Polite discourse appreciated, even without agreement. When I read Bush
bought a ranch in the boondocks of Paraguay, it was obvious to me that
he feared revolution.
http://www.daybrown.org/newomen/newomen.html is a
vision of such a collapse that I first composed a decade ago. Since its
all digital, I update it every couple years, and expect to do that again
after the election.
If we have an election. My take on Machiavelli suggests aristocracies
always corrupt republics, thereby impoverishing all lower classes, and
then a demagogue arises out of nowhere to seize all power and rebalance
the books. My take on Confucius is that he warns the aristocrats to not
let things go that far, and that there wont be any tidy hideouts from a
mass of hungry desperate peasants.
The fact that Jared Diamond's latest "Collapse" sold so well is a clue
that some of us realize the danger you refer to. The global markets seem
to have stabilized, but that remains worrisome. And its not like
rationnal discourse here will have any effect; its obvious overwhelming
numbers of posters are locked into group think of either the left or
right, and when you parse out the positions of the coalitions of either
camp you see they are logically inconsistent.
OTOH, so much irrationality suggests a slide twards anarchy, BOTOH, you
cant ever tell just when the lunatics'll try to break out of the asylum.
The advice of ancient sages, both Oriental and Occidental, that the best
life had to offer was in tending a country garden, never seemed so wise.
And with so many moving out of the urban areas (the census bureau's new
and fastest growing demographic, "X-urbs), it creates job opportunities
urbanites are unaware of.
There are only personal solutions, no political policy choices. What we
here think does not matter; all the passion displayed is evidence of the
Untied States of Denial most people live in. Like religious zealots,
they are all so sure of themselves. "Thou protest too much".
