4 ms·

> I shouldn't have to say this, but the current state of affairs is not primarily due to rich people and is far more complicated. They display a third-grade lev

> I shouldn't have to say this, but the current state of affairs is not primarily due to rich people and is far more complicated. They display a third-grade level of it economics and are even more cynical than the people he chides. Use more rigorous language and provide a rationale for your argument. “[C]urrent state of affairs” is vague and inoperative, and you point to an understanding of “far more complicated” issues but do not substantiate it. However, your comment does serve to express your superiority over the following: * the author, Douglas Rushkoff * third-grade economists * marxists * contemporary journalists * the guardian All of which can be true, but it is lacking for want of certain things like evidence, synthesis, or nuance.

locutous 4y ago
Seems clear enough to me. The author returns again and again to the idea that the men are "responsible" for the coming black swan event they are preparing for. They are but small men in a wider world whatever their wealth. Such an idea is ridiculous particularly considering the event hasn't happened and is unknown. It is sad how little the group appears to care about their fellow men. Perhaps that's the lens of the author, I don't know. But the author also strongly links survival thinking with selfishness, which is hogwash. Poor article, snatching ideological defeat from the jaws of victory.
- fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
  Before I proceed, I’d like your prespective on the following: 1) Does industrial activity reliant on fossil fuels contribute significantly to climate change? 2) Does engagement-first online political content curation contribute to political instability? 3) Does large scale arbitrage in the areas of real estate, energy, and food production significantly contribute to quality-of-life instability?
  - choko 4y ago
    "Before I proceed I want to set up some logic traps because I'm more interested in winning than in honest exchange of opinion" No thanks, have a nice weekend.
choko 4y ago
Are you SERIOUSLY asking for sources on my opinion on an opinion piece? You do know what opinion means, right?

locutous 4y ago

Seems clear enough to me. The author returns again and again to the idea that the men are "responsible" for the coming black swan event they are preparing for. They are but small men in a wider world whatever their wealth. Such an idea is ridiculous particularly considering the event hasn't happened and is unknown. It is sad how little the group appears to care about their fellow men. Perhaps that's the lens of the author, I don't know. But the author also strongly links survival thinking with selfishness, which is hogwash. Poor article, snatching ideological defeat from the jaws of victory.

fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
Before I proceed, I’d like your prespective on the following: 1) Does industrial activity reliant on fossil fuels contribute significantly to climate change? 2) Does engagement-first online political content curation contribute to political instability? 3) Does large scale arbitrage in the areas of real estate, energy, and food production significantly contribute to quality-of-life instability?
- choko 4y ago
  "Before I proceed I want to set up some logic traps because I'm more interested in winning than in honest exchange of opinion" No thanks, have a nice weekend.

choko 4y ago

Are you SERIOUSLY asking for sources on my opinion on an opinion piece? You do know what opinion means, right?