Great read - explains how those of us who were fortunate enough to grow up between the 1960s and 2010s experienced a rare reprieve from heavily enforced moral requirements. Now it's back...with a vengeance.
Great bit on how the implications of the word "controversial" in pop culture throughout this period perfectly exemplify what's occured.
Maybe it's rare because it results in what we're seeing. Maybe the 1960s-2010s were the thrill of jumping out of a plane without a parachute thinking we can fly, and now we're starting to realize not only we can't fly, we've just killed ourselves.
A vacuum cannot sustain itself. A truly moral society is a rare thing in history, but the absence of societal control never ends well. Odds are always in favor of things being much, much worse after that period of 'freedom.'
If you take it from the perspective of a degenerate pedo who dresses like a woman, it was absolutely this all encompassing and restricting. As any healthy society should be. For the average non-pedo? No it was about the freest society has ever been.
But you are correct, they weren't strong enough to hold onto their moral fiber when their kids started acting like hippies.
The cultural revolution is far from over. At least half the population hasn't conformed to the woke culture. We are in a brief cultural cease fire with one side grossly over-extended and the other scrambling to rearm.
To be frank, the half of the population who hasn't conformed doesn't matter. The woke revolutionists have the establishment, they have the schools, corporations, governments, etc. They own the narrative.
I'm sure at least half the population didn't agree with 1950s mores either when they were in place...but those people didn't matter.
Until people with our opinion start doing something substantive, we don't matter. Just look at people like Erin O'Toole and Tomi Lehren...supposed "conservatives". People are too afraid of getting cancelled to actually effect change against the new establishment.
One difference is our society in the 1950s was a lot more capable and competent than the one we have today. And if the competency we have in society starts checking out, the regime isn't going to be able to enforce its will very well. As it is it's overleveraged in enforcement capability and heavily depends on voluntary compliance.
How are the DMV Americans running the DC bureaucracy going to enforce their will in for example Montana or Wyoming? Will they even want to?
You're probably right, but it still takes competent people to design and maintain the automation. Part of my job involves automation, and it's a hard task that requires the person doing the automating to have a very deep understanding of the task as well as the limits of the technology that's doing the automating. It's a high-IQ task in a world where our Betters seem hell-bent on lowering the IQ.
I've said it before, but the silver lining in the technocratic oligarchy we live in is that the oligarchs aren't the sort of people to inspire loyalty and are too cheap to buy an approximation of it.
And they're often not smart enough themselves to understand how hard the technical aspects of their technocracy are. They'll talk about something as complicated as (eg.) putting a cold fusion reactor into production the same way they'd talk about an oil change. Which is why they keep getting screwed by offshore engineering projects: they see the dollar signs and hear the promises and don't know enough to know they're being fleeced.
Most of the people who have conformed don't matter either. Have you travelled much recently? There are areas that simply ignore the directives handed down. The point of a cultural revolution is to get everyone marching in lock step and they simply aren't. This Guardian article is the progressives admitting they are on shaky ground.
A sign of how the environment has changed can be seen in the changing tone of the word“controversial”. The term once had a neutral, or even positive, undertone, to denote cutting-edge artwork that challenged us. Now it is used entirely by the media to denote a policy or position they disapprove of, and which you are therefore supposed to disapprove of. It means something beyond the pale of acceptable opinion, a pale that has shrunk as the cultural revolution has ended, illustrated by neologisms like “problematic”.
Now I understand why they named their article "Gamergate controversy".
Great read - explains how those of us who were fortunate enough to grow up between the 1960s and 2010s experienced a rare reprieve from heavily enforced moral requirements. Now it's back...with a vengeance.
Great bit on how the implications of the word "controversial" in pop culture throughout this period perfectly exemplify what's occured.
Maybe it's rare because it results in what we're seeing. Maybe the 1960s-2010s were the thrill of jumping out of a plane without a parachute thinking we can fly, and now we're starting to realize not only we can't fly, we've just killed ourselves.
A vacuum cannot sustain itself. A truly moral society is a rare thing in history, but the absence of societal control never ends well. Odds are always in favor of things being much, much worse after that period of 'freedom.'
If you take it from the perspective of a degenerate pedo who dresses like a woman, it was absolutely this all encompassing and restricting. As any healthy society should be. For the average non-pedo? No it was about the freest society has ever been.
But you are correct, they weren't strong enough to hold onto their moral fiber when their kids started acting like hippies.
The cultural revolution is far from over. At least half the population hasn't conformed to the woke culture. We are in a brief cultural cease fire with one side grossly over-extended and the other scrambling to rearm.
To be frank, the half of the population who hasn't conformed doesn't matter. The woke revolutionists have the establishment, they have the schools, corporations, governments, etc. They own the narrative.
I'm sure at least half the population didn't agree with 1950s mores either when they were in place...but those people didn't matter.
Until people with our opinion start doing something substantive, we don't matter. Just look at people like Erin O'Toole and Tomi Lehren...supposed "conservatives". People are too afraid of getting cancelled to actually effect change against the new establishment.
One difference is our society in the 1950s was a lot more capable and competent than the one we have today. And if the competency we have in society starts checking out, the regime isn't going to be able to enforce its will very well. As it is it's overleveraged in enforcement capability and heavily depends on voluntary compliance.
How are the DMV Americans running the DC bureaucracy going to enforce their will in for example Montana or Wyoming? Will they even want to?
You're probably right, but it still takes competent people to design and maintain the automation. Part of my job involves automation, and it's a hard task that requires the person doing the automating to have a very deep understanding of the task as well as the limits of the technology that's doing the automating. It's a high-IQ task in a world where our Betters seem hell-bent on lowering the IQ.
I've said it before, but the silver lining in the technocratic oligarchy we live in is that the oligarchs aren't the sort of people to inspire loyalty and are too cheap to buy an approximation of it.
And they're often not smart enough themselves to understand how hard the technical aspects of their technocracy are. They'll talk about something as complicated as (eg.) putting a cold fusion reactor into production the same way they'd talk about an oil change. Which is why they keep getting screwed by offshore engineering projects: they see the dollar signs and hear the promises and don't know enough to know they're being fleeced.
Most of the people who have conformed don't matter either. Have you travelled much recently? There are areas that simply ignore the directives handed down. The point of a cultural revolution is to get everyone marching in lock step and they simply aren't. This Guardian article is the progressives admitting they are on shaky ground.
Your conception of the culture war is outmodded. It's about the nature of post-progressivism.
She already was revealed as a grifter... when she got down on her knees for holocaustianity.
Modern politicians are all mostly whores. The Romans would have be disgraced by modern politicians.
That half of the population is "beneath representation." They don't have power and what they think doesn't matter.
Now I understand why they named their article "Gamergate controversy".
England and the rest of the crown's puppets may be totally lost, but there is quite a bit of lively opposition to this bullshit in America still.