Excellent observation and analysis. This is one of the main underlying reasons why I took my family and left the United States - the mechanization and dehumanization of everyday life. We live in a mountain village in Italy now, where people are still human beings, and it would be the person who was trying to rush everyone through who would get the sideeye.

Expand full comment

I understand what you are saying, but they could just be having a bad day. Who knows. That said, I do see a possible really bad clash coming if the young sanctimonious don't get a bit more maturity. The other interesting thing is that a lot of successful boomers on the left have as much of a sanctimonious attitude & will likely be blindsided by the young generation who will have no respect for any of the "work" the boomers did toward social justice, the environment, etc. Living around a lot of old leftists who engaged in all that the 60s and early 70s had to offer (drugs, sex...), they sometimes think they are the ones who know how social justice should be done, like they did in Berkeley, etc. I don't think the 20 something lefties of today care. In fact a lot think that the boomers are "hoarding wealth" in the form of housing, good jobs, pensions, etc. I would hope that one thing we all should have learned in the last 3 years is to try treat each other better as human beings. What a stressful time to go through.

Expand full comment
Dec 4, 2023Liked by Theo Jordan

Robots and AI seem to be what we’re moving towards.

Depersonalization and dehumanization are steps to this end.

This saddens me as I am pro- human.

It is a good time to be old.

Expand full comment

Most Millennials and GenZ people still fall for this collectivist utopia non-sense because of the 12+ years of indoctrination in the public education system and I don't mean indoctrination in a general sense of teacher imbuing their beliefs onto the kids but actual indoctrination where the entire system crafts and executes training designed to indoctrinate the kids. PHD James Lyndsay a leader in the fight against woke and DEI, did an excellent 1 hour long interview with Prager U on exactly how over the last century organizations like NGO's as well as our own governments crafted legislation and lead various efforts that lead to what we have now. None of this is organic and it's not because these generations were born into a 2487 online world not because they have portable computing devices. Those things have lead to a break in the natural way human beings relate and communicate with each other but these were not the reason a majority of these 2 generations are activists who believe that if serious social and economical changes aren’t made on a global scale the earth is doomed. That was done thru the century long plan to dumb down and indoctrinate each new generation. The first few had to be dumbed down so that when those generations kids were indoctrinated most parents were to dumbed down and or too busy to be bothered with what was being done.

Most people don’t look at the bigger picture when examining claims that there is a group of very wealthy people trying to change the systems within in every nation. When a nation like the US goes to war, those who access how good or bad the war effort was after it’s over don’t look at just what 1 division of the Army did ion Nation A or what the Airforce did in Nation B. They look at it as a whole. When the Army invades a foreign nation whom can’t be accessed without sea travel the Navy and the air force both are involved with the navy delivering the Army and the Air Force providing cover during that delivery. If one looked at solely what the Army did it wouldn’t make sense as to how the UUS won that war because you’re not looking at the bigger picture. I hope that comparison makes sense.

Once you star looking at the bigger picture and come to accept ideas that have been shunned, discouraged by every part of the system as a defense mechanism, like the idea that people at this level think in terms of generations and not years, you start to see how it does make sense. Humans are self-interested creatures. Yes we do help others but our primal instinct is to take care of one’s self first and then if you have one, your mate and offspring. This means that if any of you reading this had access to billions of dollars there’s no way any of you could say you wouldn’t use some or even all of that on a cause you believe in like cleaning up the oceans of the large amount of plastics in it. The wealthy are no different save they do have the money and they also believe they are above the rest of us because they are wealthy. Not all wealthy are like this but those who are absolutely are going to use their resources to correct that which they believe is broken and to them allowing the peasants (as they see us) to self-govern is not tolerable. They’ve been executing a multi-generational plan to change that but because they are the very, very few they must convince the peasants to voluntarily accept change and sacrifice of certain rights, freedoms and liberty all for the greater good.

Mao used the young to bring about is Great leap Forward that lead China to ruins so much so that it was on the verge of collapse when Mao’s replacement made significant changes to Mao’s system allowing the people some level of a free, Capitalist like system. Hitler also used the youth to help bring about his idea of a utopia so using the next generation while they are young to bring about quick and drastic change is not new nor unproven so why do so many find it hard to believe that people with resources in the billions wouldn’t try and do the same if they believe that those beneath them can not be allowed to self-govern? Elon Musk used approximately %10 of his vast wealth to protect free speech on Twitter. Do you really believe other billionaires who want free speech to end in favor of controlled speech wouldn’t use their resources to do the same?

Below is a link to the James Lyndsey interview which I can't stress enough to watch.

Disrupting the Education System While Defending Truth with James Lindsay - https://youtu.be/nCbgBTwLGbM?si=tTEUpfL7tCc8PcYT

Expand full comment

Theo - If you haven't seen this yet (or just have never checked out TANGLE) you should. It's discussing teh Jarskey case. The TANGEL owner Isaac is a lefty but he's what I call a classical liberal, the type of Democrat from the 80's and 90's, before they started down the path of insanity. He is still very much a strong Liberal but he does try to be as fair and unbiased as one can be and so I respect him even if I normally disagree. In this post about Jarsky he and most lefties keep bringing up how in the 3 points of the case, lost is the fact this guy is guilty and shouldn't get away with it (go without being fined) and yet none of teh 3 points in teh case are about his guilt or if he should be fined but in what setting such a decision of guilt be made and the fine amount determined. It's very interesting and since you are a lawyer I figured you might find it interesting to that is this guy's take on it. In one of the replies the commenter notes that no decisions of a law , ruling or even delegation of power should ever be based on ensuring that no guilty person escape punishment. The Lefts stance on this is the equivalent of saying Blackstone's theory is upside down


Expand full comment

The true way one knows if their ideological preference, their dream utopia is just or not is to ask "If my utopia ends up not being a Utopia can we change it or have we locked ourselves into a system we can't change?" None of the collectivists forms of governance like Socialism or Communism would work b/c they place the power to control all including suppression of speech, by the party and those systems ensure there is only 1 political party and as little dissent as possible. You don’t like your new utopia? Tough, be quiet or else. If your Utopia ensures you can't change it if it fails you then it's not a utopia.

Expand full comment
deletedDec 4, 2023Liked by Theo Jordan
Comment deleted
Expand full comment