I’ve been thinking about the Occupy Wall Street movement and where it might lead. Up until today I entertained the view Chris Hedges expresses in the interview below, that we may reach some sort of tipping point where the police “cross the line” and refuse to follow orders (to disband protest encampments), leading to who knows what (revolution? new government?).
The more I thought about this possibility, the less likely this scenario seemed. Why?
" Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy." -- Benito Mussolini
Historically, prolonged extreme concentrations of wealth and outrageous income inequality tend to play out in two ways:
1) Violent Leftist/popular revolutions, such as the French Revolution, the Chinese Cultural Revolution, and the Russian Revolution.
2) The rise of a Fascist state, as the elites use “fear of the other” to gain support for policies that suppress freedom and democracy, and increase coercive control of the impoverished masses. Fascism never rises without support of the elites.
In the United States, with its strong pro-capitalist institutions and values, we’re more at risk for fascism than we are for violent Leftist revolution. There are strong currents of popular fascism in the racist, xenophobic blatherings of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. More and more our lawmakers are controlled by corporate interests. Disturbing incidents where police and military are used against U.S. citizens are on the rise.
Ferriss dispensing some armchair wisdom.
I recently attended Tim Ferriss’s talk “Accelerated Learning in Accelerated Times,” as presented as part of the Long Now Foundation’s Seminar series. Jason W. from Proton Radio invited me — thanks Jason!
You can listen to the whole presentation here. And here’s the Long Now blog post summarizing the talk.
I sensed the audience had a mixed reaction to Tim’s talk. It was the first time he had given this particular presentation and it felt both rough and rushed. Also, I think Ferriss’s rapid rise to celebrity status rubs some people the wrong way. He can come off as arrogant sometimes.
What are you measuring, and why?
Someone who is obsessed with how many grams of protein they consume, how many hours they sleep a night, or how much they can bench press can quickly become annoying — especially when they insist on sharing that information with us. Broadcasting such information on social networks is even more of a faux-pas (polluting the stream). I don’t care how many miles you ran this week, and neither does anyone else.
What’s behind our nation’s self-quantification fad — especially among the tech elite? It’s a combination of:
What draws us to certain styles, things, and types of people?
Why do we prefer what we prefer? Lately I’ve been thinking that “personal taste” is somewhat illusory; what different people “like” is actually a simple algorithm based on age, gender, and cultural trends. The majority of two to five year old girls in the United States like the color pink, fairies, and Disney princesses. (Gender stereotyping? Sure, but also observation.) Hipsters “like” single gear bikes. Hippies “like” hummus. And so on …
Beneath (or maybe mingled with) these broad demographic probabilities lies our real personal taste. For most of us, it (luckily) overlaps with the zeitgeist — others are compelled to wear Renaissance Faire clothes to work every day.
Casual Friday?
For a myriad of biological and cultural and indeterminate reasons, we find ourselves with a set of strong and weak preferences toward various foods, clothing styles, people, types of work, activities, and situations. How important is it to pay attention to these preferences?
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén