4 ms·

Such is not life friend. Society is whatever we want to be. The rules are made up and we, the people, can decide what society should value. It doesn't have to

Such is not life friend. Society is whatever we want to be. The rules are made up and we, the people, can decide what society should value. It doesn't have to be this way, it can change. Maybe not in our lifetimes but we plant the seeds so future generations can live better lives.

JohnFen 2y ago
Big picture, you're absolutely right and I do what I can to plant those seeds. However, while that could help future generations and so is worth doing, it doesn't actually help me in the here and now. There's nothing I can do that will positively change things on this count within my lifetime.
- netrap 2y ago
  Perhaps there is just something small you can do that is passed down or acknowledged by others who will pass it on. A behavior, an action, or some other change.
- tim333 2y ago
  There is probably a big change coming with AI. At the moment we need to pay people to work so stuff gets done but if AI can do it instead that goes away.
  - do_not_redeem 2y ago
    The hype is reaching absurd levels. Don't save for retirement, wait for AI instead! I'll just say this... if you actually believe AI will make money obsolete, I'd be happy to take all your obsolete currency off your hands.
  - azemetre 2y ago
    The actual scenario is that more wealth will be captured by the elites while hundreds of millions of people suffer or die from poverty. What we actually need is another luddite revolution.
    - tim333 2y ago
      I figure we'll get something like socialism.
rbanffy 2y ago
I'm trying. My daughter loves Star Trek and I have had over the years extensive discussions with my older sons about how poverty is designed into our society and how eradicating it could be easy with just a couple minor adjustments. Unfortunately, the world has been turning in the wrong direction - basic human decency is considered "woke" and "leftism". Any attempt to make a just society is called "communism" and shouted down aggressively by the people who would most benefit from it. We need to change these things. Something Gorbachev said on the fall of the Soviet Union stuck with me for the past couple decades, that they "failed because they tried to make a better man". Are we that doomed?
- card_zero 2y ago
  Yes, but no more doomed than that. It'll probably be alright.
- sithadmin 2y ago
  Is poverty really 'designed into our society'? It seems to me that the underlying aspects of poverty - particularly resource scarcity and insecurity - are inherent aspects of the 'state of nature', which are only escapable via the cooperative mechanisms associated with the formation of society and governance. Sure, these things aren't 100% effective at eliminating poverty, but the proposition that poverty is somehow an intentionally baked-in objective seems hyperbolic. Further, the notion that the USSR failed because "they tried to make a better man" is an absurd whitewashing of Soviet history.
  - throawayonthe 2y ago
    [dead]
  - BoxOfRain 2y ago
    >Further, the notion that the USSR failed because "they tried to make a better man" is an absurd whitewashing of Soviet history. Isn't he referring specifically to the notion of the 'New Soviet Man' here, the idea that a communist economic model would produce fundamentally different humans as a result? I can see why he would describe that as a flawed approach, but you're right that it'd be an odd thing to blame for the fall of the Soviet Union over the other factors which contributed to it.
card_zero 2y ago
> The rules are made up Not much. The rules have emerged, there's only small amounts of deliberate interference with that natural process.* Deliberate societal rules (statute laws, rulings) have to fit to what's politically viable, which is to say, what people in general like: and people in general are incoherent, only diffidently cooperative, and run on intuition, so mostly we get accidental rules instead of deliberately designed ones. * Interesting instance of when the word "natural" applies to things created by humans.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  We could be bonobos, but we chose to be chimpanzees.
  - ASalazarMX 2y ago
    It's debatable if even bonobos chose to be bonobos. I wouldn't want to make out with my neighbors to solve conflicts anyway.
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      > I wouldn't want to make out with my neighbors to solve conflicts anyway. You clearly need to move ;-)
bluGill 2y ago
Be careful though. It is very easy to change for what looks like better but is in fact worse. Most of history money was not something the typical person had or used. Adding money greatly increased freedom for everyone though - it became possible to trade things without complex 10 way barter situations.

JohnFen 2y ago

Big picture, you're absolutely right and I do what I can to plant those seeds. However, while that could help future generations and so is worth doing, it doesn't actually help me in the here and now. There's nothing I can do that will positively change things on this count within my lifetime.

netrap 2y ago
Perhaps there is just something small you can do that is passed down or acknowledged by others who will pass it on. A behavior, an action, or some other change.
tim333 2y ago
There is probably a big change coming with AI. At the moment we need to pay people to work so stuff gets done but if AI can do it instead that goes away.
- do_not_redeem 2y ago
  The hype is reaching absurd levels. Don't save for retirement, wait for AI instead! I'll just say this... if you actually believe AI will make money obsolete, I'd be happy to take all your obsolete currency off your hands.
- azemetre 2y ago
  The actual scenario is that more wealth will be captured by the elites while hundreds of millions of people suffer or die from poverty. What we actually need is another luddite revolution.
  - tim333 2y ago
    I figure we'll get something like socialism.

rbanffy 2y ago

I'm trying. My daughter loves Star Trek and I have had over the years extensive discussions with my older sons about how poverty is designed into our society and how eradicating it could be easy with just a couple minor adjustments. Unfortunately, the world has been turning in the wrong direction - basic human decency is considered "woke" and "leftism". Any attempt to make a just society is called "communism" and shouted down aggressively by the people who would most benefit from it. We need to change these things. Something Gorbachev said on the fall of the Soviet Union stuck with me for the past couple decades, that they "failed because they tried to make a better man". Are we that doomed?

card_zero 2y ago
Yes, but no more doomed than that. It'll probably be alright.
sithadmin 2y ago
Is poverty really 'designed into our society'? It seems to me that the underlying aspects of poverty - particularly resource scarcity and insecurity - are inherent aspects of the 'state of nature', which are only escapable via the cooperative mechanisms associated with the formation of society and governance. Sure, these things aren't 100% effective at eliminating poverty, but the proposition that poverty is somehow an intentionally baked-in objective seems hyperbolic. Further, the notion that the USSR failed because "they tried to make a better man" is an absurd whitewashing of Soviet history.
- throawayonthe 2y ago
  [dead]
- BoxOfRain 2y ago
  >Further, the notion that the USSR failed because "they tried to make a better man" is an absurd whitewashing of Soviet history. Isn't he referring specifically to the notion of the 'New Soviet Man' here, the idea that a communist economic model would produce fundamentally different humans as a result? I can see why he would describe that as a flawed approach, but you're right that it'd be an odd thing to blame for the fall of the Soviet Union over the other factors which contributed to it.

card_zero 2y ago

> The rules are made up Not much. The rules have emerged, there's only small amounts of deliberate interference with that natural process.* Deliberate societal rules (statute laws, rulings) have to fit to what's politically viable, which is to say, what people in general like: and people in general are incoherent, only diffidently cooperative, and run on intuition, so mostly we get accidental rules instead of deliberately designed ones. * Interesting instance of when the word "natural" applies to things created by humans.

rbanffy 2y ago
We could be bonobos, but we chose to be chimpanzees.
- ASalazarMX 2y ago
  It's debatable if even bonobos chose to be bonobos. I wouldn't want to make out with my neighbors to solve conflicts anyway.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    > I wouldn't want to make out with my neighbors to solve conflicts anyway. You clearly need to move ;-)

bluGill 2y ago

Be careful though. It is very easy to change for what looks like better but is in fact worse. Most of history money was not something the typical person had or used. Adding money greatly increased freedom for everyone though - it became possible to trade things without complex 10 way barter situations.