reply to post by ProfEmeritus
If they could dramatically bring down the cost of living, this would be a good thing. Sadly, they are doing the opposite, causing things to increase
in price. I have a pet theory, that this is done intentionally so as to end "bigotry".
Historically, during economic down turns people become more intolerant(racism and hostility towards homosexuals was very, very low during the 1920's
compared to the 1930's). A good portion of the "elite" are homosexuals and or/ of a certain ethnic heritage that faced discrimination.
By forcing an economic downturn, while at the same time forcing unprecedented change(let's face it, homosexuals where regarded as deviants even ten
years ago), and attaching an economic gun to the back of everyone's head(it is possible to get fired for opposing things) they may hope to utterly
destroy these things when things improve. And any social bigotry that does happen is directed at boy's, young men and men. A group always viewed as
"expendable" by society.
Look at newspaper articles, bigotry still happens with full social blessing, it is just targeted at males. And in that respect, that seems to be
mostly global. I suppose it could be a short term lightening rod as most men would merely wish to get on with their lives, but their is a saying that
holds true " shared suffering can breed comradeship".
By causing men to suffer globally, it causes men who would normally be at each others throats to be able to identify and feel a sense of empathy
towards each other. Granted being aware of this does not change my radical stances in terms of the Gender War, and in some cases tastes overwhelmingly
Also, it enables for women to be collectively shamed into silence a generation or less down the road. To what end I have no clue, but the first
pebbles have already started rolling in that regard( what I perceive as the first pebbles that will cause an avalanche against women is the articles
suggesting that maybe they got it wrong in regards to life, family and careers).
The only reason this seems to tie in together is, we are on the verge of a life changing economic revolution because of new technological
advancements. Advancements that could very well end human civilization if the proper steps aren't taken(distributionist steps). 3D printers are going
to radically change our society by drastically cutting the cost of living. In such a world if random chaos is left in the thrown, you could end up
with a handful of people really well off, and everyone else, millions of people living in absolute destitution(or a communist dystopia).
The only capitalistic way to ensure both the survival of our economic system and the survival of humanity would be to drastically reduce the number of
hours people work so there is more room for others to work. And if an economy is service based, then as populations expands and contracts, there will
always be enough job's.
Any attempt at mass government welfare would end up creating a horrifically stagnate culture, an idiocracy doomed to decay and self destruction.
I know this seems a bit all over the place, but it all intertwines. That said, I mostly certainly disagree with the methods and hope it backfires
wonderfully, and causes humanity another dark age. As the definition of evil is that the ends justify the means. If a better world is to be built,
then the means of building it ought to be fit to exist in the type of world that is being dreamt of.