Reply #15: Why so personal

[dmallind]

Because I don;t think we're about to return to the dark ages it must be because everything is wonderful for me (and by extension I must of course be too clueless and parochial to consider factors external to my own wellbeing)? How about I just don't see it as at all likely that we will see any serious societal instability? How about that that is based on historical precedent where instability of that magnitude almost always requires economic and political disaster far worse than we have or can reasonably expect to see? I left school in an area and time with 20%+ unemployment undergoing serious structural changes to the economy (NE England at the height of the Thatcherite Revolution). There was no descent into anarchy - although the miners's strike had some moments. Russia just went through completely monumental changes with far less of a safety net than we have. No descent into anarchy. Yes Bush has scrwed the pooch and yes we'll have some tougher times than we otherwise would have getting through it, but there's a big gulf between some hard economic choices including a lot of personal hardship by those negatively affected by the necessary changes, and the complete collapse of society as many on this thread are predicting.

I was responding to a post wherwhich specifically referred to "insecure gunwielders" and yet predicted mass unrest. I was simply pointing out the irony.