From an American perspective, it's absurd to elevate "now" above the Great Depression, World War 2, the Vietnam War, and the massive social and political changes accompanying each, to name just three eras in the past century. Tack on another century, and now doesn't even make it into the textbook.
Yeah, there's never been another moment like this, but that's true always and forever. There are some big things going on all the time. Add them all up, and this is a pretty bland time in the grand scheme of things.
> Chomsky said the current age is a “point of confluence of severe crises,” including the threat of nuclear war, climate change, a raging pandemic, economic depression and racial unrest in the United States.
Other events might or might not turn out to be more consequential in the long run, and it still be true that there are more things happening all at once than ever before.
That is a tautology kinda.
If we assume something that's bigger than anything else happens, what was bigger.
Nuclear war is silly, because The Cuban Missile crisis was scarier and probably would have been worse if it had of kicked off.
If climate change all happens in a year instead of 100 years, it's big, but not that big. You'd notice it less that the coronavirus.
Don't most posts on HN?
"This time is different. The end is nigh. Our only hope is for heathens to ascribe to our morally superior political ideology and central planning. Heretic unbelievers must accept the gospel truths of technocracy and scientism!"
Make what you will of that, but there must be a more effective way to communicate. Doomsaying is not uncommon. Nor are ideologues seeking power while claiming the mantle of "collective good". Suspicion is not unwarranted.
Please don't read this as a denial of the existence of backward and regressive individuals. Thanks.
If they hear that then they must not know that Chomsky has spent his life arguing against central planning and "technocracy." He's literally an anarchist. [1]
>"CHOMSKY: Let me just say I don’t really regard myself as an anarchist thinker."
https://books.google.com/books/about/Internationalism_Or_Ext...
From the summary of: "Internationalism or Extinction", his new book.
>The introduction and accompanying interviews place these dual threats in a framework of unprecedented corporate global power which has overtaken nation states’ ability to control the future and preserve the planet. Chomsky argues for the urgency of international climate and arms agreements, showing how global popular movements are mobilizing to force governments to meet this unprecedented challenge to civilization’s survival.
He's an anarchist who doesn't regard himself as an "anarchist thinker". He's against central planning, but laments the state's failing ability to "control the future and preserve the planet". He argues for supranational governance to protect civilization.
The proposed solutions seem at odds with the assertion that he is against central planning. I'm not sure if it is fair to define him as an ideologue within narrow political terms. Perhaps it is a case of pragmatism overtaking ideals?
> Chomsky said the current age is a “point of confluence of severe crises,” including the threat of nuclear war, climate change, a raging pandemic, economic depression and racial unrest in the United States.
The period between 1914 and 1945 would probably beg to differ.
I've found it interesting to read "left" and "right"[1] pundits on Twitter recently. Each "side"[2] believes that this is the last chance to save democracy and all hell will be unleashed if their candidate loses. Ten years ago we had the "Tea Party", on average a deranged bunch of lunatics without the ability to see or think clearly. In response one could validly and amusingly proclaim "facts have a notoriously liberal bias". Fox News was extremely partisan and contributed to a sort of radicalisation of the right. In 2020 the same lunacy seems to have taken over the Democratic party as a whole. Facts are out of the window on both sides. Fox News and CNN and a whole host of other media outlets are contributing to radicalisation of both sides.
In 2016 the media convinced me that Trump would turn into Hitler 2.0. I'm glad and embarrassed to realise that what he has turned into is an average Republican president except he understands the working class and he hasn't started any wars.
This is "the darkest and most consequential time in history" for people who want to push an agenda (right-wing commentators will claim the same, not just left-wing ones) and for media outlets who want to increase their ratings. We are facing deep, deep problems that need overcoming, but only people whose worldview was based on the assumption that the growth and stability of '92-'08 would last forever are going to be swayed by claims of this being the worst ever.
In order to be able to tackle the challenges on our plate society needs to be able to think clearly. What we need at the moment are calming forces, not the inducement of more panic.
[1] for want of better descriptions
[2] if you can really call them "sides"
Misguided people are surrounded by misguided people. And Like count made sure they all upvoted each other. Reinforcing Beliefs and Behavior.
Its not a coincidence the Tea Party grew along with social medias rise. Similar groups have emerged all over the planet.
Remove/Hide/Delay the Like Count and Behavior will change. That will be the calming force. Social medias current control rods to stop chain reactions are too ineffective.
Like, that's such a low ball man. Do you understand the working class?
> Do you understand the working class?
I'm not sure, man. Like, do you?
