Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Given how the Us government treats its own people... I am still surprised if this is a thing.

I mean "Vietnam syndrome" was a term for how people lose the taste for war because they realize the weight of lives and lead to the US government to attempt to control war coverage (to their current VERY successful level. To the extent where you could ask a room of 100 people about a recent massacre committed by the US and have none of them be able to answer) in very dishonest and sometimes repugnant ways.

There is the Patriot Act with came into play for reasons that were questionable but understood... that never went away because it was just an excuse to enact a law for the government's further surveillance on its own people. Then further surveillance laws were enacted.

There are the corporate laws that benefit Hollywood or large music labels against its own citizens.

There is the systematic corruption within the political system that is firmly entrenched as well as stupid party dynamics that makes the government look like a bunch of clowns whenever you hear the word "Filibuster"

Yet NONE of these are the reasons for this dissent to my knowledge.

My guess is everyone is just grumpy because of the recession. The United States is interesting because none of what I say is a conspiracy, the US is very open about how dastardly they can be.

[Morrigi]

There are also plenty of things derided as conspiracy theories that are in fact referenced in government documents.

[Frumple]

Depends on what you mean by "dissent", OP. People are kinda' annoyed (which is normal, really.) and (some of) the younger generations are starting to cotton on to just how badly they've been fucked over by the folks that came before 'em, but... there's not really much to it, s'far as I've seen. There's no great rising enmity, no notable powderkeg situation, no... anything, really. Little bit of political whatever as the parties react to demographic/ideological shifts but... that's about it. Vast majority of folks are pretty content with their bread, circus, and family raisin' and the situation as is isn't really messing with that enough to rustle any a notable amount of feathers. Conservative elements are getting a bit more shrill, but as others have noted (in other threads) that seems to be because they're becoming less relevant and getting a bit desperate about it.

A continuing rise in dislike of Obama is... not terribly surprising, though, especially among former supporters. Dude's presided over some pretty nasty/hypocritical shit and even his fairly impressive PR work isn't entirely covering for that anymore.

[bulborbish]

In the short term, dissent will do jack to change politics in America, simply because the people with the influence to actually do something are the ones benefiting from the current system.

In the long run, I expect some change, but more due to the demographic shift when the Youngest Generations overtake the oldest in voting. Then, their exhaustion with the current system will see a shift from a Conservative Corporate Society to a Liberal Not as Corporate Society. Again, the dissent will still only flow from the current means of altering the system.



Also, on the Gold Standard: It is just as Arbitrary as the current economic system, just on the price of one good instead of the Strength of the Entire Market which is what we follow now. Similarly, most of the nations of the world have switched to the current system because it means your currency as a whole is stronger overall, though more variation of value of currency would occur.

Despite what some supporting the Gold Standard are saying, all it will do is reduce what effects the currency to Gold Prices, which have been unreliable enough in the past that it may not be worth establishing them now and facing the same fate.

[Eagle_eye]

That's not the only problem with the gold standard. Tying money to gold causes deflation, because the economy as a whole is growing faster than gold supplies are.

[Lagslayer]

For the US in particular, I'd chalk up the dissent to multiculturalism in general. Where else in the world can you find so many people of different races, ideologies, and backgrounds all together in the same place? Nobody can agree on anything, and so there is little to non-existent direction in policy, and this just ends up pissing everyone off.

Whoever is "right" is irrelevant when everyone thinks that their viewpoint alone is the only proper answer.

[Neonivek]

Where else in the world can you find so many people of different races, ideologies, and backgrounds all together in the same place?

Canada.

I also disagree that multiculturalism actually erodes society.

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sedition

Treason

Conspiracy

Terrorism

2+2=4

Unpatriotic

Fundamentally mental

Criminal

THE RED PILLS ARE BLUE

Bad goy

The future is so bright I don't need eyes to see it

IT'S HABBEDING

Reported, flagged, blocked, checked, contacted NSA, FBI, MI5, Emperor Obama, the Queen, bought 10 boxes of methylphenidate and gave all the local children a lack of imagination, ban this sick filth and I thought Bay12 were progressives.

[Scoops Novel]

For the US in particular, I'd chalk up the dissent to multiculturalism in general. Where else in the world can you find so many people of different races, ideologies, and backgrounds all together in the same place? Nobody can agree on anything, and so there is little to non-existent direction in policy, and this just ends up pissing everyone off.

Whoever is "right" is irrelevant when everyone thinks that their viewpoint alone is the only proper answer.

Heh. Look forward to centuries of stagnation. If you can give an example where this isn't the case in a mono-cultural society, I'll be fascinated. Viewpoints have and are gaining traction in the US regardless, at that. How this links in to economical and technological concerns should also be intriguing to hear.

Edit: Didn't mean to come off as unhelpfully patronizing.

[Neonivek]

It is a very VERY common viewpoint Novel Scoops for cultures who don't have strong (or any) multiculturalism to look at it in a very negative light.

There is this idea that without a single voice of the people that the country will fall into chaos or be weakened somehow.

It is what Japan's propaganda said of the United States during WW2.

[Scoops Novel]

It is a very VERY common viewpoint Novel Scoops for cultures who don't have strong (or any) multiculturalism to look at it in a very negative light.

There is this idea that without a single voice of the people that the country will fall into chaos or be weakened somehow.

It is what Japan's propaganda said of the United States during WW2.

It's an idea that has lost it's practical value, given our interdependence, abundance of alternate groups and vulnerability to disenfranchisement, though I'll admit that last one is negotiable.

[Loud Whispers]

Heh. Look forward to centuries of stagnation. If you can give an example where this isn't the case in a mono-cultural society, I'll be fascinated.

Ignoring every country that existed before the industrial revolution, modern Spain and Iceland are shining examples.

[Bdthemag]

Multiculturalism only partially affects the variety of opinions, and the eventual clashing of them. This happens in any democratic country where a large group of people can vote, even in a mono-cultural one. People in a single culture society will still have wildly differing opinions, although they'll just claim its true to their culture's ideals and beliefs.

[Neonivek]

Multiculturalism only partially affects the variety of opinions, and the eventual clashing of them. This happens in any democratic country where a large group of people can vote, even in a mono-cultural one. People in a single culture society will still have wildly differing opinions, although they'll just claim its true to their culture's ideals and beliefs.

At the same time cultures with multiculturalism tend to be much better equipped for these differences in opinions.

[Loud Whispers]

Multiculturalism only partially affects the variety of opinions, and the eventual clashing of them. This happens in any democratic country where a large group of people can vote, even in a mono-cultural one. People in a single culture society will still have wildly differing opinions, although they'll just claim its true to their culture's ideals and beliefs.

It depends on the cultures within. The differences could be more similar than diverse than anything, or you could get two cultures from two corners of the Earth who view the world with completely different philosophies, so at odds that barely even operate under the same wavelength. Are we individuals or continuous?

At the same time cultures with multiculturalism tend to be much better equipped for these differences in opinions.

Not really no. There's nothing particularly advantageous to conflict settling in multiculturalism, if anything it merely exaggerates differences and gives tribal sides for antagonists of every viewpoint to latch onto.