onlooker wrote: It does seem that those who preach individualism and libertarian views may need to evaluate this in light of the forces of chaos to be unleashed and how woefully unprepared many are for this.
onlooker wrote:It does seem that those who preach individualism and libertarian views may need to evaluate this in light of the forces of chaos to be unleashed and how woefully unprepared many are for this.
Ibon wrote:onlooker wrote: It does seem that those who preach individualism and libertarian views may need to evaluate this in light of the forces of chaos to be unleashed and how woefully unprepared many are for this.
Before the internet and the digitization of all our transactions, whether banking or phone calls or video or whatever, the world was a largely unregulated place. I can well remember the way I ran our business back in the 80's and compare that to today in the way digital transparency has squeezed out all of the gray area.
This is something that we do not discuss much but is formidable in affecting the quality of our lives.
The power of the government to regulate, tax and have full transparency of all your daily transactions is not some paranoid idea but has slowly through the last decade become part of our lives.
As time moves forward, as constraints start to squeeze, as the government will be forced to further regulate our lives in order to attempt to keep chaos in check, how will they harness all the digital tools at their disposal to further regulate the way we live?
We ain't seen nothing yet.
dohboi wrote:en, there should indeed be much more regulation and incarceration (not to mention decapitation and defenestration! ) at the top and generally less regulation and incarceration at the bottom.
dohboi wrote:
Humans are part of the ecosystem, one species within it, to be precise. So the claim that "Human ecosystems are more fragile than natural ones" doesn't really make any clear sense. It's like saying that my blood is more frail than my body.
SeaGypsy wrote:
As to ours being the most vulnerable species to CC, I don't get that either, honestly.
jjhman wrote:There is a more accurate vocabulary for individuals who take from society without contributing. They are called either thieves or parasites.
jjhman wrote:"It does seem that those who preach individualism and libertarian views may need to evaluate this in light of the forces of chaos to be unleashed and how woefully unprepared many are for this. "
I have to laugh at the whole idea of any individual human able to survive very long without the support of a community. Imagine all of these "survivalists" without their guns. The guns depend on a whole raft of technologies that would be gone in a flash without mining of iron, copper, lead and the chemicals needed to make powder. No individual could do all of that alone in one lifetime, much less be able to learn the skills to use the damned thing once he made it.
There is a more accurate vocabulary for individuals who take from society without contributing. They are called either thieves or parasites.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
ennui2 wrote:FYI: 'Statist' is a manufactured epithet oozing with negative overtones. It has no meaning to anyone other than rabid libertarians.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Return to Environment, Weather & Climate
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 236 guests