[Rancid]

deprived migrant communities in South London

alright....

It's easy to blame immigrants, isn't it?

[albionfagan]

The ordinary citizens of the UK are the ones who have to be active and involved to change their own government's failings. If the lower classes allow that Thatcherite problem to snowball? They are also to blame. Each nation has to be very very active in pressuring their government systems in order to get better results. If you do not pressure these incompetents you get nowhere over time. It is not just the UK you know.

I have no faith in human beings. We are a selfish species who have done nothing but harm to do every other living thing. Any 'progress' has only been by accident. I think we should embrace global warming and let ourselves die out. Every other living thing will benefit.

Can you tell I'm depressed today

[Potemkin]

I have no faith in human beings. We are a selfish species who have done nothing but harm to do every other living thing. Any 'progress' has only been by accident. I think we should embrace global warming and let ourselves die out. Every other living thing will benefit.

So humans are a uniquely selfish species, are we? As opposed to, say, lions, who selflessly maintain the genetic health of gazelle herds by virtuously running down and mauling to death the weaker and slower gazelles and then nobly ripping out and devouring their internal organs while they are still alive? Humans are no more selfish than any other apex predator.

Can you tell I'm depressed today

You are depressed because humans don’t live up to your high moral standards. But the only reason you have such high moral standards is precisely because you are human. Lions or chimpanzees or wolves don’t give a flying fuck about moral standards. Bears don’t fall into a state of depression when they contemplate the appalling treatment their fellow bears mete out to migrating salmon. Because they don’t give a fuck what their food feels about being eaten alive.

[Tainari88]

So humans are a uniquely selfish species, are we? As opposed to, say, lions, who selflessly maintain the genetic health of gazelle herds by virtuously running down and mauling to death the weaker and slower gazelles and then nobly ripping out and devouring their internal organs while they are still alive? Humans are no more selfish than any other apex predator.


You are depressed because humans don’t live up to your high moral standards. But the only reason you have such high moral standards is precisely because you are human. Lions or chimpanzees or wolves don’t give a flying fuck about moral standards. Bears don’t fall into a state of depression when they contemplate the appalling treatment their fellow bears mete out to migrating salmon. Because they don’t give a fuck what their food feels about being eaten alive.

Potemkin, animals are instinct-driven creatures and as such they serve a function in the ecological system. They have to adapt to it. Because they are about survival. Human beings are about survival as well. But like all mammalian primates such as gorillas, bonobos and chimps we get depressed when we lose loved ones, and we fight for our food and survival. Nothing unique about us there. What is unforgivable is that we take more than what we need from the natural environment and we exploit the natural environment and create artificial needs that are totally unnecessarily created to consume and create a system of infinite expansion. It has made us parasitical and unbalanced.

Do we truly need all this space, and resources when there are millions of homes and houses and apartments that lie vacant, and unoccupied. Commercial spaces that are totally going to waste, and we do not recycle, and we keep saying we need more. Never satisfied. One part of human society lives too crowded and poor, and other parts are about a rich wealthy family with ten homes and vacation winter homes, summer homes, and urban apartments and mansions in the burbs, and it wasted space but they have the right. While the others can barely get enough to eat. It is totally unbalanced. A system that is not wrought by nature that only copes with creating instincts in animals.

It has allowed that tiny percentage points that differ from the other primates that defines our species, and it is incredible that people do not recognize that we are a part of that system. And always will be. We have to realize there are enough resources for everyone to live a dignified life. But it requires setting limits on what we think is possible in this world. You can't allow thoughtless waste, and uncaring infinite consumption. It all requires that all human societies start realizing that if they want a future, they need to set limits on what can be acquired, produced, distributed and invested in....if it is about waste, and some having 1000 times more than others? Time for a total overhaul of the unbalanced consumer realities. It is a false consciousness and it is making us have to realize that unless we put limits on it? Nature will take the decision off our hands. No doubt about it.

[Tainari88]

I have no faith in human beings. We are a selfish species who have done nothing but harm to do every other living thing. Any 'progress' has only been by accident. I think we should embrace global warming and let ourselves die out. Every other living thing will benefit.

Can you tell I'm depressed today

Not all human cultures live with that mentality about humans. Other cultures and other peoples live within their means and do not take more than what they can consume in a reasonable manner.

No, the depression is about the lack of real thought that happens to people who are receiving messages that are lies all day. You are not important if you are not wealthy. You are not to be respected unless you are rich and powerful. You are nobody unless you come from a respectable class of people. You are nothing without these characteristics. It does not emphasize innate human value at all. It only rewards the set of values that helps a wasteful and inhumane system continue unchallenged.

People had better start challenging it strongly. Because in the end all of us are responsible for the lack of change that is making us depressed.

Take action and care, and serve other people besides yourself. And you will feel much better about life. That is a real feeling.

[Potemkin]

Potemkin, animals are instinct-driven creatures and as such they serve a function in the ecological system. They have to adapt to it. Because they are about survival. Human beings are about survival as well. But like all mammalian primates such as gorillas, bonobos and chimps we get depressed when we lose loved ones, and we fight for our food and survival. Nothing unique about us there. What is unforgivable is that we take more than what we need from the natural environment and we exploit the natural environment and create artificial needs that are totally unnecessarily created to consume and create a system of infinite expansion. It has made us parasitical and unbalanced.

The natural world punishes maladaptation. The human race was once extremely egalitarian, as almost all non-eusocial species are. As hunter-gatherers, we took only what we needed, largely because the need to keep moving to follow our prey animals meant that we could ‘own’ only what we could comfortably carry. The invention of agriculture and then towns and cities changed all of that. For the first time, an economic surplus could be created and then confiscated by a tiny hereditary elite. We became unbalanced, maladapted.

Do we truly need all this space, and resources when there are millions of homes and houses and apartments that lie vacant, and unoccupied. Commercial spaces that are totally going to waste, and we do not recycle, and we keep saying we need more. Never satisfied. One part of human society lives too crowded and poor, and other parts are about a rich wealthy family with ten homes and vacation winter homes, summer homes, and urban apartments and mansions in the burbs, and it wasted space but they have the right. While the others can barely get enough to eat. It is totally unbalanced. A system that is not wrought by nature that only copes with creating instincts in animals.

It has allowed that tiny percentage points that differ from the other primates that defines our species, and it is incredible that people do not recognize that we are a part of that system. And always will be. We have to realize there are enough resources for everyone to live a dignified life. But it requires setting limits on what we think is possible in this world. You can't allow thoughtless waste, and uncaring infinite consumption. It all requires that all human societies start realizing that if they want a future, they need to set limits on what can be acquired, produced, distributed and invested in....if it is about waste, and some having 1000 times more than others? Time for a total overhaul of the unbalanced consumer realities. It is a false consciousness and it is making us have to realize that unless we put limits on it? Nature will take the decision off our hands. No doubt about it.

Humans, uniquely among animals, are not driven by unthinking instinct, but by rational calculation. But is that rational calculation to be in the service of narrow-minded individualism, or is it to serve the needs of human society as a whole? For thousands of years, there has been a failure of vision, a failure of imagination. We have created, and now practically worship, an economic system which produces for profit rather than for need, which rather than serving the needs of humanity, forces humanity to serve it.

[Tainari88]

The natural world punishes maladaptation. The human race was once extremely egalitarian, as almost all non-eusocial species are. As hunter-gatherers, we took only what we needed, largely because the need to keep moving to follow our prey animals meant that we could ‘own’ only what we could comfortably carry. The invention of agriculture and then towns and cities changed all of that. For the first time, an economic surplus could be created and then confiscated by a tiny hereditary elite. We became unbalanced, maladapted.


Humans, uniquely among animals, are not driven by unthinking instinct, but by rational calculation. But is that rational calculation to be in the service of narrow-minded individualism, or is it to serve the needs of human society as a whole? For thousands of years, there has been a failure of vision, a failure of imagination. We have created, and now practically worship, an economic system which produces for profit rather than for need, which rather than serving the needs of humanity, forces humanity to serve it.

Yes, indeed Potemkin. We still can right the ship Potemkin. But the window of opportunity is narrowing and closing fast. Unless we change it in time? It is going to be TIME IS UP. The Sixth Extinction Event is here. Too late...so sorry. Your time for change is gone. Now comes the punishment.

I read this book. A Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist wrote it.

[noemon]

The natural world punishes maladaptation. The human race was once extremely egalitarian, as almost all non-eusocial species are. As hunter-gatherers, we took only what we needed, largely because the need to keep moving to follow our prey animals meant that we could ‘own’ only what we could comfortably carry. The invention of agriculture and then towns and cities changed all of that. For the first time, an economic surplus could be created and then confiscated by a tiny hereditary elite. We became unbalanced, maladapted.


Humans, uniquely among animals, are not driven by unthinking instinct, but by rational calculation. But is that rational calculation to be in the service of narrow-minded individualism, or is it to serve the needs of human society as a whole? For thousands of years, there has been a failure of vision, a failure of imagination. We have created, and now practically worship, an economic system which produces for profit rather than for need, which rather than serving the needs of humanity, forces humanity to serve it.

My emphasis to stand on this particular.

Aren't hunter-gatherers and animals subject to serving the system in which they operate under?

Surplus also means hospitals, medicine, science & education. It means extending human life expectancy to triple, quadruple, or more. If survival is a primary instinct in the living kingdom, then...?

Also, how do you define 'humanity' in the political sense? Where do a citizen's rights & reach extend to in universal terms?

[Unthinking Majority]

How much independence did the average British citizen gain for their loss of wealth?

Anyway, I don't agree with the "this doesn't involve you, so you can't have an opinion" stuff. By default, my opinion doesn't matter too much because I'm not a British voter. However, we are all socially and economically connected. What Britain decides to do, does affect the rest of the world. I can have an opinion about that. To say I can't, is imperialism of the thought.

Well you're free to have an opinion, i'm sure its just an economic observation. All I'm saying is that if I were a Brit i'd tell all the non-Brits who think it was a "mistake" that it's tough shit for them. They don't owe anything to anyone else in the EU or anywhere else. For everyone to pile on the UK telling them it was a "mistake" is imperialism of thought. The whole point of Brexit is to reduce foreign influence on their domestic affairs.

If I were a Brit I'd eat grass if I thought ultimately it was the best decision for the country in the longterm.

[ingliz]

@Unthinking Majority

Even the English - and it was the 56.5 million English who voted for Brexit - are regretting it.

As of December 2023, 55 percent of people in Great Britain thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with 33 percent who thought it was the right decision.

— Statista

[Potemkin]

@Unthinking Majority

Even the English - and it was the 56.5 million English who voted for Brexit - are regretting it.

As of December 2023, 55 percent of people in Great Britain thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with 33 percent who thought it was the right decision.

— Statista

It was people of a certain age who voted for Brexit. As time passes, more and more of those people will drop off the perch, so the polling figures will change. This is to be expected, @ingliz. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the people who voted for Brexit have changed their minds. They’re just dead now, that’s all.

[ingliz]

people of a certain age

In the Brexit referendum of 2016, 73 percent of people aged between 18 and 24 voted to Remain in the European Union, compared with just 40 percent of people aged over 65.

— Brexit vote by age

In the Brexit referendum that took place on June 23, 206, approximately 57 percent of people in upper middle-class professions voted to Remain compared with 43 percent who voted to Leave. Among those in lower working-class professions, 64 percent voted to leave, and 36 percent to Remain.

— Brexit vote by social class

Data from the British Election Study shows there was a 40-percentage point 'educational gap' in 2016 EU referendum voting. While just 31% of those with low educational attainment (GCSE or below) voted to remain in the EU, fully 69% of those with high educational attainment (at least a Bachelor's degree) did so.

— Brexit vote by educational attainment

Education-based differences in Leave/Remain preferences were larger than those associated with other influential demographic characteristics, like age and income.

[Potemkin]

In the Brexit referendum of 2016, 73 percent of people aged between 18 and 24 voted to Remain in the European Union, compared with just 40 percent of people aged over 65.

— Brexit vote by age

In the Brexit referendum that took place on June 23, 206, approximately 57 percent of people in upper middle-class professions voted to Remain compared with 43 percent who voted to Leave. Among those in lower working-class professions, 64 percent voted to leave, and 36 percent to Remain.

— Brexit vote by social class

Data from the British Election Study shows there was a 40-percentage point 'educational gap' in 2016 EU referendum voting. While just 31% of those with low educational attainment (GCSE or below) voted to remain in the EU, fully 69% of those with high educational attainment (at least a Bachelor's degree) did so.

— Brexit vote by educational attainment

Education-based differences in Leave/Remain preferences were larger than those associated with other influential demographic characteristics, like age and income.

Nevertheless, the mere passage of time alone will have a significant effect on the polling results, regardless of whether people change their minds or not.

[Potemkin]

My emphasis to stand on this particular.

Aren't hunter-gatherers and animals subject to serving the system in which they operate under?

Surplus also means hospitals, medicine, science & education. It means extending human life expectancy to triple, quadruple, or more. If survival is a primary instinct in the living kingdom, then...?

Also, how do you define 'humanity' in the political sense? Where do a citizen's rights & reach extend to in universal terms?

I’m not @QatzelOk - I don’t oppose the Neolithic Revolution. I’m pointing out, however, that all progress has a downside: undesirable and unexpected effects which need to be solved. So far, the human race has failed to resolve these issues, mainly because the ruling elites throughout history (and now) don’t want these issues to be resolved. We need to try harder.

[AFAIK]

Other species are usually considered to be amoral in their actions since morality is a human construct and to apply it to others would be anthropomorphic. I find it strange that people consider humans to be selfish when just a few centuries ago it was legal and morally acceptable to own slaves, fuck children and treat women as property and we continue to advocate for more rights and recognition to be granted to vulnerable groups both human and non human.

[Potemkin]

Other species are usually considered to be amoral in their actions since morality is a human construct and to apply it to others would be anthropomorphic. I find it strange that people consider humans to be selfish when just a few centuries ago it was legal and morally acceptable to own slaves, fuck children and treat women as property and we continue to advocate for more rights and recognition to be granted to vulnerable groups both human and non human.

Exactly. Some humans even voluntarily abstain from eating meat because they consider it to be ‘immoral’ to eat other animals, despite the fact that predation has been the main driver of evolution since any form of life more sophisticated than some green slime first appeared just over half a billion years ago. And humans are supposedly a uniquely ‘selfish’ species?

[albionfagan]

I didn't say humans were 'uniquely' selfish, but our actions are unique in that they have the greatest effect on every living thing. Yes, Lions don't care for the plight of the Gazelle's they eat but Lions do not poison the oceans or clog up rivers for species which they don't prey on.

Combine that with the outstanding arrogance human beings have, believing they can manipulate nature at will, I'd say we're definitely unique in our malign influence.

[Rancid]

Well you're free to have an opinion, i'm sure its just an economic observation. All I'm saying is that if I were a Brit i'd tell all the non-Brits who think it was a "mistake" that it's tough shit for them. They don't owe anything to anyone else in the EU or anywhere else. For everyone to pile on the UK telling them it was a "mistake" is imperialism of thought. The whole point of Brexit is to reduce foreign influence on their domestic affairs.

If I were a Brit I'd eat grass if I thought ultimately it was the best decision for the country in the longterm.

Sure, it's fine for a Brit to tell me to fuck off with my opinion (i.e. that they don't agree it was a mistake). That is different from saying "you don't get to have an opinion".

Anyway, there is a big difference between me telling my neighbor I think it's a bad financial move for him to buy a Maserati given what I know about his job and personal economics, versus me locking him in his house to prevent him from going out and buying one. You are making this sound like I'm advocating for the second one.

[Tainari88]

Sure, it's fine for a Brit to tell me to fuck off with my opinion (i.e. that they don't agree it was a mistake). That is different from saying "you don't get to have an opinion".

Anyway, there is a big difference between me telling my neighbor I think it's a bad financial move for him to buy a Maserati given what I know about his job and personal economics, versus me locking him in his house to prevent him from going out and buying one. You are making this sound like I'm advocating for the second one.

I wonder if you dream of owning a Maserati eh? You automobile man you!

My car needs some repairs. Both my husband and my son are sick. I fed them breakfast, made tea and coffee and gave them massages etc. They are now half asleep, this is my chance to run away and get things done. Lol.

Poverty can be eradicated in a very systemic way. But it requires people to change in their minds.

If they do not change? They wind up giving the current system no pressure at all. No pressure at all? Needed changes do not happen.

[ingliz]

@Tainari88

I always fancied a Jaguar XJ-C 5.3 V12 coupe.

In my youth, I almost bought one cheap from my brother's father-in-law (3rd wife).

Cheap to buy, too expensive to run, an ornament, the wife said.

So it was a No.

It only managed around 12 miles per gallon.