You're right, but what really gets me is that the internet was supposed to be the great equalizer, revealing that the emperor had no clothes, but it's almost as if as the corruption becomes more apparent, the more they have to push it to stay on top of the proletariat. It's worrisome where this trend will end up.
Ultimately I guess it depends on whether you're optimistic about human nature, over time.
I think we're seeing a gross abuse of it, esp. from the leaders of the US and the people pulling the strings. But, I'd like to think we improve over time, despite this kind of evil. And there is no doubt in my mind its an evil, perhaps not biblical, but a vast and greedy, sickening selfishness.
Pity we won't be around to see it if and when it turns right, but time is a great healer. I don't think the level of greed we're seeing now can be turned around in a generation.
The problem is realism in foreign policy. Even the nicest kid entering Harvard for a polisci degree is going to have to reconcile information asymmetry / anarchy in international relations with democracy and civil society. It's harder than you think. I once asked a foreign policy friend of mine if ethics entered foreign policy decisions. He sat and thought for about 2 or 3 mins before saying "sometimes, sure, if the stakes aren't too high". On his own this guy wouldn't hurt a fly, and in general he accepts that liberalism and US soft power is sometimes effective, but at his core he's a realist, and realists tap the internet and throw revolutions in the Ukraine.
I'm thinking nonsense. We have to descend to the lowest common denominator to make things work? That seems lazy to me.
The system we have at the moment is geared towards a few, extremely wealthy individuals and companies, and they basically created the system and need to see it continue. And its from the US it came and gets enforced.
There is absolutely no need to have a system we have in the US where the corporations basically call the shots, via campaign funding and revolving door bribery, or for the warmongering. Its like someone holding a gun to your face complaining that the other person "just won't see sense, they refuse to put their gun down". Small wonder, when they're being threatened.
What would make sense for me is for a few people in powerful positions to grow a backbone and start to demand changes; but I think the apparatus is so strong now, that those that do, meet an untimely fate, and the remaining few have courage in the face of certain death/social destruction.
I think we've been had, basically, in a really large way, and I don't see a way out of it. Its a successful, long game play that has won out. Nice if you're part of it, sucks if you're not.
Personally, I don't see much light at the end of the tunnel?
This greed seems cool in some circles--which I can't comprehend. It is not cool in my world. I feel morality is lacking? I don't know how to install morality. I do know this "Just because it's legal, doesn't make it moral" said by a deceased friend of mine.
Idk, but longer term I'd think a co-operative approach would make more sense, and stop destroying the planet for elfish short-term gains.
Crazy idea though. Can't have anything compete with those beautiful oil, fracking, banking, warring people though - they mean well! I mean, its just short term, we'll just cut down all the forests, ruin all the topsoil, drill all the oil, frack all the rocks and lpg, and ... well, we don't care, go fuck yourselves, we made money, and we don't care about children or grandchildren. Cya.
I guess Wolf of Wall St puts that behaviour on a bit of a pedestal. I personally don't know anyone that is that kind of a prick, but presumably they exist.
I think we all know what is selfish, and what is greedy. Some will choose to ignore it though, and/or justify it.
And the Arab Spring was supposed to result in a great liberalization of MENA countries.
I don't know whether it's optimism or naiveté–or likely some mixture of the two–but the western public tends to ignore how large changes in technology and society can (and usually does) tilt the balance of power towards the establishment.
