fatalism run amok?

[varwoche]

After 9/11, followed by the anthrax episode (geez, what a f**ked-up few years this has been), I became fatalistic about the future of mankind. My thinking, in broad strokes:

- tv is everywhere; have-nots are able to view the haves (the power of the picture)
- al-qaeda taught the world that the power to inflict massive harm is within reach of ordinary people
- advances in bio-engineering will (already?) put the capability to create truly nasty bugs in the hands of college students (worldwide).
- Who needs al-qaeda? Some kid pulling a columbine might wipe us out.
- Could bugs engeneered to an ethnicity be around the corner?
- terrorism aside, scientists think a megabug is a matter of when, not if
- in case bio doesn't get us, when Pakistan, N Korea, maybe soon Iran have nukes, the cows are pretty much out of the isotopic barn

I am ready, willing and eager to be exposed as paranoid and/or idiotic.

[fishbob]

Betcha a nickel you don't get exposed as paranoid and/or idiotic.

[shemp]

varwoche is paranoid and idiotic!

(I expect a 2 cent kickback from that nickel.)

[Chaos]

Idiotic? No, definitely not.
Pessimistic, okay, and perhaps realistic.

But paranoid?
Let me just remind you that, even if you´re paranoid, it doesn´t mean they are not out to get you. ;)

[varwoche]

Originally posted by fishbob
Betcha a nickel you don't get exposed as paranoid and/or idiotic.
I can see where this is leading.
(.03 on rummy, last offer)

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Chaos
Let me just remind you that, even if you´re paranoid, it doesn´t mean they are not out to get you. ;)
Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale; the question is not are you paranoid? but, are you paranoid enough?

Edited to add:
There was a psychiatrist in the 70's named Laing (actually by this point he'd turned his couch to face the opposite direction and become an anti-psychiatrist) whose basic idea was that insanity was the logical response to the contradictions of the world—he termed this "hypersanity"—and it's the supposedly sane people who are truly mad, because they develop all kinds of delusional ideas—like religion, conservativism, reality TV shows and Britney Spears—to hide from the fundamental truth that the lunatics have always been in charge of the asylum.

[Blue Monk]

It is easy to be fatalistic if you only look at the dark side. There are positive aspects that lend hope.

Do you realize how long it’s been since there’s been a Pauly Shore movie?

[evilgoldtoesock]

I'm not insane...I'm UNsane.
muhahaha.

Yeah I would agree that humans are in trouble, as always. Still don't think things are nearly as bad as the Dark Ages in Europe were, however. Hmm, or any time in which the Roman Empire existed, or the stone age for that matter.

We are going to really learn to modify our behavior if we are to survive. The key, I believe, is designing better systems of social organization that can sublimate our aggressive tendencies. In other words, I think we should have more soccer fields, and less guns.

The truth is, there is no excuse for our crappy behavior. The world is abundant with resources, has plenty of space (despite what a few whackos may say,) and overall would be an ok place to live if we could learn to create societies where human needs are better met. This doesn't mean initiating anything like communism, it just means working harder to form rational solutions to human problems.

Ohh, and I believe that Cartoon Network Adult Swim makes up for the evils of television.

[varwoche]

It is nearly impossible to post to this forum and not take flack from some quarter or another, regardless the topic.

Yet in the one thread where I want to be debunked, no flack. Thanks a lot folks.

This cheery post reflects my view that both presidential candidates will lead us on a path of self destruction by waging an inept war on terror.

I'm voting for Kerry not becasue I expect a more effective war on terror. It boils down to the supreme court. A Kerry supreme court will be more apt to allow us to self-destruct with dignity.

[TragicMonkey]

Just relax and try to make the most of life's pleasant possibilities...in the brief time we have before we're all brutally murdered in a horrific fashion, or the victims of dreadful diseases, or they find our mangled corpses distended with putrefaction floating in a swamp choked with the wreckage of all you hold dear as civilization itself implodes in a catastrophic fireball of sheer oozing nastiness.

Smile!

[roger]

Given that all the other hominoid species became extinct, I don't see any reason to think that we will dodge that fate. In this case, our "intelligence" is the likely environmental danger to which we can't adapt.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by roger
Given that all the other hominoid species became extinct, I don't see any reason to think that we will dodge that fate.


Don't be silly. We're the inventors of the "spork"! Clearly we are the pinnacle of evolution and masters of our destiny. No species capable of creating magnificent advancements like cheese that you can squirt from a can, or bacon-scented car deodorizers, or backpacks shaped like stuffed animals so you can shove your binders into a gaping wound in Hello Kitty's stomach can ever be wiped out by mere chance. Give humanity some credit.

[Pescado]

Originally posted by roger
Given that all the other hominoid species became extinct, I don't see any reason to think that we will dodge that fate. In this case, our "intelligence" is the likely environmental danger to which we can't adapt.

Well ain't that a soundly ironic kick to the ass...

[BPSCG]

You want the bad news? There are those (okay, there's one, anyway) who say this OP is too optimistic. John Derbyshire wrote this. (http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire080202.asp) I've just extracted the paragraph headers. Read the whole thing; it's morbidly funny, but if you're prone to depression, be sure to stay away from the open windows:

Most of us will die in poverty.

Quality health care for all is not possible.

Pop culture is filth.

Si jeunesse savait, si vieillesse pouvait.

The environment is collapsing.

Science has stopped.

Not all groups are equally good at all things.

Affirmative action is absolutely essential to social order.

Socialism is popular.

Conservatism is dead.

Nothing will be done about immigration.

Only Anglo-Saxon countries can do democracy.

China will get stronger and richer, without moving one inch closer to constitutional government.

Taiwan will be re-united with the Motherland....by some combination of economic carrot and military stick.

Something inconceivably horrible will happen in the Middle East.

The four horsemen of the Apocalypse are saddled up and ready to ride.

The next version of MicroSoft Windows will be even buggier and more counterintuitive than the last.

Poverty and hardship build character; prosperity and security destroy it.

The U.S. constitution is incompatible with a war on terrorism.

Justice is dead.

We are living in a golden age. The past was pretty awful; the future will be far worse.

[Frank Newgent]

http://ruthlessreviews.com/pics4/notld1.jpg

When they said REPENT REPENT (http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/naturalbornkillers/thefuture.htm) I wonder what they meant

[CBL4]

You are wrong. The people in the world have constantly gotten healthier, smarter and freer. The environment has gotten steadily cleaner as countries get richer. There never has been a long term shortage of any natural resource. There is less a threat of major war than there has been for a century.

There are three reasons for this:
1) Wealthy liberal democracies (WLD). People in WLD are free and healthy. WLD never invade their neighbors. WLD never change their form of government. Each year there are more and more WLD. It is the climax form of government.
2) Technology. Technology makes people healthier and gives them more opportunities. It will always overcome the problems associated with because
3) Moderately wealthy people care. Once a person is comfortable (e.g. healthy and enough to eat) they have the time and money to care. They care about education. They care about the environment. They care to prevent poverty. They care to make the world a better place.

There will be some glitches in the world such as the current terrorism threat but this is nothing compared to threat of the Soviet Union. A_U_P even claims that we are living in a world without threat of major war.

If you do not believe me, compare yourself to your parents. You are probably richer than your parents. You probably have a higher IQ. You probably will live longer than your parents. You probably are healthier than your parents. You probably have a bigger house. You probably eat out more often. You probably have more TVs, phones, computers, cars and more stuff in general. You have a safer car, cleaner air, cleaner water, more immunizations, more opportunities and are less likely to face bigotry.

CBL

[varwoche]

CBL4... Appreciated. However you are describing status quo, not the fatalistic future scenarios.

[BPSCG]

CBL4 - I didn't say I agreed with the article - just found it morbidly amusing. FWIW, I agree with much of what you wrote. Life is better today, in many ways, for more and more people, largely because of the advance of capitalism and liberal democracy over the last 200 years. I'm insanely jealous of my great-great-grandchildren, because I firmly believe that by then, they'll have figured out a way to keep the earth's population stable, well, fed, peaceful, and will have figured out a way to turn off whatever switches cause us to age, sicken, and die.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm insanely jealous of my great-great-grandchildren, because I firmly believe that by then, they'll have figured out a way to keep the earth's population stable, well, fed, peaceful, and will have figured out a way to turn off whatever switches cause us to age, sicken, and die.

You could always get the last laugh on those rotten kids by not having any descendants at all. That would put them in their place!

[CBL4]

However you are describing status quo, not the fatalistic future scenarios. The reality is that individual people have the ability to create greater harm or good than ever before.

Even if we assume that somebody will release small pox and thousands of people die, it is nothing compared to the plagues in the past. A nuclear bomb in NYC does not compare to the deaths in the post-WWI flu epidemic. A slight drop in the death rate in children is huge compared to increased deaths from the worst terrorist attack.

CBL

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
You could always get the last laugh on those rotten kids by not having any descendants at all. That would put them in their place! Actually barring something like the angel's visitation to Abraham and Sarah, that's exactly the case. I was kinda speaking figuratively.

[fishbob]

We are going to really learn to modify our behavior if we are to survive. The key, I believe, is designing better systems of social organization that can sublimate our aggressive tendencies. In other words, I think we should have more soccer fields, and less guns. Like dance-offs between rival motorcycle gangs? Swat Team vs Bank Robber basketball games?

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by fishbob
Like dance-offs between rival motorcycle gangs? Swat Team vs Bank Robber basketball games?

A hyper-realistic virtual reality version of "Grand Theft Auto" would do the trick. Kill, maim, steal, and destroy to your heart's content, but it's all okay because it's just a game.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by varwoche
After 9/11, followed by the anthrax episode (geez, what a f**ked-up few years this has been), I became fatalistic about the future of mankind. My thinking, in broad strokes:

- tv is everywhere; have-nots are able to view the haves (the power of the picture)
- al-qaeda taught the world that the power to inflict massive harm is within reach of ordinary people
- advances in bio-engineering will (already?) put the capability to create truly nasty bugs in the hands of college students (worldwide).
- Who needs al-qaeda? Some kid pulling a columbine might wipe us out.
- Could bugs engeneered to an ethnicity be around the corner?
- terrorism aside, scientists think a megabug is a matter of when, not if
- in case bio doesn't get us, when Pakistan, N Korea, maybe soon Iran have nukes, the cows are pretty much out of the isotopic barn

I am ready, willing and eager to be exposed as paranoid and/or idiotic.

I was thinking of the H G Wells vision, with the Morlocks running everything.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by fishbob
Like dance-offs between rival motorcycle gangs? Swat Team vs Bank Robber basketball games? Sharks and Jets at the dance? That worked out well, didn't it?

[varwoche]

Originally posted by CBL4
The reality is that individual people have the ability to create greater harm or good than ever before.

Even if we assume that somebody will release small pox and thousands of people die, it is nothing compared to the plagues in the past. A nuclear bomb in NYC does not compare to the deaths in the post-WWI flu epidemic. A slight drop in the death rate in children is huge compared to increased deaths from the worst terrorist attack. Thank you for this CBL4. I'm gonna bask in it for a while before composing my dour reply.

[a_unique_person]

One way of guessing at the future is to see how things went in the past. (not a guaranteed predictor, but it can give you an idea).

History shows us that human life has constantly had events of carnage, war, misery, despair, ignorance, stupidity, cruelty...(you get the idea).

Whatever comes can be no worse than what has been.

[varwoche]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Whatever comes can be no worse than what has been. I wish. Technology has progressed.

[varwoche]

Originally posted by CBL4
The reality is that individual people have the ability to create greater harm or good than ever before.

Even if we assume that somebody will release small pox and thousands of people die, it is nothing compared to the plagues in the past. A nuclear bomb in NYC does not compare to the deaths in the post-WWI flu epidemic. A slight drop in the death rate in children is huge compared to increased deaths from the worst terrorist attack. Hey CBL4, you cheered me up (in actuality) and now I'm going to try to convert you to fatalism. Sorry 'bout that.

First, you could be wrong about how many people are killed by bad guys. Someone could create a bug that wipes out humanity. But let's say you're right. Let's say we're just talking 9/11 type events, a few dirty bombs, maybe a suitcase nuke one day.

Can you imagine the changes to our society? Biometric identity cards. Computers knowing everywhere you go, every book you buy, every web site you visit. Every detail of your life is data mined. Due process? Forget it. A society rampant with security, rampant with paranoia.

Geez, we're already on the way there.

It's not just body count.

[varwoche]

Originally posted by BillyTK
There was a psychiatrist in the 70's named Laing whose basic idea was that insanity was the logical response to the contradictions of the world I'm familiar with Lang. It is this theory that provides me hope that I'm not as far gone as some say. ;)

[varwoche]

What does the US do if and when a suitcase nuke is exploded in NYC or DC?

And when al-Whoever says "do x, y, and z right now or else we're going to set off another one", what is the US going to do? What good is our arsenal, nuclear and otherwise, when dealing with non-state enemies?

I imagine there are people in government who deal with these what-if scenarios, don't you think?

I can already hear the calls to turn the mid-east into glass. But I just can't imagine a US leader killing tens of millions of innocent people, including the populations of Israel, Turkey, Jordan, etc., when it will not even be the case that al-Whoever and their suitcase nukes are (entirely) in the mid-east to begin with.

Do we surrender? Short of surrender, and short of treating the primary treatable root cause (Israel/Palestine), which no US politician is willing to do, there is only one course of action that I am able to envision: a bug engineered to an ethnicity or two.

(This on top of the afore mentioned hyper-securitization of our society that will make the patriot act seem like baby stuff.)

[varwoche]

Geez, I didn't even go looking for this. Welcome to the (near?) future:

Ethnic Weapons (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11197760%255E401,00.html) BIOLOGICAL weapons that target selected ethnic groups could become part of the terrorists' arsenal unless governments and scientists act now, the British Medical Association warns.

Such designer weapons would be based on the growing ability of scientists to unravel and compare human DNA.

In theory, experts could engineer organisms to attack genetic variations commonly found in, say, Chinese or German populations.

Genetically engineered anthrax, smallpox and polio viruses are also "approaching reality", the BMA claims in a new report, Biotechnology, Weapons and Humanity II.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by varwoche
What does the US do if and when a suitcase nuke is exploded in NYC or DC?

And when al-Whoever says "do x, y, and z right now or else we're going to set off another one", what is the US going to do? What good is our arsenal, nuclear and otherwise, when dealing with non-state enemies?


We are decades away (at least) from non-state actors being able to produce nuclear weapons. If we get hit by a suitcase nuke, it means that some state gave it to a terrorist. And at that point, we DO get to use our arsenal. We take down EVERY state we consider an enemy, no mercy, no reprieve.


I can already hear the calls to turn the mid-east into glass. But I just can't imagine a US leader killing tens of millions of innocent people, including the populations of Israel, Turkey, Jordan, etc., when it will not even be the case that al-Whoever and their suitcase nukes are (entirely) in the mid-east to begin with.

The hitlist wouldn't include every country in the middle east (at least not at first). It would start with Syria, Iran, and North Korea, and expand from there depending on the circumstances. Yes, the collateral damage would be immense. We need not necessarily resort to nukes to take out the governments of those countries, but we do need to be willing to. And it is vitally important that we let our enemies know that if we get hit with a nuke, every single enemy government is going down, regardless of who did it. Because only if there is no safety in anonymity, only if our enemies know that they cannot hide by pinning the blame on other states or non-state actors, can we deter them from such attacks. And that, I would hope, is the common objective on our side.