I’m much more concerned about crises being an excuse to expand government powers than to privatize or deregulate. That’s the problem in this particular instance too. Both can be bad but expanding government powers is almost always bad.
No. I’m not convinced China is worse than the US in terms of developing anti-human technologies and people living in China can’t boycott China. The point is to get the people in every significant country (including China) to oppose these technologies so strongly that they aren’t able to be developed anywhere. The Chinese military has to employ Chinese people to make its weapons, but if 80% of the population is opposed to these weapons existing and even the foundation of modern technology on which they are built then that is going to be difficult. Even if they were able to only employ those who are fine with WMDs the public’s opposition to modern technology would be a problem for the government maintaining control while developing those weapons and forcing modern technology on the people as a means of controlling them.
Ruling with an iron fist tends to create resistance and without mass surveillance technology an unpopular regime couldn’t keep everyone in line. But if instead most people are in agreement about something being bad (like they are with slavery or pedophilia) then there is much less resistance to enforcement against it (whether that’s centralized or decentralized enforcement) and therefore that thing is more effectively stopped. While lone individuals or small secretive groups could continue doing the bad practice, in terms of technology I don’t think this will matter much because they won’t be able to develop a lot of technology with only a small group of people who aren’t building on other people’s work and their technology also wouldn’t be adopted by a society that is against it.
They work for others. It would be helpful to know in what way they aren’t working for you. And did you try this one? https://zbbb278hfll091.bitchute.com/KmVnLpFsCzAq/jmhFAjqbxnQ.mp4 (49 minutes in)
So something can’t be called an x unless it meets every definition of x? I don’t think that’s how definitions work.
The Bitchute link should work. Here’s one directly to the mp4: https://zbbb278hfll091.bitchute.com/KmVnLpFsCzAq/jmhFAjqbxnQ.mp4. Again, it’s about 49 minutes in that talks about the Europol report.
a son or daughter of human parents
Technically everyone is a child so all marriage is child marriage. Abuse of language can be dangerous, children.
It’s the other way around. Right wing media got popular because people reacted against the rapid devolution of mainstream and left wing political discourse and sought other media. But I’ve accepted that people like this will live and die without ever understanding this.
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
One minute - gonna go drink some drive
Where it all went wrong was the industrial revolution
That sounds like a good place to start. Take it one step at a time. You can even start with just an offline morning a week. You said you like reading books so that’s one thing you can do in those times. I’m sure you have other hobbies or tasks you can do that don’t require digital devices.
Unfortunately most intentional communities don’t last very long and many are cult-like, overly collectivist or based on (what I would consider) wacky ideologies. There’s a few that have lasted and seem reasonable but I haven’t looked into them much yet and doubt I would be able to visit them. My ideal has some overlap with back-to-the-land movements but it goes further in that it strives to ultimately get away from the internet, cars, drugs and other modern tech. I’m not aware of any intentional communities specifically trying to do that.
Yes, they allow books. But unfortunately you wouldn’t be able to join them unless you hold their specific religious convictions.
My hope is that intentional communities can form that support each other so that they are not subject to strong competitive pressures that practically necessitate anti-consumer practices and the use of modern technology that does more harm than good. The central principles would be belief that doing things the natural way is (almost always) best and that societal wellbeing is largely unrelated to efficiency, economics and material goods once the basic needs have been met. No other religion or beliefs would be required. Through their positive example these communities would influence the rest of the world in the right direction too so that we might not become extinct.
To this end I started https://lemmy.today/c/StopTech and https://lemmy.today/c/ParallelSocieties. I’m working on groups on other platforms as well and trying to start a community in the real world.
I definitely think the Amish way of life is happier, healthier and more beneficial to others than American life for the past 100 years. But the way they managed that is by rejecting modern technology with very little picking and choosing like using radios but not phones or cars but not planes. I’m sure when they do pick and choose (e.g., I heard some use pesticides like Roundup) it will usually have negative consequences (see Roundup).
But unfortunately the Amish will die along with everyone else if there isn’t a global stop to technological progress. Forming anti-tech communities is an important step in the right direction but awareness of the issues needs to spread to most people on the planet - and fast.
Agreed. This technology’s existence is a net negative to humanity, whether everyone has it or just the police have it. It all needs to be stopped, no exceptions for any government agency, research lab, corporation and non-profit organization.