I am the optimist with which you did not converse, and I believe my optimism is quietly, even secretly, shared by many.
Yes, things may get worse, but not catastrophically. And we will (in the West, anyway) continue our 2-steps-forward-1-step-back progress.
Still, I will not support my optimism with argument (here anyway), and in any case, I acknowledge I could be completely wrong, but I do feel the need to express this opinion to you now, and really, I wonder why that is.
Perhaps, as I enjoy your writing, I feel the urge to cheer you up! I judge you deserve a better future than all those pessimists are forever worried about.
I did not know Ted K. was a cult hero to some millennials. Interesting. Also made me think, on MLK day, of his statement linking violence at home with the violence the US empire fosters abroad.
"I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed, without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world - my own government." MLK
I think one issue with online discourse is that most people are terrible at expressing themselves literately. The write like they speak and then rarely edit or consider the message they're sending. they write with the expectation that sarcasm is obvious; they can't moderate tone yet expect it to be inferred. And to further the problem, these behaviors are rewarded by algorithms that expressly promote hot-takes.
Obviously this isn't the only issue, just one of many, and as bad as people may be at writing, they're just as bad at reading.
I was alive during the Unibomber days and remember his arrest. I remember the manifesto being printed in the NYT. I've read it. I thought it was pretty low quality, but I can understand why it seems fresh to young eyes. I'd have to dig it up and go through it again to find the points I disagree on, but my memory is that his analysis is correct but his conclusions are primitive and narrowly focused on his grievances.
Look carefully all the time everywhere for sociopaths lurking...because it's definitely not the government with billions of dollars that go towards weapons. But watch out! Those bogeymen are coming for us sometime soon!
Thank you, PJ'sR.
I am the optimist with which you did not converse, and I believe my optimism is quietly, even secretly, shared by many.
Yes, things may get worse, but not catastrophically. And we will (in the West, anyway) continue our 2-steps-forward-1-step-back progress.
Still, I will not support my optimism with argument (here anyway), and in any case, I acknowledge I could be completely wrong, but I do feel the need to express this opinion to you now, and really, I wonder why that is.
Perhaps, as I enjoy your writing, I feel the urge to cheer you up! I judge you deserve a better future than all those pessimists are forever worried about.
Thanks! I always hope for the best but prepare for the worst. But maybe a little more optimism would serve me well
I did not know Ted K. was a cult hero to some millennials. Interesting. Also made me think, on MLK day, of his statement linking violence at home with the violence the US empire fosters abroad.
"I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed, without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world - my own government." MLK
Good article. Keep 'em coming!
You would be surprised. Very good quote from MLK- especially these days!
I think one issue with online discourse is that most people are terrible at expressing themselves literately. The write like they speak and then rarely edit or consider the message they're sending. they write with the expectation that sarcasm is obvious; they can't moderate tone yet expect it to be inferred. And to further the problem, these behaviors are rewarded by algorithms that expressly promote hot-takes.
Obviously this isn't the only issue, just one of many, and as bad as people may be at writing, they're just as bad at reading.
I was alive during the Unibomber days and remember his arrest. I remember the manifesto being printed in the NYT. I've read it. I thought it was pretty low quality, but I can understand why it seems fresh to young eyes. I'd have to dig it up and go through it again to find the points I disagree on, but my memory is that his analysis is correct but his conclusions are primitive and narrowly focused on his grievances.
Look carefully all the time everywhere for sociopaths lurking...because it's definitely not the government with billions of dollars that go towards weapons. But watch out! Those bogeymen are coming for us sometime soon!