in reply to Nanook

@nanook I don't think that it was ever possible to divide people into such a distinctive two groups without a major kinetic conflict. It can only be achieved by emotional hacking through hijacking of information. TV news is outdated. Now most people receive news based on the echo chamber they subscribe to which muffles any contradicting ideas. There is very little deviation and individualism. It's all emotionally based tribalism. This was never the case. Also feminism strengthened it.
in reply to OneEyeKing

@OneEyeKing I guess I'd be in a better position to agree or disagree if you were more explicit with regard to what "two groups" you are referring to, even without specifying it suggests a binary thinking mode that is not in line with a much more complex and nuanced reality. That TV news is outdated, well at least there is one thing we can agree upon. There are many echo chambers as you say and so there is not the widespread agreement that you think exists. Yes I will concur emotional tribalism is real and is problematic.
in reply to FourOh-LLC

Thomas Sowell talks a lot about "culture", but fails to admit that culture is also blood-feud, and convictions, and responsible to wiping out entire Civilizations. Thomas Sowell is not a very smart dude.

Western Civilization is building an ethical, not a cultural Society. Something the ancients - Greece and Rome - started building. Of course they fallen into complacence, and decadence, and Thomas Sowell is correct on that record.

Yet the fact that we are building a Civilization - not a "cluture", not "society", not "code"... escapes him.

Thomas Sowell is not ignorant, not stupid. He's your average dude who has not figured it out how to fix broken things, so he is putting extraordinary efforts into it.

in reply to FourOh-LLC

"Culture" wiped out the entire South American structure of Civilizations. Not just one nations, one tribe, one race - but basically re-written History.

There has been never critical views to "culture", such as that modern civilization shall never affect indigenous people... oh, wait.

It took us thousands of years of "evolution" to realize that "culture" is more destructive than the hydrogen bomb.

I rest my case, and I wish Thomas Sowell would stop hawking about it.

in reply to Nanook

The relevancy is that some things are not broken, and they do not need fixing. The fact that there are tyrants, the rich and poor, and other extremes is not an exception. Its not something broken.

Have you ever seen a tornado constructing a condo, how come all we ever see is tornadoes deconstructing them? Only a fool complains about tornadoes in that context.

How come its always the poor who wants to "re-distribute wealth"? How come the rich is not protesting on the streets for being obstructed in their wealth re-distribution efforts?

Half of what Aristotle stated has to do with the struggle over limited resources, but 2300 years ago the concept of "limited resources" was not in the text books. So smart and curious people created these cumbersome revelations about the same fundamental fact.

I'm grokking here..

in reply to Nanook

I brought up Thomas Sowell because a lot of memes keep quoting him.

Its only commerce, the market, its business that is fully aligned with the governing forces of limited resources. NONE of the other cultural and civilizational institutions matter anymore. I saw in the last few decades how Law, Education, Arts has been subverted by activists, and all those institutions are now on the verge of collapse.

Everything can be re-imagined except profit. What makes one person successful, and the other person a failure is their capacity to recognize this. Unless you are "gainfully employed" you will not likely to succeed.

Unless of course your are a sociopath, a criminal, a professional victim and a grifter, and so on. Or a warlord, a tryrant.

in reply to Nanook

I did not call him unintelligent, I called him average who is putting out some extraordinary effort, but most of it is wasted on me, and others like me. The same goes for Aristotle, as I already explained.

I think people like Thomas Sowell would do better with deconstructing something that would directly benefit "Humanity" like Islam, Communism, Activism. These are parasitic institutions, and I'm convinced we could get rid of the social and economic classes of people who are promoting them. Again, these are not something you can or want to "destroy" or "fix", but something you want to clearly describe for what they truly are - parasitic institutions.

By the way, you CAN get a law degree, a PhD, even a Noble price with low IQ. You CAN become a business mogul with low IQ. You can be very effective in a great many ways with low IQ.

in reply to FourOh-LLC

We managed to described a great many destructive things such as false advertisement, predatory lending, monopoly. The reason we are able to describe them is because they are all involved with financial transactions, dollars and cents, without any rounding errors.

Describing why Activism or Communism is parasitic may be done the same way, as both of these are bottom-less money pits never building any tangible wealth.

Islam is the same way, and to me the visit by Trump was an eye-opener. The wealth of the emirates is based on natural resources, based on depleting them. Trump brought them the idea of Commerce, in intellectual assets, a wealth-building not resource-depleting proposal.

I did not vote for Trump because of politics, I voted for him because of his constructive ideas.