4 ms·

In the Shadow of the Great War

19 points by jasoncrawford 5y ago

nlarion 5y ago
Groan... All I can think of is the kids in the hall episode when they make fun of "god is dead." Sure, god is dead (shrug emoji). But to think that progress is also dead, takes a bit more than an obscure quote to convince me. WWII could be considered the genesis of the nuclear age, which is hard to imagine not being "progress". Lately I've been thinking the exact opposite that war drives progress. Maybe I'm not picking up whatever this guy is on about, but it makes no sense to me. maybe someone will enlighten me. *edit spelling
- ravi-delia 5y ago
  The thesis of the blog overall is that progress has happened, is happening, and is vitally important. Here the author is saying that despite the obvious existence of progress, people are pretending it isn't happening.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > The thesis of the blog overall is that progress has happened, is happening, and is vitally important. Here the author is saying that despite the obvious existence of progress, people are pretending it isn't happening. I don't think anyone denies some kinds of "progress" are happening. However, the naive optimism is rightfully gone, and that naivete seems to be what the CEO of this blog wants to bring back.
- IntrepidWorm 5y ago
  War tends to drive a very specific type of progress, from my understanding. Generally speaking, the more lengthy and devastating the conflict, the more industry benefits. Look to the post war expansion by many of the allied powers following the world wars. Also look to the destruction that it brought to its theaters- the change there was also drastic, and not necessarily for the better.
simonblack 5y ago
In reality, progress did not stop in the twenty years after the First World War. Many of the great inventions of the 20th century came about in those 20 years: Jet engines, Sound movies, Color movies, Television, Radar, Modern Liquid-Fueled Rocketry, Nuclear Energy, Antibiotics, and several others that I can't dredge up out of my brain just right now.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > In reality, progress did not stop in the twenty years after the First World War. > Many of the great inventions of the 20th century came about in those 20 years... Also: nuclear weapons, the seeds of global warming, etc. Since then we've had other great inventions come about, like computerized mass surveillance. I don't think "progress" should be understood as "accumulation of technology."
  - tomjen3 5y ago
    Nuclear weapons have killed very few people and have made further large scale war between great powers unthinkable. Global warming is a problem that we will deal with, as we have all other problems we have solved before. The problems with global warming are easily worth it compared to not having an industrialized society.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      > Nuclear weapons have killed very few people and have made further large scale war between great powers unthinkable. Eh. We're probably a couple malfunctions away from a nuclear war. IIRC, there have been a few near misses in the past, and my understanding Russia has an automated launch system setup to fail deadly. > Global warming is a problem that we will deal with, as we have all other problems we have solved before. The thing about existential threats is that you successfully deal with them all until you don't. Then the story stops. Now I don't think global warming is going to make humanity extinct, but it's quite possible it will cause massive suffering and lead to a future where we're noticeably worse off and diminished.

19 points by jasoncrawford 5y ago

Groan... All I can think of is the kids in the hall episode when they make fun of "god is dead." Sure, god is dead (shrug emoji). But to think that progress is also dead, takes a bit more than an obscure quote to convince me. WWII could be considered the genesis of the nuclear age, which is hard to imagine not being "progress". Lately I've been thinking the exact opposite that war drives progress. Maybe I'm not picking up whatever this guy is on about, but it makes no sense to me. maybe someone will enlighten me. *edit spelling

ravi-delia 5y ago
The thesis of the blog overall is that progress has happened, is happening, and is vitally important. Here the author is saying that despite the obvious existence of progress, people are pretending it isn't happening.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > The thesis of the blog overall is that progress has happened, is happening, and is vitally important. Here the author is saying that despite the obvious existence of progress, people are pretending it isn't happening. I don't think anyone denies some kinds of "progress" are happening. However, the naive optimism is rightfully gone, and that naivete seems to be what the CEO of this blog wants to bring back.
IntrepidWorm 5y ago
War tends to drive a very specific type of progress, from my understanding. Generally speaking, the more lengthy and devastating the conflict, the more industry benefits. Look to the post war expansion by many of the allied powers following the world wars. Also look to the destruction that it brought to its theaters- the change there was also drastic, and not necessarily for the better.

simonblack 5y ago

In reality, progress did not stop in the twenty years after the First World War. Many of the great inventions of the 20th century came about in those 20 years: Jet engines, Sound movies, Color movies, Television, Radar, Modern Liquid-Fueled Rocketry, Nuclear Energy, Antibiotics, and several others that I can't dredge up out of my brain just right now.

tablespoon 5y ago
> In reality, progress did not stop in the twenty years after the First World War. > Many of the great inventions of the 20th century came about in those 20 years... Also: nuclear weapons, the seeds of global warming, etc. Since then we've had other great inventions come about, like computerized mass surveillance. I don't think "progress" should be understood as "accumulation of technology."
- tomjen3 5y ago
  Nuclear weapons have killed very few people and have made further large scale war between great powers unthinkable. Global warming is a problem that we will deal with, as we have all other problems we have solved before. The problems with global warming are easily worth it compared to not having an industrialized society.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > Nuclear weapons have killed very few people and have made further large scale war between great powers unthinkable. Eh. We're probably a couple malfunctions away from a nuclear war. IIRC, there have been a few near misses in the past, and my understanding Russia has an automated launch system setup to fail deadly. > Global warming is a problem that we will deal with, as we have all other problems we have solved before. The thing about existential threats is that you successfully deal with them all until you don't. Then the story stops. Now I don't think global warming is going to make humanity extinct, but it's quite possible it will cause massive suffering and lead to a future where we're noticeably worse off and diminished.