American Turning Point Imminent

[AFTT47]

This is a long video (42 minutes) by Professor Jeffrey David Sachs in which he argues that the present extreme polarization in America is rapidly approaching a breaking point. He argues that the worsening wealth inequality and the people's near-total lack of trust or confidence in the system is unsustainable. It's an excellent speech IMO. Those interested in American politics should give it a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tCGNvQf6Ro

[Mister Agenda]

My continued optimism depends on the USA having fair midterm elections. Which I'm not very optimistic about.

[Fireball]

The chump bunch planted the seed of "rigged elections" in 2016, and they kept it up even after gaining the White House. We're seeing that bear even more tainted fruit, now.

[Leonardo17]

I am currently following the events that followed the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
 
I am naturally appalled by this type of politically motivated murder. To me it’s another wake up call about gun Control. (If you cannot change human nature the least you can do is to reduce their capacity to do harm).
 
But the man is/was a racist, homophobic (even) misogynist who is  pro-Israel and an anti-Semite at the same time. And you wouldn’t believe how the European far right (In England, France even Germany) are idealizing this man even taking back the slogan “Je suis Charlie” (the “We are all Charlie” Slogan that was adopted by people from all ends of the political spectrum to condemn the attacks on the French Magazine Charlie Hebdo in 2015).
 
What is happening is that the far right is gradually losing it. They thought they found the perfect way to brainwash the masses through social media etc. Now they themselves are caught in third alternate reality they thought they had created the vulnerable and weak-minded people among us.
 
If you are looking for an appropriate response to this rather pessimistic trend among those we call “ordinary people”. You may check this web page made by the physicist Neil Degrasse Tyson.
 
 https://neildegrassetyson.com/commentary...ationalia/
 
In this utopic society described by the physicist the constitution of the country is “All policy shall be based on the weight of evidence”.
 
Let me go on with a quote from the web page:

---

In Rationalia, the Constitution stipulates that a body of convincing evidence needs to exist in support of an idea before any Policy can be based on it. In such a country, data gathering, careful observations, and experimentation would be happening all the time, influencing practically every aspect of our modern lives.
 
 In Rationalia, since weight of evidence is built into the Constitution, everyone would be trained from an early age on how to obtain and analyze evidence, and how to draw conclusions from it.
 
In Rationalia, you would have complete freedom to be irrational. You just don’t have the freedom to base policy on your ideas if the weight of evidence does not support it. For this reason, Rationalia might just be the freest country in the world.
 
In Rationalia, for example, if you want to introduce capital punishment you’d need to propose a reason for it.

In Rationalia, if you want to fund art in schools, you simply propose a reason why. Does it increase creativity in the citizenry? Is creativity good for culture and society at large? Is creativity good for everyone no matter your chosen profession? These are testable questions. They just require verifiable research to establish answers. The debate then ends quickly in the face of evidence, and we move on to other questions.
 
In Rationalia, citizens would pity newscasters for presenting their opinions as facts. Everyone would have a heightened capacity to spot bullshit wherever and whenever it arose.
 
In Rationalia, a diverse, pluralistic land, you are free to practice religion. You would just have a hard-time basing policy on it. Policy, by most intended meanings of the word, are rules that apply to everyone, but most religions have rules that apply only to themselves.

---

Of course Rationalia is not really applicable to the situation of any nation on this planet. But it’s still the exact opposite of populism.
 
To this I want to add my conviction that Religion and politics it’s such a bad mixture because, again, it’s the opposite of Rationalia utopia and turns religion into something %100 irrational. (Ex: Modi in India, Political Islam in the Middle East, MAGA and affiliates in the US, Israel under Netanyahu)

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^As much as I admire Dr. Tyson (a lot), his Rationalia suffers from the same flaw as every other utopian blueprint: it fails to take human nature into account.  Human beings are not rational animals - we are rationalizing animals.

Boru

[awty]

I am currently following the events that followed the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
 
I am naturally appalled by this type of politically motivated murder. To me it’s another wake up call about gun Control. (If you cannot change human nature the least you can do is to reduce their capacity to do harm).
 
But the man is/was a racist, homophobic (even) misogynist who is  pro-Israel and an anti-Semite at the same time. And you wouldn’t believe how the European far right (In England, France even Germany) are idealizing this man even taking back the slogan “Je suis Charlie” (the “We are all Charlie” Slogan that was adopted by people from all ends of the political spectrum to condemn the attacks on the French Magazine Charlie Hebdo in 2015).
 
What is happening is that the far right is gradually losing it. They thought they found the perfect way to brainwash the masses through social media etc. Now they themselves are caught in third alternate reality they thought they had created the vulnerable and weak-minded people among us.
 
If you are looking for an appropriate response to this rather pessimistic trend among those we call “ordinary people”. You may check this web page made by the physicist Neil Degrasse Tyson.
 
 https://neildegrassetyson.com/commentary...ationalia/
 
In this utopic society described by the physicist the constitution of the country is “All policy shall be based on the weight of evidence”.
 
Let me go on with a quote from the web page:

---

In Rationalia, the Constitution stipulates that a body of convincing evidence needs to exist in support of an idea before any Policy can be based on it. In such a country, data gathering, careful observations, and experimentation would be happening all the time, influencing practically every aspect of our modern lives.
 
 In Rationalia, since weight of evidence is built into the Constitution, everyone would be trained from an early age on how to obtain and analyze evidence, and how to draw conclusions from it.
 
In Rationalia, you would have complete freedom to be irrational. You just don’t have the freedom to base policy on your ideas if the weight of evidence does not support it. For this reason, Rationalia might just be the freest country in the world.
 
In Rationalia, for example, if you want to introduce capital punishment you’d need to propose a reason for it.

In Rationalia, if you want to fund art in schools, you simply propose a reason why. Does it increase creativity in the citizenry? Is creativity good for culture and society at large? Is creativity good for everyone no matter your chosen profession? These are testable questions. They just require verifiable research to establish answers. The debate then ends quickly in the face of evidence, and we move on to other questions.
 
In Rationalia, citizens would pity newscasters for presenting their opinions as facts. Everyone would have a heightened capacity to spot bullshit wherever and whenever it arose.
 
In Rationalia, a diverse, pluralistic land, you are free to practice religion. You would just have a hard-time basing policy on it. Policy, by most intended meanings of the word, are rules that apply to everyone, but most religions have rules that apply only to themselves.

---

Of course Rationalia is not really applicable to the situation of any nation on this planet. But it’s still the exact opposite of populism.
 
To this I want to add my conviction that Religion and politics it’s such a bad mixture because, again, it’s the opposite of Rationalia utopia and turns religion into something %100 irrational. (Ex: Modi in India, Political Islam in the Middle East, MAGA and affiliates in the US, Israel under Netanyahu)

One of Kirk's talking points was that the price of having the second amendment is that people die.

Do tell.  He picked one of the hills he was willing to die on....and he did.

[The Grand Nudger]

To this I want to add my conviction that Religion and politics it’s such a bad mixture because, again, it’s the opposite of Rationalia utopia and turns religion into something %100 irrational. (Ex: Modi in India, Political Islam in the Middle East, MAGA and affiliates in the US, Israel under Netanyahu)

Religion is politics, and to the extent that it's opposite to rational thought that's only because a particular religion insists.  No one is doing that to those religions.  Theyre not being turned into anything.  That's their fundamental nature.

[Thumpalumpacus]

To this I want to add my conviction that Religion and politics it’s such a bad mixture because, again, it’s the opposite of Rationalia utopia and turns religion into something %100 irrational. (Ex: Modi in India, Political Islam in the Middle East, MAGA and affiliates in the US, Israel under Netanyahu)

Religion is politics, and to the extent that it's opposite to rational thought that's only because a particular religion insists.  No one is doing that to those religions.  Theyre not being turned into anything.  That's their fundamental nature.

Yet that doesn't prevent a firewall. Look at Western Europe.

[The Grand Nudger]

In theory, sure, but not in practice, and to the extent that we're willing to lay aside that the history and boundaries of western european nations were written by religious politics, and that they currently have their own overtly religious and ascendant right wing movements, the hypothetical bulwark in those nations is itself a secular civil religion. Same as here.

[Thumpalumpacus]

In theory, sure, but not in practice, and to the extent that we're willing to lay aside that the history and boundaries of western european nations were written by religious politics, and that they currently have their own overtly religious and ascendant right wing movements, the hypothetical bulwark in those nations is itself a secular civil religion.  Same as here.

If everything's a religion, then nothing's a religion. What you're arguing is nonfalsifiable under those circumstances, so I won't bother any more.