Distrust in science
Solution: Better education
More broadly: an inability to discern good sources of information from bad sources of information.
Same solution though: education.
Yeah, it’s shocking how many people still believe the lockdowns were a good idea despite so much evidence to the contrary in Sweden, etc. and now skyrocketing inflation and interest rates.
People ignore education, grow up stupid. Stupid people vote stupid politiciants into office. Stupid politiciants cut funding to education. Worse education, people grow up stupider.
Its a vicious cycle
I don’t think it’s as simple as that. Science is messy and knowing its limitations is just as important as knowing its conclusion.
Scientific opinion can and should be able to change pretty rapidly, the educational system can’t.
Besides, a cardiologist is highly unlikely to be able to reliably tell whether a neurological study’s conclusions are sound, or not. Let alone someone, who isn’t even a doctor.
To top it all up, the monetary incentives in academia are about as corrupt, as it gets. It wasn’t so long ago, when studies about how smoking tobacco isn’t actually harmful, or addictive, got published in mainstream journals (funded by the tobacco industry, of course).
The result is being taught science that was disproven 20 years ago. I think primary education should focus just as much on critical thinking as it does on learning facts at the very minimum.
I don’t mean cutting edge science. But a basic understanding of physics, mathematics, biology and chemistry.
You can’t understand global warming without physics and mathematics.
You can’t understand a pandemic without biology and mathematics.
And so on
Completely agree. General education from elementary school until the end of high-school feels outdated.
Capitalism has led us to believe the only true value of something is financial. Education shouldn’t just be about positioning you for a good career. We’ve substituted human morals for religious dogma. We need David Lynch to do one more season of Twin Peaks.
I have never agreed with a comment more. Especially re education and lynch.
I think pretty much all problems can be tracked down to financial inequality. We could live in Utopia if money was distributed better.
I will add that I see a lot of people complaining about financial inequality, but then everyone has an iphone/samsung, everyone is using twitter/facebook/instagram, everyone is using Nike/adidas.
We complain about financial inequality and we keep giving the money to the people with most money
Dogmatic belief in ideologies: Christianity, Islam, Marxism, Right, Left
Solution is to, question everything without fear of mental, societal and physical persecution
Just made my own post before even reading the thread! I agree 100%
Greed and people not understanding that it’s not a coincidence that there is 1% owning 99% of wealth. A large majority of the 1% are not “self made men” that “built an emporium from nothing”.
I’m not talking about some communistic solution where we hunt down Elon Musk and take everything from him.
I’m just say saying that it’s fucked up that a lot of people think it’s ok that Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Donald Trump, Steve Bezos etc have or have had periods where they built extreme wealth and paid no taxes at all.
Don’t fret. Humans will be gone very soon.
Everybody, can we all just pause a moment before we tell people how to live their lives?
If someone wants to wear stripes with spots, why do people feel obligated to have an opinion on that? If someone enjoys collecting their toenail clippings, how does that hinder your own ability to live how YOU want?
Nobody is perfectly “normal”, but we all pretend to be, just so we can mock the ones who don’t try to hide their true selves as well.
Why is it anyone’s business?
So many problems would be solved if all countries prioritize sharing clean food, water, energy, and air with all its residents and other countries.
People keep trying to govern based on an old book written thousands of years ago.
We have evolved, our minds have evolved. We now know it’s unfair to treat women unequal. We now know two same sex gender persons can have a family without problems. Why do people keep trying to rule the world with a book written thousands of years ago?
Make politicians work for minimum wage. That way the minimum wage will be guaranteed to be livable, and people will not get into politics in pursuit of money, but for the right reasons like “making the country/state a better place” and other hippie BS.
Nah, then even fewer people will go into it than now, and those that do will have made their money elsewhere / family wealth like it is already.
I don’t know if that’s true. It might actually open it up for activists that basically work for free now. Obviously these things will not cause immediate change, but after a few election cycles, perhaps we would see something. This would require other regulations to work best, like actually making bribes illegal and denying all outside income, like the Presidency in the US is supposed to. We need to get to a point in which politicians are public servants first and foremost.
You should definitely look up how China works - where local politicians have to be civil servants first, and pass exams, etc.
It’s far from perfect either since it means the high-level politicians are all civil servants, but at least it puts a minimum level of meritocracy - and also means the “Deep State” of civil servants is clearer.
Just to clarify, do you mean how China works on paper or in practice?
Problem: Humans
Solution: extinctionNo humans = nothing around to construct the concept of problems or to philosophize on their existence or solutions.
Everything solved!
People stopped listening to themselves, listening to their insides and listening to other people. Everyone is busy, so no one has time anymore to focus. Instead of understanding each other, polarization is preferred, because the later is quicker and easier. People need to slow the hell down again.
But overall the world is still on a good track, a lot of young people care more about certain topics than when I was a kid. That’s overall a positive thing. There are also less wars going on world wide, despite us being more and more under time and resources pressure.
If I could hammer one thing into peoples mind, it would be to to abandon the doom culture and understand that humans are by nature nice, helpful and good people. Only our environment makes people do shitty things and everyone working against this mountain of fake psychology “humans are evil by nature”, does a net positive to our society. People are shit because we treat them like shit not because they are bad.
Ideology. Like adopting a strict ideology and then refusing to hear anything from any other ideology. Like sometimes Capitalism is the solution, sometimes Socialism or Government intervention is the solution. Usually it’s a mixture of both. But no we must divide strictly into our little boxes and demonize anything else.
And of course social political issues which are bound up into ideology no matter if it makes sense or not. Of course that is the wedge used to divide people while the powers that be fill their pockets. By all means let’s all argue about who gets to use what bathroom while food becomes unaffordable and housing becomes a pipe dream.
Based entirely on your comment, I would say the issue isn’t the concept of ideology, but the fact that the ideologies that matter the most and the ones that spread the fastest aren’t the same. After all, the idea that no one should starve is itself an idealogy.
Or I guess maybe the ideology of balanced ideologies!
- Tax accumulated wealth and use it to level the playing field (land value tax, inheritance tax, wealth tax) - it is accumulated wealth that should be taxed, not income.
- Invest in education and research heavily, and focus on STEM + Medicine - stuff like algebra and programming should be taught much earlier.
- Destroy the vestiges of extreme conservatism like monarchism and religion (still very prevalent in Europe).
- Invest in Nuclear Fusion and electrification to alleviate environmental problems without “de-growth”.
- Punish violent crime much more severely (it shouldn’t be the case that a few criminals can commit 100+ crimes freely).
- Introduce a child licence for having children (like we already have for adopting dogs!)
- Introduce ID cards, digital ID, full genetic sequencing and fingerprinting, etc. - this helps both criminal investigations and the delivery of services and healthcare.
The way things are going is scary though. My salary in real-terms has plummeted around 30% since I started a new job 2 years ago due to the weakening currency, high inflation, increasing utility bills (the energy crisis, and inflation), and high interest rates affecting the mortgage at renewal and the maintenance fee (that just went up 15% today!). And I’m lucky to still keep my job, I know a lot of people who haven’t been so fortunate.
And then the so-called “Left” push for “de-growth” and reducing consumption - just making us even poorer (already living without a car is restrictive and a hassle, but it’s so expensive now), doing nothing to combat violent crime, and more concerned with fringe issues like the LGBTQIA2S+ community.
I honestly think if things carry on like this we’ll see the resurgence of real fascism as people face severely declining living standards and lose patience - just look at Zemmour and Bukele for example. And such concentration of power never works out well in the end.
You can’t complain about the dangers of totaliterianism and also make your last two bullet points with a straight face.
I live in a country with ID cards and digital ID now and it’s far from totalitarian. Nice for being able to sort out your taxes and mortgage online though.
This sort of anti-technology stuff is really holding society back (just like the anti-GM, anti-vaccine stuff, etc.)
Tech is fine but applying for permission to have kids (based on what criteria?) and having to present my DNA everywhere to track everything I do is several steps into overbearing state control.
You misconceive what is “degrowth”, it is surely not about making people poorer, outside the rich… Degrowth calls for a radical reassessment of what needs to be produced vs. shrunk, how, by whom, for whom, and under what ownership system. So degrowth has never been about shrinking ‘everything’, ‘everywhere’. And it is not something we could do in the current system, there is nothing to compensate if we ban cars right now or tax carbon for the most vulnerable, hence degrowth is about redistribution.
Introduce a child licence for having children (like we already have for adopting dogs!)
Eugenics already?
Not eugenics but just ensuring that they have a fair start in their life.
It’s bizarre that if you adopt a dog they’ll check how much room you have, any criminal record, your income source, etc. - but you can have a child with none of that.
And then society and the child end up paying for it - via benefit payments, crime, drug problems, etc.
Just simple things like paying a 10k deposit, no recent violent criminal record, etc. would go a long way.
You’re basically saying minorities shouldn’t have children. 10k is insane. If anything, certain things should be subsidized.
I never wrote anything about minorities. A child will cost far, far, far more than 10k - the point is it’d be a deposit that you get back when they’re born to pay for things.
So I agree with 90% of this, and I don’t understand why you’re getting downvoted. That being said, the one thing I can’t get behind is worse punishments for violent crime. I’m not saying violent crime is good, but basically all of the evidence suggest that worse punishments do nothing to curtail it, and in fact make it more likely. The longer someone spends in prison, the less likely they are to reintegrate into society. If the goal is to reduce violent crime, rehabilitation is far more effective than deterrence.
It’s not about putting people off doing, but stopping them re-offending. If they’re in prison for 40 years for murder, they can’t murder someone else. If it’s only 5 years, they can.
This isn’t some theoretical thing either - it’s the current reality in Europe. Almost every criminal has prior convictions, often serious ones.
https://polisen.se/aktuellt/nyheter/2023/mars/atta-ars-fangelse-for-valdtakt-grov-misshandel-och-manniskorov/ - here’s one example:
Gärningsmannen har tidigare dömts för liknande brott, senast 2017 till drygt fyra års fängelse och 2009 till sju års fängelse.
Two prior convictions for sexual violence - then committed a horrific kidnapping and rape after his second release.
Or this one: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-55666623 - already a known sex offender, went on to commit further crimes.
Or this guy - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-56569863 - an illegal asylum seeker who had avoided deportation so far, etc.
There’s one sentence that guarantees no re-offending, and I think we need it for serious violent crime (especially repeat offences).
I don’t disagree with this, but it sounds like you’re talking less about violent crime in general and more about sexual battery and premeditated assault, which makes up a relatively small proportion of violent crime.
Most violent crime is just regular conflict that escalates into throwing punches, and throwing these people in prison is the quickest way to push them away from lawfulness and down the path of crime. Prison is just networking for criminals.
Yeah, I mean like serious, repeat crime. Robbery too - one of my friends was robbed at knife-point and beaten by 4 guys.
The police caught one and he was an undocumented “minor”, since he was considered a “minor” (but they all say that) he was put in a youth holding centre before trial. And then right before trial just walked out as there’s no security, he has no papers and just disappears, free to meet up with his gang and rob more people again.
It’s madness - Europe has become much less safe due to stuff like this. Like it’s one thing to accept refugees, etc. but we need to have absolute zero tolerance for those who end up worsening our own society.
I agree for stuff like an odd bar-fight, or aggressive argument, etc. then it shouldn’t be sentenced near as badly, as they can be rehabilitated and don’t pose a threat to the general public.
Not enough people have the time or ability to take a nice long walk and look for tanuki. To whistle for crows and have them swoop up silently, cautiously, and patiently wait for you to leave a few peanuts on a fence post for them. To take in the moon going through its phases and the lightning of a rainstorm that’s over the next ridge and won’t get to them for another hour or more. To be inspired by whatever may come on a nice long walk.
Solution: Folks need the ability to work less and earn enough. To be satisfied with enough. To be celebrated for their nice long walks with enough and no more.
