Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Chebucto Regional Softball Club

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. If anyone tells you that they can explain all of the craziness of the world in a single theory be skeptical.
A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.

If anyone tells you that they can explain all of the craziness of the world in a single theory be skeptical.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
27 Posts 12 Posters 8 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • ? Guest

    @futurebird

    I have references!

    We know the super rich are worried, they straight up asked a tech futurist about their bunker plans.

    Link Preview Image
    The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse

    Tech billionaires are buying up luxurious bunkers to survive a societal collapse they helped create, but like everything they do, it has unintended consequences

    favicon

    the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

    Or from "we're not in this together: There is no universal politics of climate change "

    "Tillerson and those he works with are not in some kind of shadowy conspiracy. The Rex Tillersons of the world have taken a look at the same data, the same trends, the same underlying social and political conditions, and they have noticed that in the probable world in which nothing changes for them, business-as-usual, they end up on the “winning” side of a sharp global and local dividing line. Every structural incentive serves to reinforce such thinking. The best outcome in such a position is to push on with business-as-usual; the costs of climate change will largely be borne by those who already bear the cost today. Indeed, as I will argue, that other people will be bearing those costs helps keep the system going as long as possible and makes the Rex Position of maximal extraction for maximal maintenance, or cashing out, that much better. Even modestly successful climate mitigation and adaptation for the vast majority of people would require socioeconomic and political changes that would pose a steep loss to the Rex Position.

    Link Preview Image
    We’re Not in This Together | Ajay Singh Chaudhary

    One of the most common misconceptions concerning climate change is that it produces, or even requires, a united humanity.

    favicon

    The Baffler (thebaffler.com)

    The Trump administration makes so much more sense as a smash and grab trying to steal many resource for the super rich as they can, while letting the ordinary people die.

    Heck even the push for AI, fits in with this story of the super rich looking to replace their dependence on the working class they're trying to kill off.

    (edit fixed sentence that was incompletely edited)

    ? Offline
    ? Offline
    Guest
    wrote last edited by
    #14
    @futurebird @alienghic They're also doing this so they can hide from the revolutions that will likely result from all of this. 😠
    myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • ? Guest
      @futurebird @alienghic They're also doing this so they can hide from the revolutions that will likely result from all of this. 😠
      myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
      myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
      myrmepropagandist
      wrote last edited by
      #15

      @tk @alienghic

      Underestimating the effectiveness of crowbars.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • ? Guest

        @futurebird

        I have references!

        We know the super rich are worried, they straight up asked a tech futurist about their bunker plans.

        Link Preview Image
        The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse

        Tech billionaires are buying up luxurious bunkers to survive a societal collapse they helped create, but like everything they do, it has unintended consequences

        favicon

        the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

        Or from "we're not in this together: There is no universal politics of climate change "

        "Tillerson and those he works with are not in some kind of shadowy conspiracy. The Rex Tillersons of the world have taken a look at the same data, the same trends, the same underlying social and political conditions, and they have noticed that in the probable world in which nothing changes for them, business-as-usual, they end up on the “winning” side of a sharp global and local dividing line. Every structural incentive serves to reinforce such thinking. The best outcome in such a position is to push on with business-as-usual; the costs of climate change will largely be borne by those who already bear the cost today. Indeed, as I will argue, that other people will be bearing those costs helps keep the system going as long as possible and makes the Rex Position of maximal extraction for maximal maintenance, or cashing out, that much better. Even modestly successful climate mitigation and adaptation for the vast majority of people would require socioeconomic and political changes that would pose a steep loss to the Rex Position.

        Link Preview Image
        We’re Not in This Together | Ajay Singh Chaudhary

        One of the most common misconceptions concerning climate change is that it produces, or even requires, a united humanity.

        favicon

        The Baffler (thebaffler.com)

        The Trump administration makes so much more sense as a smash and grab trying to steal many resource for the super rich as they can, while letting the ordinary people die.

        Heck even the push for AI, fits in with this story of the super rich looking to replace their dependence on the working class they're trying to kill off.

        (edit fixed sentence that was incompletely edited)

        Michael BuschM This user is from outside of this forum
        Michael BuschM This user is from outside of this forum
        Michael Busch
        wrote last edited by
        #16

        @alienghic @futurebird

        Disaster preppers are unaware of just how miserable it would be to be stuck in a bunker with nobody but them.

        myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • Michael BuschM Michael Busch

          @alienghic @futurebird

          Disaster preppers are unaware of just how miserable it would be to be stuck in a bunker with nobody but them.

          myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
          myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
          myrmepropagandist
          wrote last edited by
          #17

          @michael_w_busch

          Also unaware of how much the world would enjoy them being in there.

          ? 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • myrmepropagandistF myrmepropagandist

            @michael_w_busch

            Also unaware of how much the world would enjoy them being in there.

            ? Offline
            ? Offline
            Guest
            wrote last edited by
            #18

            @futurebird @michael_w_busch

            I really Douglas Rushkoff had interviewed the guy with embassy security experience more.

            In the article he mentions that after talking to the billionaires panicking about how to maintain control over their guards, a guy with real world security experience approached him and shared his plans for responding to "the event".

            "He felt certain that the “event” – a grey swan, or predictable catastrophe triggered by our enemies, Mother Nature, or just by accident –was inevitable. He had done a Swot analysis – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats – and concluded that preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one. “By coincidence,” he explained, “I am setting up a series of safe haven farms in the NYC area. These are designed to best handle an ‘event’ and also benefit society as semi-organic farms. Both within three hours’ drive from the city – close enough to get there when it happens.”"

            I feel like "preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one" is an excellent insight.

            Michael BuschM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • ? Guest

              @futurebird @michael_w_busch

              I really Douglas Rushkoff had interviewed the guy with embassy security experience more.

              In the article he mentions that after talking to the billionaires panicking about how to maintain control over their guards, a guy with real world security experience approached him and shared his plans for responding to "the event".

              "He felt certain that the “event” – a grey swan, or predictable catastrophe triggered by our enemies, Mother Nature, or just by accident –was inevitable. He had done a Swot analysis – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats – and concluded that preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one. “By coincidence,” he explained, “I am setting up a series of safe haven farms in the NYC area. These are designed to best handle an ‘event’ and also benefit society as semi-organic farms. Both within three hours’ drive from the city – close enough to get there when it happens.”"

              I feel like "preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one" is an excellent insight.

              Michael BuschM This user is from outside of this forum
              Michael BuschM This user is from outside of this forum
              Michael Busch
              wrote last edited by
              #19

              @alienghic @futurebird

              My thought reading that article was that "safe haven farms" are also not actual prepardness for disasters.

              Where does he imagine he would be getting fertilizer from?

              How does he imagine he would survive a hurricane running over them?

              Who is running the hospital that does not exist on them?

              And so on.

              Forcing him to confront that might have made him realize "preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one" actually means.

              myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • secretslothS secretsloth

                @futurebird I went to an upper middle class school near DC, and for ages could not figure out why we were taught about climate change ("worst case scenario, we could reach a grim point in ~50 years," graduated 04,) when the "leaders" these kids were being groomed to be were denying this. Clearly, they have known for a long time. But then I realized... well exactly. Of course they knew. They probably knew it was worse than that. But the "leadership" is expected to learn how to lie about it.

                ? Offline
                ? Offline
                Guest
                wrote last edited by
                #20

                @secretsloth @futurebird I see part of the problem we have today is that some of these people have been simmering in the lies for so long that they legitimately don't believe the truth anymore and really do think that climate change isn't real, the rich who are fighting against climate reforms have empowered true believers and the looniest subnormals, like Alex Jones or Trump, who are just fundamentally unserious people. Anyone who understands and isn't a total loser would do *something* to mitigate the effects if they had the resources and power, even repressive autocracies like China know they have to do something and are doing it, but the US "leadership" has lost the plot.

                myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • myrmepropagandistF myrmepropagandist

                  They don't even want people to realize that the problem is real.

                  That's not leadership.

                  tuban_muzuruT This user is from outside of this forum
                  tuban_muzuruT This user is from outside of this forum
                  tuban_muzuru
                  wrote last edited by
                  #21

                  @futurebird

                  I must admit, I feel defeated.

                  Timeframe:
                  From 1958 to 2025 is 67 years.

                  Total estimated extinctions:
                  150 species/day
                  ×365 days/year
                  ×67 years
                  ≈3,668,250 species

                  myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • ? Guest

                    @secretsloth @futurebird I see part of the problem we have today is that some of these people have been simmering in the lies for so long that they legitimately don't believe the truth anymore and really do think that climate change isn't real, the rich who are fighting against climate reforms have empowered true believers and the looniest subnormals, like Alex Jones or Trump, who are just fundamentally unserious people. Anyone who understands and isn't a total loser would do *something* to mitigate the effects if they had the resources and power, even repressive autocracies like China know they have to do something and are doing it, but the US "leadership" has lost the plot.

                    myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                    myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                    myrmepropagandist
                    wrote last edited by
                    #22

                    @raven667 @secretsloth

                    Trump knows it's real, or is listening to people who do.

                    That is why he wants Canada and Greenland.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Michael BuschM Michael Busch

                      @alienghic @futurebird

                      My thought reading that article was that "safe haven farms" are also not actual prepardness for disasters.

                      Where does he imagine he would be getting fertilizer from?

                      How does he imagine he would survive a hurricane running over them?

                      Who is running the hospital that does not exist on them?

                      And so on.

                      Forcing him to confront that might have made him realize "preparing for calamity required us to take the very same measures as trying to prevent one" actually means.

                      myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                      myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                      myrmepropagandist
                      wrote last edited by futurebird@sauropods.win
                      #23

                      @michael_w_busch @alienghic

                      There is no wonderful modern way of life with microwave food and movies on demand without millions and millions of people.

                      You can last ten years, but not twenty. Your kids will live like subsistence farmers.

                      If we want to keeps this? We have to keep it all.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • tuban_muzuruT tuban_muzuru

                        @futurebird

                        I must admit, I feel defeated.

                        Timeframe:
                        From 1958 to 2025 is 67 years.

                        Total estimated extinctions:
                        150 species/day
                        ×365 days/year
                        ×67 years
                        ≈3,668,250 species

                        myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                        myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                        myrmepropagandist
                        wrote last edited by
                        #24

                        @tuban_muzuru

                        Part of me has become detached to deal with it. Because in the long line of this planet's history other destructive species have existed, thrived and died. Biodiversity ebbs, flows. So really we are destroying all of this for ourselves. We will never get to see or know what we have destroyed.

                        Are we exceptional enough to realize and minimize further loss?

                        Or are we just another creature that will spam the fossil record with our numerous bones?

                        mhagdornM 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • myrmepropagandistF myrmepropagandist

                          @tuban_muzuru

                          Part of me has become detached to deal with it. Because in the long line of this planet's history other destructive species have existed, thrived and died. Biodiversity ebbs, flows. So really we are destroying all of this for ourselves. We will never get to see or know what we have destroyed.

                          Are we exceptional enough to realize and minimize further loss?

                          Or are we just another creature that will spam the fossil record with our numerous bones?

                          mhagdornM This user is from outside of this forum
                          mhagdornM This user is from outside of this forum
                          mhagdorn
                          wrote last edited by
                          #25

                          @futurebird @tuban_muzuru that's exactly how I see. I totally agree with your thread. I would add to your assessment that climate change is already driving some of the conflicts directly.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • myrmepropagandistF myrmepropagandist

                            If anyone tells you that they can explain all of the craziness of the world in a single theory be skeptical. The world is complex and many factors drive history.

                            I do think there is one vector of pressure that we don't talk about directly very often that is playing a role in a lot of political edginess. From nativism, to the rightward swing of the UK and US the silent actor is climate change.

                            Because at this point wealthy people know that it is real and I think some of them are panicking.

                            craignicolC This user is from outside of this forum
                            craignicolC This user is from outside of this forum
                            craignicol
                            wrote last edited by
                            #26

                            @futurebird the single theory people know exactly what they're doing. It's called depluralisation, turning all your complex problems into one single manageable hatred "blame the immigrants, blame women..."

                            It's exactly how those in power try to distract those without power

                            Link Preview Image
                            EIP Explainer: Understanding radicalisation | EIP

                            What do we know about the process that turns youngsters into single-truth adherents, or possibly terrorists? […]

                            favicon

                            (www.eip.org)

                            myrmepropagandistF 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • craignicolC craignicol

                              @futurebird the single theory people know exactly what they're doing. It's called depluralisation, turning all your complex problems into one single manageable hatred "blame the immigrants, blame women..."

                              It's exactly how those in power try to distract those without power

                              Link Preview Image
                              EIP Explainer: Understanding radicalisation | EIP

                              What do we know about the process that turns youngsters into single-truth adherents, or possibly terrorists? […]

                              favicon

                              (www.eip.org)

                              myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                              myrmepropagandistF This user is from outside of this forum
                              myrmepropagandist
                              wrote last edited by
                              #27

                              @craignicol

                              something isn't working with that link?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0

                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • 1
                              • 2
                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups