DocWatts

Anyone who's studied psychology could tell you how unreliable eyewitness testimony is. Not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but for such a huge paradigm shift it feels like the sort of thing we should withhold judgement on until it can be verified to the high standard that would be used if life were discovered on another body in our Solar System. I don't really have a dog in the race on way or another, but I do see alot of overlap between this subject and the larger Conspiracy Theory community.

Surprised this isn't being talked about more than it is. I guess microbes aren't as exiting as grainy footage of flying saucers https://theconversation.com/the-detection-of-phosphine-in-venus-clouds-is-a-big-deal-heres-how-we-can-find-out-if-its-a-sign-of-life-146185

Very well thought out post. I'd like to take a moment to give recognition and praise to the current Pope, Pope Francis, for using his position of authority to advocate for urgent action to combat Climate Change; framing it as an issue of social justice that the world's poorest people will end up shouldering the burden of. Mad props to the guy for using his religious authority to advocate for social responsibility. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06082020/climate-change-pope-francis

I think the catch-22 is that it's generally hard to find Conservatives who are thoughtful and open to growth, because that sort of mindset is inimical towards the rigid thinking needed to maintain that sort of worldview. And the ones that are open minded to growth will have already realized this and left that worldview behind them. While there's alot to be learned by interacting conspiracy theorists or religious fundamentalists, and it's important to understand what attracts people to these ways of thinking, there's plenty of others forums on the internet to do so. I would hope that the selection bias here is such that most of us are aware of the dangers of echo chambers, and that we have enough common sense to have interactions with the real world to counter balance this.

Really hope this is one of those situations where my initial misgivings turn out to be completely unfounded; could be that I might be over reacting somewhat to 2016 without giving enough consideration to the differences between the situations then and now. Welp, guess I'll try to convince who I can to get out and Vote.

Fair point that I agree with wholeheartedly; but is Joe Biden the kind of candidate who would get anyone excited enough to go vote who wasn't going to already? I could see someone like Bernie or Yang encouraging otherwise apathetic people to go vote, but Biden? The fact that much of his support is a reluctant "well at least he's better than Trump" isn't exactly encouraging... I suppose the fact that normies without MAGA hats who voted for Trump in '16 might stay home after seeing Trump make an ass of himself in a debate is an interesting point though.

I guess I don't see the point? As I'm having trouble believing that there's anyone out there who's still undecided as to whether they're on board with on board with Trump's brand of Authoritarianism or not. I know that from a factual standpoint these people must exist, but it's harder for me to put myself in the mindset of an undecided than it is for me to understand a Trump voter. I imagine the more relevant question is whether the potential apathetic person will bother to vote at all in the upcoming election.

Great to hear that Spiral Dynamics is being taught in University classes; I actually listen to a number of podcasts and lectures from people in the world of Academia and don't hear Spiral Dynamics brought up very often. Not to mention that it wasn't a subject that was covered in any of my classes during my time in college.

We don't know that; the mindset that Civilization is doomed so nothing we do matters is highly counterproductive (and I'd go so far as to argue toxic). Yes climate change is going to change the world in profound ways over the upcoming century, but we do have a choice for how to respond. Do we continue down the destructive path that led us to the point, or do we put pressure on our governments to invest in sustainable energy production and agriculture? Do we let corporations have a free reign to destroy the planet , or do we make an attempt to reign in and regulate corporations? Do we stick with the capitalist system that helped get us in to this mess, or do we evolve the system in a way that the social and environmental costs are factored in to the price you pay for something at the supermarket? Yes civilization could collapse at some point, but that's far from inevitable. I've known a handful of conservative people with the "civilization is going to collapse regardless of what I do" mindset, who use that as a rationalization for their highly selfish and short sighted behavior.

Slightly different take on the topic, but Jared Diamond wrote a whole book that uses a number of past societies as Case studies for how societies either succeed or fail in addressing ecological problems that threaten their existence. Excellent systems level approach towards looking at environmental issues through the lens of history, in a way that helps bring a bit of perspective on where we find ourselves today.

Adventure Time introduces the concept of Social Constructs in a way that's approachable for younger people who may be just getting Introduced to the idea.

If anyone is aware of any additional high quality news sources that offer a Yellow perspective on contemporary issues/politics, I'd love to check it out.

Well said.

In regards to the OP, the Roman Empire was also able to stumble along more or less in tact for centuries regardless of whether any individual Roman Emperor was incompetent and/or crazy, before finally succumbing to its internal contradictions and collapsing. Stakes are quite a bit higher these days when the current analog to the Roman Empire posseses nuclear weapons and is capable of triggering a global ecological collapse if things are bungled badly enough.

Thought it might be interesting to start a thread where everyone posts a recommendation for a Podcast/Youtube channel they enjoy, along with maybe a one or two sentence description. I'll kick the thread off for the (highly underappreciated) Martyrmade podcast by Darryl Cooper, in particular his six part series about Jim Jones and the People's Temple Cult. https://www.martyrmade.com/topics/jonestown/ Goes in to a ton of depth about cult mentality, the fragmentation of the American Civil Rights movement, and so much more. He does a great job at covering difficult subject matter with a lot of nuance and empathy.

Also the fact that he's writing these books for the general public, and that he's able to present a nuanced look at the complexities of the systems he's analysing in a way that's understandable for a non specialist is a mark of just how good of a communicator he is.

Great points. In addition to this I think that his travels around the world, having spent much of his working life in places like Papua New Guinea forming relationships with indigenous people, have given him additional perspectives to think about the modern world and the problems it faces.

Glad to see this series get a mention.

Since the subject was brought up, I feel obliged to mention the Maryrmade Podcast's 'Fear and Loathing in the New Jerusalem' series, which felt like an emotional gut punch because of how well the host gets you to empathize with the trauma experienced by both the Israelis and Palestinians in this long and sad conflict. Really in depth and nuanced take that's a wonderful primer for anyone who wants to learn more about the subject. http://www.martyrmade.com/fear-loathing-in-the-new-jerusalem/

Detroit

Transcend and include: capitalism is great at generating wealth, not so great at distributing its gains in an equitable manner, and is also terrible for environmental sustainability. Social democracy is really just a way to improve industrialized capitalism so that it works for a larger portion people, not just an economic elite. Not like social democracies like Sweden don't make heavy use of markets to distribute goods. The hard divide that's drawn between the two systems is rather silly, and usually done for ideological reasons and/or to make a strawman argument.

What's hilarious is that there are people from Blue who don't realize that this is making fun of them, and end up taking a critique of elements of Black culture from stage Green as an affirmation of thier own racist views. Chappele's Show also comes to mind for people in stage Blue / Red misunderstanding and liking something in a way contrary to what the artist intended.

Maybe I'm the odd man out, but after looking at a screen all day for my job, flipping through a physical book is really nice. Might be something particular to my sensibilities, but that subtle mildewy smell from a slightly older book is something I actually kind of miss when reading an ebook. I use simple sticky notes to mark the pages I want to return to, and will use an old school pencil to mark off this section or that.

Yup.

Easier said than done, but if you can frame the idea in a way that's uses some aspect of thier own worldview, you'll have more success. Just off the top of my head, the current Pope, Pope Francis, has been masterful in framing progressive ideals such egalitarianism and environmentalism in a way that religious people can find palatable (ie God gave this world to us, and we have moral duty not to let climate change and pollution destroy this gift from our Creator).