How Do We Make Society Better?

[_Ceeboo]

Ceeboo don't ignore the remainder of Gunnar's comments.

I didn't.

He makes good sense.

That reads a lot like an opinion.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Jersey Girl]

That reads a lot like an opinion.

Peace,
Ceeboo

So did my comments on transforming the educational system and I think those made some sense as well.

[_Uncle Ed]

I am so "over myself". The world fascinates with its looming imbalances, particularly the rising human population. That, really, is the core problem causing everything to teeter toward catastrophe.

And opinions change so rapidly that it is quite astonishing to look back on my life and see where "now" and "then" don't fit together at all. "Then" I had plenty of children. If I were starting a family "now", with how I view the world now, I would not have nearly as many children. Back "then" I had a religious world view compatible with Mormonism, or, Judeo-Christianity in general: I was living in anticipation of "the millennium" being imminent. No longer. Meanwhile the world's population has doubled and almost tripled in my short lifespan. Wild animal populations have continued to fade until they number less than ten percent of total life on the planet (c. 100 years ago wild animals numbered ninety percent of total life). (I won't defend these figures; they are inculcated from a variety of sources, many or most of them liberal or "tree hugger" in origin: but I don't doubt the point that they are making.)

So I do not view the world of humans as I once did. My place in it is insignificant. But so is every other common individual's place. Together we form a considerable problem.

The solution is NOT Gov't mandated educational content, forced birth control, compulsory education on how to raise a child, etc. and etc. and etc. Proposing that Gov't get even more involved in our private lives, and push control, control, control upon us in continually intrusive ways is no kind of LIFE. So what if we "save the planet" by micro managing diet, family size and composition and thoughts? What is the point. What is it for? It isn't FUN!

So far every suggestion to "save the planet" always involves more of Jersey Girl's list of fixes or similar control freak "solutions" to the reality of too many stupid humans on the planet. Soylent Green portrayed the attitude toward the "peasants" very well. I appeal to that movie only to illustrate my point: that is no LIFE. Total Gov't control of everything, including where and how to breathe ('cause that ain't livin').

Reality check: food supply is the key to burgeoning population. Every other problem but starvation simply gets bigger as we produce more and more people and the food to feed them. This planet got along swimmingly when humans numbered around a billion. And I would shoot for that number as an ideal.

The single most efficacious birth control is affluency. Really well off people do not want lots of children: they want lots of time to devote to the one or two that they opt to have, and to play and work at what they love. Birth rates drop off to sustainability (virtual zero growth, and even slight reduction in population) as a society attains genuine, confident affluence. The more opulent a society is the smaller its birth rate. So let's get the poverty out of the equation any way we can, short of forcing it, of course.

If a developing nation cannot feed itself (and they can't already) what do we do? Rushing food stuffs to keep people from starving only provides the control freaks there with more storage and black market supplies, i.e. our "aid" only aids and abets terrorists and tyrants. We can't go in everywhere and use military control to put down the control freaks and tyrants. And even if we did, then feeding the masses of unwashed and ignorant would only feed the problem of their huge reproductive problem.

I am afraid that Asimov's "prophetic" view of the first quarter of the 21st century is going to have to play out: "the plague", a pandemic, is going to have to sweep off billions of people first. When the food is inadequate enough to sustain sufficient nutritional levels, the people get sickly and then the plague takes a hold and literally goes viral. The last time this occurred across the known world, it carried off a quarter and more of Europe's population within c. two years. Over the next half century, through endemic outbreaks, along with wars (notably the Hundred Years War and its bastard children, the ravages of the unemployed mercenary bands), Europe's general population dropped by half or more.

A 21st century equivalent would see the end of this century with a surviving human world population of c. over three billion. That would be a good dent in the problem right there. It might be possible to develop the largely depopulated countries (for it would be almost entirely the "developing countries" which lost most of those billions) at that point. And by "develop", I mean affluence building in them, such that they have no desire or need to have large families. Like in the West generally today.

Once human population is on the steady decline (toward c. a billion or so worldwide), the issues connected to our species, such as declining wild animal populations and natural balances in our wildernesses, etc., will resume themselves. We won't have to do a damned thing except keep our human footprint sustainably small.

[_Water Dog]

Do the forum a favor and move along. You contribute nothing

[_Jersey Girl]

The solution is NOT Gov't mandated educational content,

Who do you think mandates curriculum right now?

[_Ceeboo]

How do we make society better?

Government mandated picnics that force opposing political views to share pulled pork sandwiches and a smile.

It might work?

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Uncle Ed]

The solution is NOT Gov't mandated educational content,

Who do you think mandates curriculum right now?

What is Common Core? Why do States get Fed funding if they teach Common Core?

[_I have a question]

How do we make society better?

Government mandated picnics that force opposing political views to share pulled pork sandwiches and a smile.

It might work?

Peace,
Ceeboo

Not for vegetarians.
(But I’m in!)

[_Xenophon]

How do we make society better?

Government mandated picnics that force opposing political views to share pulled pork sandwiches and a smile.

It might work?

Peace,
Ceeboo

Not for vegetarians.
(But I’m in!)

Perhaps the food choices could be variable. Even some meat eaters can't eat pork.

Ceeboo, I think your suggestion certainly has merit and it isn't too far off from MeDotOrg's idea of riding the subway together. I find that a lot of bigotry and division can be alleviated from exposure and shared experience.

[_Ceeboo]

I find that a lot of bigotry and division can be alleviated from exposure and shared experience.

I think you're most certainly right. (no pun intended with my word choice of "right")

Peace,
Ceeboo