Will Mankind's Future Be Advanced or Primitive? - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Will Mankind's Future Be Advanced or Primitive?

1. Mankind's Future Will Be Advanced and Egalitarian.
9
29%
2. Mankind's Future Will Be Primitive and Egalitarian.
No votes
0%
3. Mankind's Future Will Be Advanced and Hierarchical.
8
26%
4. Mankind's Future Will Be Primitive and Hierarchical.
7
23%
5. Other.
7
23%
#14897020
It is private property and the trade thereof by private decision which is exactly what everyone does from ancient Sumerians, bare foot Africans to modern giant multi-nationals. And everyone wants to make advantageous trades, profitable trades, you think any bare foot African wants to make a loss? What is good about making a loss anyway? Everyone invests too. Nothing develops without somekind of investment. Even commies invested. Do you think the USSR could have thrown their white elephant projects into space without investing resources? I don't understand how you can be such a nitwit. It's a little disturbing to be honest.

The key modifier is "investing capital for profit", SolarCross. It's a subtle difference, but an important one. :)
#14897028
Mankind's Future Will Be Primitive and Hierarchical

It will be technologically futuristic and look wonderful but it will be very basic in every other respect. Art and music will be nothing but sound.

Society will look egalitarian on paper. Everyone will have their rights but it will actually be a society of total control where you can consume freely and live whatever lifestyle you want but with no real power to change the system.
#14897089
Albert wrote:Wait, that is exactly how I feel living in Canada. :hmm:


In the east it is the party which rules you, the party organises your life and you live according to the rules of the party.

In the west it is the company which rules you, the company organises your life and you live according to the rules of the company.

The world of the future will just be as bad as now. Absolute existential nightmare for thinking people. It will function on a cocktail of anti-depressants, conformism and consumerism. You'll be able to have 50 gender types and do whatever you want to do, but none of it will have any meaning at all. It will be completely miserable.
#14897099
SolarCross wrote: The birth of ASI (predicted to happen around 2045 give or take a decade) is the best candidate for an extinction level event for humans in the near term

Yes, and I very much fear that SAI will reflect the priorities of the soulless, amoral greed robots who are funding and guiding its commercial development, or worse, those of the black-ops supervillains who are funding and guiding its military/security development. It is the genie in the lamp, and it is always those who want power the most who both rub the lamp hardest and are most likely to use its power destructively. That is our supreme danger from now on.
If the west ceases to be a place of intellectual creativity no doubt east asia or the slavosphere or even somewhere else will be happy to carry on without us.

Civilization is now global; it's just governments and a few religious kooks that are fighting a rear-guard action to preserve their local spheres of power against the tsunami of information. One way or another, SAI will do away with all that nonsense.
#14897112
Political Interest wrote:In the east it is the party which rules you, the party organises your life and you live according to the rules of the party.

In the west it is the company which rules you, the company organises your life and you live according to the rules of the company.

The world of the future will just be as bad as now. Absolute existential nightmare for thinking people. It will function on a cocktail of anti-depressants, conformism and consumerism. You'll be able to have 50 gender types and do whatever you want to do, but none of it will have any meaning at all. It will be completely miserable.


All life under any political system will be an existential nightmare. We exist for no particular reason and nothing can alleviate the inevitability of our death, the death of all humanity, and the death of the universe. It is inevitable and all is meaningless.

It's all well and good to criticism the west, capitalism, or other social systems, but don't go blaming them for the inherent nature of our existence. :)
#14897122
mikema63 wrote:All life under any political system will be an existential nightmare. We exist for no particular reason and nothing can alleviate the inevitability of our death, the death of all humanity, and the death of the universe. It is inevitable and all is meaningless.

It's all well and good to criticism the west, capitalism, or other social systems, but don't go blaming them for the inherent nature of our existence. :)

I've always thought that people who demand that life have a meaning are slaves in search of a master. After all, let us assume that life has a meaning, and that we know what that meaning is. We would become slaves to that meaning, to that purpose. We would have no choice but to conform to it, to obey it, and to live our lives in accordance with it. It would be like living in the Imperium of Mankind in Warhammer 40k, but without the cool power armour. :eek:

No, life has no meaning, and it's a damn good thing that it doesn't. It's the only thing that guarantees our existential freedom as human beings.
#14897133
mikema63 wrote:Can you imagine, it would probably be some mundane depressing meaning too if there were one. God just needed a way to produce plastic and so made us, we exist so god can have plastic. :lol:

Precisely, Mike. What sort of 'meaning' do these people want their life to have, anyway? And how would it make everything all better for them? They would be just as miserable as they are right now. "42? 42?! Is that it??!!" :lol:
#14897188
I actually took a position:

Mankind's Future Will Be primative and Hierarchical.

Two things. I will arbitrarily define the future as the next 50 years. Beyond that the variables are beyond imagining at this point.

I believe it will be more authoritarian because that is the direction it appears to be moving in today. The foundations of the countries most powerful in the world today, the US, China and Russia are in two cases fundamentally authoritarian and in the other (the US) moving that way very quickly indeed. Given that the EU is in disarray these days I see no emergent entity that will change the big three. So in my 50 year window, much more authoritarian.

WRT my primitive guess. The next 50 years should see the effective end to work as we know it. At least in what we now refer to as the advanced nations. There will still be some workers. Maybe a lot. But for the rest of us life will either be more primitive or at least more basic.

What will we do? How do you occupy the time of individuals who are not called upon to support themselves? Music? Art? or is it warfare and chaos? It could go either way but it is hard to see how with more authoritarian world leaders they will choose to turn to a kinder and gentler way to manage the masses.

If it was likely that these leaders would move "left" for lack of a better term, we would have seen some evidence in a leftward move recently. Instead we are seeing the opposite.

So my horizon is 50 years. We may not even make it that long.
#14897210
Decky wrote:Fucks sake. I was just trying to find the Hitchhikers clip with the machine saying 42. You are quick on the draw for an oldie Pote. :*(



How old is Potemkin anyway? I will guess somewhere between 6-8 thousand years, am I off the mark?
#14897223
The root of the matter (if we want a stable world) is a very simple and old-fashioned thing, a thing so simple that I am almost ashamed to mention it, for fear of the derisive smile with which wise cynics will greet my words. The thing I mean — please forgive me for mentioning it — is love, Christian love, or compassion. If you feel this, you have a motive for existence, a guide in action, a reason for courage, an imperative necessity for intellectual honesty. If you feel this, you have all that anybody should need in the way of religion. Although you may not find happiness, you will never know the despair of those whose life is aimless and void of purpose, for there is always something that you can do to diminish the awful sum of human misery. - Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
#14897295
Potemkin wrote:I've always thought that people who demand that life have a meaning are slaves in search of a master. After all, let us assume that life has a meaning, and that we know what that meaning is. We would become slaves to that meaning, to that purpose.


The purpose of life is liberation from meaninglessness. Liberation from all meaningless constraints and oppression. To liberate ourselves from oppressive economic, social, and cultural systems, from the cycle of history, from character defects, neurosis, and weakness, from our own flawed natures, from ignorance, even from the limits imposed on us by biological evolution. Meaning is found in and through the struggle for liberation. The only slaves are those who aren't fully engaged in the struggle, that is, those who accept meaninglessness.
#14897532
fuser wrote:How old is Potemkin anyway? I will guess somewhere between 6-8 thousand years, am I off the mark?


It's hard to tell with Scottish people sometimes, they look ancient and haggered by the time they are 25. ;)
#14897649
On meaning of Life :

It seems that all human societies have collectively worked towards one common goal i.e. to increase the human capacity of production, ergo if there is a meaning of life set up by God, its to keep increasing our production capabilities.... Capitalism has exhausted its potential to do so, only communism can do so now as Prophet Marx (pbuh) demonstrated. Hence God wants communism.......QED.
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Every accusation is a confession ... This is co[…]

The UCJ just ordered Israel to allow food aid . […]

Before he was elected he had a charity that he wo[…]

Candace Owens

... Too bad it's not as powerful as it once was. […]