase now but it can't last. |
Whatever. Despite this I don't see any shortages of, weelllllll........., anything. When will the "resources" run out, prey tell? Oil was supposed to run out last year, and the year before that.
Your environMENTAL death cult might have been fun for a while, but events simply aren't really backing it up.
Let's pretend for a second that you are correct. Even if you are, what are we supposed to do about it? If you are right, there isn't that much we can do. Why cut our standard of living in that case? We might as well have a merry old time and use up as many "resources" as we can, if we are all going to die anyway. I would rather that, than submit to your sick neo-dark age, village life fantasy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Let's pretend for a second that you are correct. |
Of course he's correct. Oil isn't infinite.
| Senior wrote: |
| Even if you are, what are we supposed to do about it? If you are right, there isn't that much we can do. |
Intelligent, farsighted people must choose to be more self-sufficient, and try to convince others to follow suit.
| Quote: |
| Why cut our standard of living in that case? We might as well have a merry old time and use up as many "resources" as we can, if we are all going to die anyway. |
We *are* all going to die, environmental apocalypse or not. Every human who has ever existed has faced that problem, and all have come up with different answers, but no wise human has ever concluded that the solution is to forget about it and 'just party'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Let's pretend for a second that you are correct. |
Of course he's correct. Oil isn't infinite. |
I haven't disputed this for a second. It doesn't logically follow that oil will ever run out, though.
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Even if you are, what are we supposed to do about it? If you are right, there isn't that much we can do. |
Intelligent, farsighted people must choose to be more self-sufficient, and try to convince others to follow suit. |
So not being "self-sufficient" is unintelligent and myopic? What does "self sufficient" even mean"?
| Quote: |
| Why cut our standard of living in that case? We might as well have a merry old time and use up as many "resources" as we can, if we are all going to die anyway. |
We *are* all going to die, environmental apocalypse or not. Every human who has ever existed has faced that problem, and all have come up with different answers, but no wise human has ever concluded that the solution is to forget about it and 'just party'.[/quote]
The difference is we don't know exactly when we are going to die, naturally. If the environmentalists are correct, our fiery doom is impending. Like, RIGHT NOW!!!! If not now, it will affect our children, "Oh won't somebody PLEEEEAASE! think of the children!", they haven't quite decided yet. I was simply using his situation as a hypothetical. I obviously don't think we should "just party" either. Though, it wouldn't hurt if the environmentalist movement would lighten up a little.
Advocating nebulous junk like "self sufficiency", sustainability and etc, only distracts from finding a real solution. A solution which doesn't involve living in grass huts, or as the enviros would have it, returning the Earth to some pre-man state. These "solutions" aren't serious. Thankfully real people are starting to get the message. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Let's pretend for a second that you are correct. |
Of course he's correct. Oil isn't infinite. |
I haven't disputed this for a second. It doesn't logically follow that oil will ever run out, though. |
Yes it does follow. Unless a cleaner energy source is discovered/implemented - which is a possibility, not an inevitability - or we cut back, it will run out. If we assume (against all logic) that oil 'might not run out', it's still senseless and greedy to consume it at breakneck speed.
| Senior wrote: |
| So not being "self-sufficient" is unintelligent and myopic? What does "self sufficient" even mean"? |
Before you twist my words any more I must point out that I wrote "more self-sufficient". Moving on, I find the ideas of sustainability and self-sufficiency to be precise enough to be useful. Sustainability is in some cases mathematically precise. Self-sufficiency is a newfangled word for an older way of life, namely householding; it is the opposite of consumerism. The problem here is that, instead of inspecting the ideas, you dismiss them as 'enviro' or 'neo-dark age'.
| Senior wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| We *are* all going to die, environmental apocalypse or not. Every human who has ever existed has faced that problem, and all have come up with different answers, but no wise human has ever concluded that the solution is to forget about it and 'just party'. |
The difference is we don't know exactly when we are going to die, naturally. If the environmentalists are correct, our fiery doom is impending. Like, RIGHT NOW!!!! If not now, it will affect our children, "Oh won't somebody PLEEEEAASE! think of the children!", they haven't quite decided yet. |
You'll have to explain it another way, because as it is I don't see any difference. Death has always been unforseeable yet impending, and throughout history one of the most popular solutions has been to think of the children. The cases are exactly parallel. The difference is that now people don't or won't see beyond themselves.
| Senior wrote: |
| Advocating nebulous junk like "self sufficiency", sustainability and etc, only distracts from finding a real solution. A solution which doesn't involve living in grass huts, or as the enviros would have it, returning the Earth to some pre-man state. These "solutions" aren't serious. Thankfully real people are starting to get the message. |
I'd have thought that independent choices made by far-sighted individuals is exactly the type of solution a libertarian would support. What do you think would be better? Anyway, it's strange that you advocate a real solution when supposedly you don't believe a problem exists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Advocating nebulous junk like "self sufficiency", sustainability and etc, only distracts from finding a real solution. A solution which doesn't involve living in grass huts, or as the enviros would have it, returning the Earth to some pre-man state. These "solutions" aren't serious. Thankfully real people are starting to get the message. |
I'd have thought that independent choices made by far-sighted individuals is exactly the type of solution a libertarian would support. What do you think would be better? Anyway, it's strange that you advocate a real solution when supposedly you don't believe a problem exists. |
The common libertarian attitudes towards climate change are exquisitely annoying.
First, deny the science and the initial premise.
If that doesn't work, employ some catchphrase. My favorite is: watermelon, green on the outside, red on the inside. This is a great way to combine denialism while smearing the intentions of those who advocate collective action for a problem that pretty much necessitates collective action.
Lastly, assert the market, or a magic bullet provided by the market, will fix the problem. This last step you'll see even among libertarians who concede the science. But there is no magic bullet.
What's required is a comprehensive public-private response, from direct mitigation measures to carbon-consumption taxes to implementation of international accords to dual public-private investment in diversified green tech to reducing energy consumption. The United States is right on time to revamp its infrastructure, so why not go green? Just because something is green and sustainable doesn't necessarily make it more costly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Advocating nebulous junk like "self sufficiency", sustainability and etc, only distracts from finding a real solution. A solution which doesn't involve living in grass huts, or as the enviros would have it, returning the Earth to some pre-man state. These "solutions" aren't serious. Thankfully real people are starting to get the message. |
I'd have thought that independent choices made by far-sighted individuals is exactly the type of solution a libertarian would support. What do you think would be better? Anyway, it's strange that you advocate a real solution when supposedly you don't believe a problem exists. |
The common libertarian attitudes towards climate change are exquisitely annoying.
First, deny the science and the initial premise.
If that doesn't work, employ some catchphrase. My favorite is: watermelon, green on the outside, red on the inside. This is a great way to combine denialism while smearing the intentions of those who advocate collective action for a problem that pretty much necessitates collective action.
Lastly, assert the market, or a magic bullet provided by the market, will fix the problem. This last step you'll see even among libertarians who concede the science. But there is no magic bullet.
|
We've acquired Lord Perv Gore to our arsenal too.
Also, while we were arguing about something that does not exist, we all neglected the much less sexy task of ensuring that we don't lose the Gulf of Mexico for a few thousand years. We all should have kept our eye on much less sexy tasks.
| Quote: |
| What's required is a comprehensive public-private response, from direct mitigation measures to carbon-consumption taxes to implementation of international accords to dual public-private investment in diversified green tech to reducing energy consumption. The United States is right on time to revamp its infrastructure, so why not go green? Just because something is green and sustainable doesn't necessarily make it more costly. |
The United States is simply not capable of such reform. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
Also, while we were arguing about something that does not exist, we all neglected the much less sexy task of ensuring that we don't lose the Gulf of Mexico for a few thousand years. We all should have kept our eye on much less sexy tasks. |
Whatever. Its not like the government can't multi-task. The US should be able to cure regulatory problems in the Executive while the Legislative crafts solutions to other problems.
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| What's required is a comprehensive public-private response, from direct mitigation measures to carbon-consumption taxes to implementation of international accords to dual public-private investment in diversified green tech to reducing energy consumption. The United States is right on time to revamp its infrastructure, so why not go green? Just because something is green and sustainable doesn't necessarily make it more costly. |
The United States is simply not capable of such reform. |
Probably true. Cynicism about the US system is the best bet, as far as recent history is concerned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| We've acquired Lord Perv Gore to our arsenal too. |
Gore's a perv??? He's broken the Republican monopoly? Dems , OTOH, are usually tax evaders; did you mean to write 'Lord Tax Dodger Gore'? Anyway, I must have missed that one. I hope you are referring to something more substantive than that big, sloppy kiss he gave Tipper in national spotlight on the campaign trail in 2000.
So, got a link? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
Also, while we were arguing about something that does not exist, we all neglected the much less sexy task of ensuring that we don't lose the Gulf of Mexico for a few thousand years. We all should have kept our eye on much less sexy tasks.
|
It's the same people doing their best to obstruct with regards to both fronts. The same people in our government who are casually shrugging off any possibility of AGW are saying that the problem with our oil industry is that it suffers from too much government regulation and apologizing to BP for holding it financially accountable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
