by nature to run modern western democracies of, by and for the people. They can do dictatorships that oppress many to serve a few, but even those tend to fail after a few decades at most. That's after watching them for decades fail to care and/or be able to understand that what allowed people to struggle along enough to produce new generations for 20,000 years before won't keep 300,000,000 people alive.
Liberals get it and moderate conservatives can face it, but I haven't met one strong conservative yet who wondered how THIS for world population below should affect their attitude toward government. 20,000 years of people living basically as we always had, then the industrial revolution with population taking off like a rocket.
Or THIS for growth of life expectancy (which is virtually identical to the first):
Or THIS for productivity, or why we need so many closets and cupboards and big garages now instead of just what we can carry as we follow food around through the seasons.
They agree these are mostly good things for us all but don't get that, without the systems that have been developed in the last second or so of mankind's life to manage new realities, there would be crashes and most of us would die. How many of any of us have watched Puerto Rico and wondered what (IF) we'd be eating or drinking next week if a crash took down the critical support systems of our nation. Such as by pandemic.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read