9 ms·

Kind of related : America Is Falling Apart at the Seams https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/opinion/america-falling-apart.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13

by screye 5y ago

Kind of related : America Is Falling Apart at the Seams https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/opinion/america-falling-apart.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/opinion/america-falling-a... A loss of civic sense and cultural criminality are incredibly hard to weed out of a population, once it has taken root. I worry that the a mix of pessimism and a loss of civic sense is sending non-elite America into a death spiral. Opponents of return-to-normalcy claim that these are temporary and anomalous circumstances as a result of covid. However, a 2 year period of cultural erosion can lead to this regression getting cemented as a modern cultural identity of non-elite US. Cost-benefit analyses have been ignored in favor of tunnel-visioning on viral outcomes and short term political gain. At the end of this, we might just find ourselves asking "We made it out of this, but at what cost?". p.s: I am not advocating for any particular policy, just pointing to the absence of any holistic response. That being said, the complete failure of the American response in terms of 'viral outcomes' despite tunnel visioning on it, doesn't inspire confidence in it.

JimBlackwood 5y ago
Do you have a source for this? We’re seeing similar things in my country and I’d love to understand why (and how we can make it go away) a little more
y4mi 5y ago
And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. That's not going to reduce tensions in that regard, that's for sure. There is only circumstantial evidence but the story sounds plausible. If things continue like this, I'd wager that trump will return in 24
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  - y4mi 5y ago
    I'm not sure how good your reading comprehension generally is, but at least in this case you've clearly misinterpreted what I've written there.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      You wrote (full sentence): > And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. Maybe you think you can mention "that ... theory" without endorsing it in any way. I say that even mentioning this completely bogus garbage in a way that doesn't say that it's completely bogus garbage is effectively endorsing it. That's just the way communication systems work, unfortunately. I'm not implying that you believe "that ... theory". I am saying that it's essentially insane, has no credibility, and is spreading only because people mention it in this sort of "offhand" way ("oh, I didn't mean anything").
  - uejfiweun 5y ago
    This is a very insulting comment, and seems to have been prompted by practically nothing at all. I'd urge you to consider how your condescending attitude appears to anyone who doesn't agree with you.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      I generally try not to be condescending, and seek to take seriously the opinions of people who do not agree with me. However ... > And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. to even mention this "theory" as if it had any credibility whatsoever crosses a line where I'm not willing to cede good faith, sensible thinking etc., and can only react with dismissal and condescension. "And that ... Theory about the earth not really being round but actually flat but the illuminati prefer that we think it is round because reasons ..." is in the same ballpark.
- hidudeurcool 5y ago
akira2501 5y ago
> are incredibly hard to weed out of a population, once it has taken root. Is the root of this issue really "in" the population? Or is the population merely responding to a set of external circumstances? I'm uneasy when someone says something like "weed out of a population." Many dark journeys have started with this idea. > However, a 2 year period of cultural erosion can lead to this regression getting cemented as a modern cultural identity of non-elite US. From my perspective, this erosion started showing itself during Occupy Wall Street. Our entire economy was set on fire and very few, if any, people were actually held responsible for that. They were bailed out, and everyone was expected to move on. If I had a sense that something needed to be "weeded out" of my society, I know that's where I would start.
jiveturkey42 5y ago
I wonder how much of this correlates with the drop in religious participation. Religion, for better or worse, was a useful tool for stigmatizing bad behavior and incentivizing good behavior
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jdavis703 5y ago
  Do we have any evidence that religion reduces bad behavior? We know some of the most religious countries (Mexico, Syria) are relatively more dangerous than more secular countries like France or China. Is there a better data source to look at here?
  - jiveturkey42 5y ago
    You would have to adjust for all external influences. Mexico and Syria are mostly dangerous because of failed USA policies (drug war, war on terror) than their internal cultures
    - mijowi 5y ago
      It probably has more to do with poverty really.
    - sumedh 5y ago
      > You would have to adjust for all external influences. Or you could argue that their internal culture probably due to religion was not strong enough to fight against external influences.
- fivea 5y ago
  > Religion, for better or worse, was a useful tool for stigmatizing bad behavior and incentivizing good behavior Sweden is one of the least religious countries in Europe, and one of the safest.
  - 5y ago
wayoutthere 5y ago
There’s another explanation that I find fits better: that the last ~70 years have been an extraordinary confluence of good luck and peak resource extraction that is no longer viable going forward. Scarcity was always going to become a thing again, and Covid pulled that crash forward by a decade. There’s no stuffing the genie back in the bottle now. We’re going to be paying the price for the corporate excess of the 90s, 2000s and 2010s for the next few decades in the form of climate change, disinformation, authoritarianism and the ensuing civil unrest. Thanks to the combination of the last three we will continue to be unable to muster a coherent response to any problem going forward. Maybe we can have some good times again eventually, but the next decade or two are going to be rough.
rjbwork 5y ago
In no particular order: The rich are getting richer faster than the rest of us. Real wages are stagnant. Social safety nets are constantly being removed. Labor protections have been being rolled back or enforcement lax since the ATC strike. Atomization and alienation have taken root. The mythos of the nuclear family being paramount is fully embedded in the culture, destroying the older concept of a broader family and community taking part in the rearing of the next generation and just general socialization. We're heading to the failure of multiple systems, including food production and power, due to climate change and the increasing frequency of disastrous weather systems. "Greed is good" has been a value promulgated by the elites for a few generations now. Things are getting more expensive faster than wage growth, especially basics and things needed for economic upward mobility (housing, education, healthcare, etc). Identity politics and wedge issues are dividing people who otherwise have similar interests. Modern life is anxiety and depression inducing, creating a rise in interpersonal conflict. Our government is no longer accountable to the people or representative of them in any real way unless you're in the top quintile of wealth/income (and that is generous). All of these things, and many more, are ripping apart the social contract. People no longer feel invested in the wellbeing of the places in which they reside or the governmental and societal systems they are a part of. Instead, they merely endure them with resentment. This won't end well.
- givemeethekeys 5y ago
  > The mythos of the nuclear family being paramount is fully embedded in the culture, destroying the older concept of a broader family and community taking part in the rearing of the next generation and just general socialization. I think we're past "nuclear family" at this point. Getting married is actively discouraged by our legal system.
  - rjbwork 5y ago
    True. I certainly am not. Definitely part of Atomization. Large swathes of the country, especially the religious and conservative still buy into this mythos though.
- xster 5y ago
serious_habit 5y ago
Outrageous behavior is being glorified because it drives clicks. So many of these Alex Jones wannabe 'anti-maskers invade a store protesters', schoolboard meeting ravers get publicized because they get people fired up and drive clicks and ad revenue. It's normalizing that the way to handle disagreement is to act out. I'm sorry to say that this onslaught of terrible behavior isn't because people are tired of lockdowns, it's because it's great for driving ad traffic & getting $ from voters.

by screye 5y ago

JimBlackwood 5y ago

Do you have a source for this? We’re seeing similar things in my country and I’d love to understand why (and how we can make it go away) a little more

y4mi 5y ago

And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. That's not going to reduce tensions in that regard, that's for sure. There is only circumstantial evidence but the story sounds plausible. If things continue like this, I'd wager that trump will return in 24

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
- y4mi 5y ago
  I'm not sure how good your reading comprehension generally is, but at least in this case you've clearly misinterpreted what I've written there.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    You wrote (full sentence): > And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. Maybe you think you can mention "that ... theory" without endorsing it in any way. I say that even mentioning this completely bogus garbage in a way that doesn't say that it's completely bogus garbage is effectively endorsing it. That's just the way communication systems work, unfortunately. I'm not implying that you believe "that ... theory". I am saying that it's essentially insane, has no credibility, and is spreading only because people mention it in this sort of "offhand" way ("oh, I didn't mean anything").
- uejfiweun 5y ago
  This is a very insulting comment, and seems to have been prompted by practically nothing at all. I'd urge you to consider how your condescending attitude appears to anyone who doesn't agree with you.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    I generally try not to be condescending, and seek to take seriously the opinions of people who do not agree with me. However ... > And that ... Theory about the lockdowns supposedly not being because of the virus but to hide a larger financial crisis/weath reallocation is spreading quite quickly at least at far as I can tell. to even mention this "theory" as if it had any credibility whatsoever crosses a line where I'm not willing to cede good faith, sensible thinking etc., and can only react with dismissal and condescension. "And that ... Theory about the earth not really being round but actually flat but the illuminati prefer that we think it is round because reasons ..." is in the same ballpark.
hidudeurcool 5y ago

akira2501 5y ago

> are incredibly hard to weed out of a population, once it has taken root. Is the root of this issue really "in" the population? Or is the population merely responding to a set of external circumstances? I'm uneasy when someone says something like "weed out of a population." Many dark journeys have started with this idea. > However, a 2 year period of cultural erosion can lead to this regression getting cemented as a modern cultural identity of non-elite US. From my perspective, this erosion started showing itself during Occupy Wall Street. Our entire economy was set on fire and very few, if any, people were actually held responsible for that. They were bailed out, and everyone was expected to move on. If I had a sense that something needed to be "weeded out" of my society, I know that's where I would start.

jiveturkey42 5y ago

I wonder how much of this correlates with the drop in religious participation. Religion, for better or worse, was a useful tool for stigmatizing bad behavior and incentivizing good behavior

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jdavis703 5y ago
Do we have any evidence that religion reduces bad behavior? We know some of the most religious countries (Mexico, Syria) are relatively more dangerous than more secular countries like France or China. Is there a better data source to look at here?
- jiveturkey42 5y ago
  You would have to adjust for all external influences. Mexico and Syria are mostly dangerous because of failed USA policies (drug war, war on terror) than their internal cultures
  - mijowi 5y ago
    It probably has more to do with poverty really.
  - sumedh 5y ago
    > You would have to adjust for all external influences. Or you could argue that their internal culture probably due to religion was not strong enough to fight against external influences.
fivea 5y ago
> Religion, for better or worse, was a useful tool for stigmatizing bad behavior and incentivizing good behavior Sweden is one of the least religious countries in Europe, and one of the safest.
- 5y ago

wayoutthere 5y ago

There’s another explanation that I find fits better: that the last ~70 years have been an extraordinary confluence of good luck and peak resource extraction that is no longer viable going forward. Scarcity was always going to become a thing again, and Covid pulled that crash forward by a decade. There’s no stuffing the genie back in the bottle now. We’re going to be paying the price for the corporate excess of the 90s, 2000s and 2010s for the next few decades in the form of climate change, disinformation, authoritarianism and the ensuing civil unrest. Thanks to the combination of the last three we will continue to be unable to muster a coherent response to any problem going forward. Maybe we can have some good times again eventually, but the next decade or two are going to be rough.

rjbwork 5y ago

In no particular order: The rich are getting richer faster than the rest of us. Real wages are stagnant. Social safety nets are constantly being removed. Labor protections have been being rolled back or enforcement lax since the ATC strike. Atomization and alienation have taken root. The mythos of the nuclear family being paramount is fully embedded in the culture, destroying the older concept of a broader family and community taking part in the rearing of the next generation and just general socialization. We're heading to the failure of multiple systems, including food production and power, due to climate change and the increasing frequency of disastrous weather systems. "Greed is good" has been a value promulgated by the elites for a few generations now. Things are getting more expensive faster than wage growth, especially basics and things needed for economic upward mobility (housing, education, healthcare, etc). Identity politics and wedge issues are dividing people who otherwise have similar interests. Modern life is anxiety and depression inducing, creating a rise in interpersonal conflict. Our government is no longer accountable to the people or representative of them in any real way unless you're in the top quintile of wealth/income (and that is generous). All of these things, and many more, are ripping apart the social contract. People no longer feel invested in the wellbeing of the places in which they reside or the governmental and societal systems they are a part of. Instead, they merely endure them with resentment. This won't end well.

givemeethekeys 5y ago
> The mythos of the nuclear family being paramount is fully embedded in the culture, destroying the older concept of a broader family and community taking part in the rearing of the next generation and just general socialization. I think we're past "nuclear family" at this point. Getting married is actively discouraged by our legal system.
- rjbwork 5y ago
  True. I certainly am not. Definitely part of Atomization. Large swathes of the country, especially the religious and conservative still buy into this mythos though.
xster 5y ago

serious_habit 5y ago

Outrageous behavior is being glorified because it drives clicks. So many of these Alex Jones wannabe 'anti-maskers invade a store protesters', schoolboard meeting ravers get publicized because they get people fired up and drive clicks and ad revenue. It's normalizing that the way to handle disagreement is to act out. I'm sorry to say that this onslaught of terrible behavior isn't because people are tired of lockdowns, it's because it's great for driving ad traffic & getting $ from voters.