Poll How do you see the future of humankind?

[statickid]

December 21st 2012? Cos that would be the ultimate irony :lol:

my birthday is december 20th. I remember a few years ago, (before all the hype) I was pleasantly surprised that the Mayan apocalypse would be the day after my 31st birthday, like if the years of my life were just like the days in a month, and I only lived one year-month.

---------- Post added at 12:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 AM ----------

yeah, back then the date 2012 was obscure trivia knowledge that I came across on some astrology website

 

[Ghostrider]

We're farther from a real resources crisis than many would think. Food, for instance, is not a problem: the EU and US are actually limiting production in order to keep the prices reasonable to the point that some EU countries actually have an upper limit on how much they can produce - and the excess must be destroyed. The issue is distribution.

The same goes for energy. Modern cars and appliances are far more energy efficient than what we had in the past and it would take just some bold decisions (nuclear, space-based solar) to address the situation, but the public has been generally conditioned to fear the first and ridicule the last option.

Oil? Modern cars consume far less than anything in the past and pollute even less. Although an alternative is desirable, where is the rationale in curtailing the use of your private means of transportation that you use to work and carry groceries at home while public transport prices are kept too high to be a viable alternative, and in the meanwhile thousands of empty trucks are roaming all over Europe because it's in the best interest of their owners to keep them running?

And where exactly is the rationale in raising my electricity bill when I use very little of it (I kinda like it in the dark, you see) while the nearby construction site uses an ungodly amount of klieglights all night through so that everybody can see the magnificence of the latest architectural eldritch abomination even at 2 o'clock?

Resources are not the issue. The allocation and distribution are another matter. And trying to make Joe Public feel guilty about his existence, it would be nice to address The Man's follies.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Even in the poorest of nations human rights are upheld, unless they are violated by criminals. And confusion of human rights with "luxuries" and that they should be violated for "survival" of civilisation really means that such a "civilisation"- if it even has the right to be called that- doesn't deserve to exist.

You forget that today's poorer nation coexist in this world with richer and several most rich nations today. Almost every nation is encrusted, like a jewel into its setting, into the universal framework of international relations. Every same small nation's leader understands that outright defying human rights shall hit his country's publicity, break economic relations and drive his country towards expelling from the club of respectable countries, thus making it an outcast country.

30 years ago, they had a choice of joining the block of pro-Soviet countries, but such a move was risky too, because a third world country following this route was in position to becoming a battleground of undercover opposition of the two global powers, which also had a devastating effect. Most cunning third world leaders has been constantly trimming sails, trying to follow winds blowing from opposing sides. Some were really good in playing this game, some weren't.

But today the alternative looks simple: if you aren't a superpower yourself, you either have to play by the rules drawn by the first world, or become an outcast. In the latter case, your best chance is to acquire a Nuke as swift as possible, and keep sitting on your tiny throne, having secured yourself from a punishment from outside, showing a finger to everybody.

But imagine what happens IF the mainstay pillars of the First world gradually fail? And by gradually, I mean worsening the situation inside through allowing problems running uncontrolled in hope that something will eventually turn up. If no one gives a damn of what happens in a Mumbo-Jubandia anymore, and even in the worst circumstances there's no chance that some aircraft carrier appears in vicinity of Mumbo-Jumbadian coast to restore order, the present leader has only to choose from: a) become and oppressive dictator; b) free his chair for an oppressive dictator to take.

And suddenly, the number of nations in the world respecting democracy and human rights, shrinks dramatically. Oops, we are at dawn of the New Dark Age.

Why the democratic countries might fail? Well discussed above, already. How that may happen? Not really quickly, but if you are young, you are holding a chance to live through and watch the end. The first step is making a nation dumb one way or another. Consumerism and saving on available high quality education are good enough to begin turning people into a mass, illiterate or indifferent not only to inherited culture and science, but also to how things works in the society itself. No one will be able just to hold a discussion like we have here, and be able to separate the wheat from the chaff altogether. If you also impair people ability to communicate across and travel freely (sticking on these things a price tag too high for the most to pay is Ok), you limit their world's knowledge even more. "Controllable History" is the next step, and it takes a certain existing level of dumbness in the masses. It helps you to make whatever claims of how the better future should look, more profound. Making spectators not to look at the juggler's hands is also essential, and there are many choices here, what to concentrate public attention on: military conflicts, natural disasters, problems with immigrated population.

And thus a door for Fascism to come opens widely.
​

 

[Ghostrider]

Guess it's the right time to learn some Hokuto Shinken techniques and to pronounce omae wa mo shindeiru correctly.

 

[Urwumpe]

When it comes to limiting the resource/energy consumption luxuries somehow become mixed with human rights. You'll see it.

No. What you mean is abolishing human rights, not more, not less. Even by making them vague and empty, you can abolish them.

There is no human right saying that you need to own a car. Or have your house lit up like a Christmas tree. Still, mobility and electricity are not luxuries, they are necessary goods for being part of a society and economy. But that is a social and economic problem - and I leave it happily to those who need employees, customers and citizens for political justification.

Political idiots always limit their view of the economy to those big companies, that invite them for dinner (corruption can have many faces), but forget that even an unemployed alcoholic buying his beer from welfare is an economic factor. One of them is maybe a tragedy, but a few million of them is an economic force.

In the past, during the deepest hours of capitalism, wise company leaders provided housing, hospitals, schools and identity for their employees. All near the factories, so the workers had been around. Caring for employees beyond the work hours paid out. I am sure it still does, even if all business experts tell you that such things are only expenses without revenue. They mean revenue that you can't measure directly. The same experts also try to tell you that quality assurance and measurement technology are not bringing you any revenue - that is again true, but it doesn't need a MBA to estimate how expensive it can get if you attempt producing without it.

So, if you say that human rights are negotiable, you are wrong, they are not. They are necessary evils for preventing situations that can destabilize a nation. Human rights are often also economic rights, without them, your economy will be in danger.

 

[SiberianTiger]

I see that very few people would like to see the future painted in dark hues, and not everybody believes in ultimate survivability of the modern Western type social democracy (mind you, I'd like it to spread everywhere - foolishly, like a small kid dreams of getting a truck load of sweets...) so probably estimating how we'd fare in a society whose economy and social life is regulated through technical means may be compelling. It's something that's still in realms of science fiction (mostly distopian), but some authors who aren't communism allergic still sometimes try to revive the topic and rethink the idea.

One of such is...
http://argonov.ru/2032.html

Victor Argonov's rock opera 2032: the legend of a never happened future.

Synopsis: After death of Constantin Chernenko, history makes an alternative turn and, instead of Mikhail Gorbachev, power falls into hands of Grigory Romanov who (somehow) manages to drive the USSR out of the economic crisis of the 80's in one piece. He is then superceded in late 90's in the position of General Secretary by Academician Plotnikov who introduces an artificial intelligence system for automatic governing (the ASGU). Over next decades, it undergoes many upgrades and its capabilities increase. Under computer control, the USSR makes significant ecomonic advances and Socialist block becomes even larger, gradually including countries of Asia. That lasts until 2035, when the ASGU (which by the moment acquired a kind of female personality and a pretty voice) offers Soviet government to completely submit control over production processes and military command to 'her'. Milinevsky, the General Secretary at the time of setting, is reluctant towards the offer at first, fearing that Soviet people will be left just nothing to do, all their jobs taken away by the universal machine. Politbureau finally agrees to the offer, but insists on hardcoding of classic Communist Dogmas into the ASGU on the axiomatic level.

After a while, Western countries decide to shutter the balance and make a peripheral strike through incite anti-Communist revolts in Iran and other border lands. The Communists strike back, but the robotic war which sparkled up as a conflict in one spot, consumes more and more of the world and transforms into a stalemate. Anticipating grave problems which await the Soviet Union, should the conflict is left to evolve, the ASGU suddenly offer Milinevsky some cunning plan to make a nuclear strike with a 98% of no striking back from the West. The General Secretary is appalled by the prospect of killing trillions, and demand an explanation from the system (who is so lovely otherwise, especially due to having developed a mysterious bond with a 16-years old girl who fell in love with Milinevsky and dreamt of eternal life...) The responce was like: "because it's the objective set for me to make every people in the world happy under Communist rule - or die. What do you want - you programmed this into me yourself!"

Finally, after the "connected" girl is put into suspended animation, Milinevsky flips the switch, shutting the ASGU off. An open final comes (but the final song is so sorrowful that it enables you to make some guesses on what would happen next).

Knowledge of Russian is required for understanding of the songs, but if you don't speak Russian, you still can listen to the instrumentals (tracks 01, 07, 19, 22, 26, 29, 32). All the mp3's are free to download. Enjoy Communism. :lol:

 

[PeterRoss]

I see in the poll results that democracy is taking points. And that's really good - much of you people just don't believe in the apocalyptic scenario we were discussing lately. You may count me as communist if you want, but I'm rather for humankind survival, by any means. So I'm OK with social democracy, as far as it works.

Resources are not the issue. The allocation and distribution are another matter.

Wasn't it what I was talking about from the beginning? I think it is an issue allright. The distribution of resources is the major stumbling stone.

You see, every nation today is concerned only it's own demands and human rights (well, excluding some major nations seeking to import its beliefs with the means of warfare in excange for oil and heroine; yes, there is also EU trying to be something united). But if we'll try to imagine some global government we'll see it have to concern the problems of a whole humankind. And in this case all the developed regions will have to support underdeveloped ones. Without the hope for payoff ever. I'm talking not about some humanitarian aid but some major rebuild of poorest regions of the world. It will take all the resources we consume now without even thinking about it's rational usage. But for that mechanism to run we need to throw off the goods/money relationships we're enjoying today.
Still there is of course some easier-to-realize ideas like Golden Billion survival which are not connected directly to communism but rather capitalism. Of course it is somewhat of conspiracy theories, but come on, it's an idea too.

In the past, during the deepest hours of capitalism, wise company leaders provided housing, hospitals, schools and identity for their employees. All near the factories, so the workers had been around. Caring for employees beyond the work hours paid out.

Funny thing here is that this caring was caused by communism threat, and 'wise company leaders' was just afraid that their workers will follow the communist ideas which was initially focused on the caring for workers. So they've been forced to become somewhat socialist.

Human rights are often also economic rights, without them, your economy will be in danger.

And what if we're talking about some completely different economy?

Victor Argonov's rock opera 2032: the legend of a never happened future.
...
Enjoy Communism.

Jeez, I'll better reread some Strugatskys' books.:lol:

...
And thus a door for Fascism to come opens widely.

Just a wild thought: Standartenführer Stierlitz would be a real nightmare for western guys: commie disguised as fascist. :hide:

 

[Ark]

I'm in the dystopian category. As resource shortages and overpopulation get worse, the powers that be will resort to more and more brutal means to hold on to that power. The numbers are pretty clear: The resources necessary to support our technical civilization are running out quickly, and IMO the odds of a miraculous energy breakthrough before the resource crunch hits are slim.