I just saw CNN's new show about the 90s with my family. The first episode (two hours long) was about TV shows.
>at least half of it was about shows that "changed what it means to be black/female"
>went over the big talk show hosts of the time; when a black host's show was cancelled due to lack of popularity, sad music plays and the interviewee treats it as a black voice being "silenced"
>talks about Ellen admitting she's a lesbian and what a triumphant, brave time that was
>goes into detail about part of a show in which a girl wearing a cross is a lesbian and wants a sex change
>speaks highly of other major networks (CBS, ABC, etc) except the only mention of Fox is about how the Simpsons made fun of them
>"[The Simpsons] showed problems that applied to the viewer"; cut to a scene mocking the intelligence of people who don't like immigration
>many of the people being interviewed are Jewish
Have modern media and the various /pol/ boards made me too sensitive about politics as a whole, or can CNN truly do nothing right (or both)?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): 21219B757333056072DFA4808DDC222F-81235.jpg (79.3 KB, 1100x619, serveimage (1).jpg)
Depends on the mental age of the viewer. Are the past the stage where their identity is tied to the group?
>>49038
CNN is appealing to a group. Not individuals. Its attempting to sell to millenials, assuming theyre mostly a liberal identity seeking conformity. The only reason its so left is it wants this fickle demographic or it will go the way of blockbuster like all legacy news.
CNN is appealing to a group. Not individuals. Its attempting to sell to millenials, assuming theyre mostly a liberal identity seeking conformity. The only reason its so left is it wants this fickle demographic or it will go the way of blockbuster like all legacy news.
File (): 4F226B637C188A39EDC4412638EA85C6-721878.jpg (705.0 KB, 940x4199, orange_blue.jpg)
>>49037
>Have modern media and the various /pol/ boards made me too sensitive about politics as a whole?
It may be a meme, but /pol/ literally opened your eyes and broke your conditioning. What has been seen cannot be unseen. Now that you're aware of the kikery, you'll see it everywhere. It's like orange/blue contrast. What once looked normal to you will now be an endless stream of signals to race mix, destroy the family unit, erase your traditions and culture, be irresponsible, etc.
>Have modern media and the various /pol/ boards made me too sensitive about politics as a whole?
It may be a meme, but /pol/ literally opened your eyes and broke your conditioning. What has been seen cannot be unseen. Now that you're aware of the kikery, you'll see it everywhere. It's like orange/blue contrast. What once looked normal to you will now be an endless stream of signals to race mix, destroy the family unit, erase your traditions and culture, be irresponsible, etc.
File (): ABCECD2C246A186FAC12E07B51686199-205281.png (200.5 KB, 999x442, pol hurtbox.png)
>>49037
I saw CNN's "The 60's," "The 70's," and "The 80's," or at least the half of those about politics - I didn't watch any of those about TV shows or music. Honestly I thought they weren't too bad. I liked the episodes about the Vietnam war (mostly because it's so fun to imagine Nixon screaming "Aroo!" as B52s carpet bomb the forest, leaving beautiful riples), as well as those about Nixon, the 1968 election, the Cold War, Terrorism, the Ford and Carter administrations, and Ronald Reagan. The episode about "greed" in the 1980's had an obnoxious liberal theme to it, but really that was the only episode where the bias somewhat reduced the enjoyment of watching the episode.
I saw CNN's "The 60's," "The 70's," and "The 80's," or at least the half of those about politics - I didn't watch any of those about TV shows or music. Honestly I thought they weren't too bad. I liked the episodes about the Vietnam war (mostly because it's so fun to imagine Nixon screaming "Aroo!" as B52s carpet bomb the forest, leaving beautiful riples), as well as those about Nixon, the 1968 election, the Cold War, Terrorism, the Ford and Carter administrations, and Ronald Reagan. The episode about "greed" in the 1980's had an obnoxious liberal theme to it, but really that was the only episode where the bias somewhat reduced the enjoyment of watching the episode.
File (): 38892ED3AAD0A1757E3E2DEFE79624D4-273445.jpg (267.0 KB, 2813x1521, what_pol_does_to_a_man.jpg)
>>49044
Checked.
Come to think of it, watching MLP is like visting /pol/. A lot of us were originally opposed to watching it. "It's just a little girl's show" and all that. Then we were convinced to watch an episode. Then we watched another...and another.
Checked.
Come to think of it, watching MLP is like visting /pol/. A lot of us were originally opposed to watching it. "It's just a little girl's show" and all that. Then we were convinced to watch an episode. Then we watched another...and another.
File (): 067943584F19A686F4B880C7FEAAAB07-153537.jpg (149.9 KB, 890x876, pol nightmare.jpg)
>>49041
That's what I thought, just didn't want to be too paranoid. One saying I used to see on 4/pol/ was "let the redpill enhance your life, not consume it". Not that it's gotten to that point, but like you said, it's getting harder to just ignore these things.
>>49044
Believe me, I wouldn't have watched CNN on my own.
That's what I thought, just didn't want to be too paranoid. One saying I used to see on 4/pol/ was "let the redpill enhance your life, not consume it". Not that it's gotten to that point, but like you said, it's getting harder to just ignore these things.
>>49044
Believe me, I wouldn't have watched CNN on my own.
>>49041
>Orange Blue
>Typical color of the sky (midday and dusk/dawn)
>implies a new beginning/end, nuance and frontiers
Cannot Unsee!
>Orange Blue
>Typical color of the sky (midday and dusk/dawn)
>implies a new beginning/end, nuance and frontiers
Cannot Unsee!
>>49037
The capacity to indulge in feelings occurs when you are rich enough to have all other serious concerns taken care of. This richness does not have to be money, it can be time, such as parents or government paying for your survival (Hi uni students! The uni students make the teachers, not the other way 'round).
Our brains are always on the look out for problems, this is excellent for survival maximisation, but when your survival is not at risk, the brain's behaviour does not change. We start to worry about bullshit instead. (Am I 20% gay, or 30% gay??)
When a whole society is rich, the whole society starts concerning itself over nonsense issues. This feeds back upon itself as the society gets richer.
CNN is a product of the boom times of the USA, therefore it is a product also of nonsense issues, further more it is a entertainment network (not news) which needs eye balls, and since society is still wealthy enough to worry over bullshit issues it will cater to them. (Ratings!)
Once the wealth of the USA runs out, the population will stop caring about these trivialities because it will have genuine concerns to deal with.
Rich breeds Lefties, and Poor breeds the Right. (See Germany)
The capacity to indulge in feelings occurs when you are rich enough to have all other serious concerns taken care of. This richness does not have to be money, it can be time, such as parents or government paying for your survival (Hi uni students! The uni students make the teachers, not the other way 'round).
Our brains are always on the look out for problems, this is excellent for survival maximisation, but when your survival is not at risk, the brain's behaviour does not change. We start to worry about bullshit instead. (Am I 20% gay, or 30% gay??)
When a whole society is rich, the whole society starts concerning itself over nonsense issues. This feeds back upon itself as the society gets richer.
CNN is a product of the boom times of the USA, therefore it is a product also of nonsense issues, further more it is a entertainment network (not news) which needs eye balls, and since society is still wealthy enough to worry over bullshit issues it will cater to them. (Ratings!)
Once the wealth of the USA runs out, the population will stop caring about these trivialities because it will have genuine concerns to deal with.
Rich breeds Lefties, and Poor breeds the Right. (See Germany)
>>49061
Interdasting...
It's so obvious, it doesn't come to mind very often.
People are always looking for something to worry about, aren't they?
Interdasting...
It's so obvious, it doesn't come to mind very often.
People are always looking for something to worry about, aren't they?
File (): 45135897371549C18F0CCB45CFF7F400-36218.jpg (35.4 KB, 543x474, cycle-ideology.jpg)
>>49065
When you know where your society is in the cycle you can predict the future. :)
A smart person can use this to great effect.
When you know where your society is in the cycle you can predict the future. :)
A smart person can use this to great effect.
File (): 932CC934FD75C24AB2F17BD0337EAABC-504077.gif (492.3 KB, 800x450, mlfw7692-1343905071857621.gif)
>>49082
Technology and economic changes may have changed the cycle itself. I don't have full confidence we'll be seeing the times of strong men again
Technology and economic changes may have changed the cycle itself. I don't have full confidence we'll be seeing the times of strong men again
File (): EDA3BA3E8950BDFCE332664137E46374-51147.jpg (49.9 KB, 667x800, de371a2171bdd2198efc7d5e97e40d36--sad-anime-creepypasta.jpg)
>>49084
This is debatable because there are many cycles and they all "vie" for prominence. One interesting one is the weapons and human kill capacity. This cycle has been ramping up for 100s of thousands of years. And you could argue that technology has permanently changed things... until the nukes go off around the planet. Then we start again with clubbing a person of the head. This cycle is shaped like a saw tooth rather than a sine wave.
The excess capacity that technology bring to the economy is destabilising to humanity. Because humanity needs, currently, money to live. If your job is done by a robot, in capitalism, you die off because you are a useless resource. I see UBI as the future... which looks like a return to Communism... another cycle.
Henry Fords, motor car "changed humanity for the better and we will never go back." Opps immigration problems so great the US gov actually fires it's Mexican workers. Oops, Great Depression.
Humans don't control the cycle, like rain drops don't control the ocean waves.
This is debatable because there are many cycles and they all "vie" for prominence. One interesting one is the weapons and human kill capacity. This cycle has been ramping up for 100s of thousands of years. And you could argue that technology has permanently changed things... until the nukes go off around the planet. Then we start again with clubbing a person of the head. This cycle is shaped like a saw tooth rather than a sine wave.
The excess capacity that technology bring to the economy is destabilising to humanity. Because humanity needs, currently, money to live. If your job is done by a robot, in capitalism, you die off because you are a useless resource. I see UBI as the future... which looks like a return to Communism... another cycle.
Henry Fords, motor car "changed humanity for the better and we will never go back." Opps immigration problems so great the US gov actually fires it's Mexican workers. Oops, Great Depression.
Humans don't control the cycle, like rain drops don't control the ocean waves.
>>49088
Either way, you're saying that we're going to have to deal with increased socialism/Marxism, or a nuclear Holocaust, before we begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel?
It's grim, but I still have a shred of faith in humanity...
Either way, you're saying that we're going to have to deal with increased socialism/Marxism, or a nuclear Holocaust, before we begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel?
It's grim, but I still have a shred of faith in humanity...
>>49091
I could argue that humanity is still evolving and these major cycle still exist upon the raw desire for humanity to find better ways to survive. So, yes, deep down nature will find a way. But this millions of years cycle is less relevant to our lives directly. The most important cycle for us, I think, is the cycle which is nearest to our life length. Which seems to be a 100 year cycle. And is summaries in the ideology cycle picture I posted above.
Also the survival of humanity does not have to mean the survival of you or the West. It could be that Muslims propagate more efficiently into the future.
Another interesting aspect of the ideology cycle is that it shows there is no "one ideology to rule them all" it changes according to the society's economic state. So all these political debates are just arguing raindrops as they all head towards the inevitability of the shore.
If we were young adults in 1960s we would be at Woodstock.
I could argue that humanity is still evolving and these major cycle still exist upon the raw desire for humanity to find better ways to survive. So, yes, deep down nature will find a way. But this millions of years cycle is less relevant to our lives directly. The most important cycle for us, I think, is the cycle which is nearest to our life length. Which seems to be a 100 year cycle. And is summaries in the ideology cycle picture I posted above.
Also the survival of humanity does not have to mean the survival of you or the West. It could be that Muslims propagate more efficiently into the future.
Another interesting aspect of the ideology cycle is that it shows there is no "one ideology to rule them all" it changes according to the society's economic state. So all these political debates are just arguing raindrops as they all head towards the inevitability of the shore.
If we were young adults in 1960s we would be at Woodstock.
>>49088
But not every factor that leads into political happenstance is cyclical. Some are linear. Technology has not proceeded in cycles, at least not to any meaningful degree, but has progressed linearly. Similarly, the migrations of peoples lead to permanent changes. Extreme poverty is probably eternally banished in the west, certainly as a general condition. Violence in general is down, and interstate violence is also down massively relative to 500 years ago. Monarchism is probably never going to make a comeback. The use of a class of landed clergy is probably not going to make a comeback, at least not in the West. Disease is forever down, with some diseases literally extinct or close to it. Religion is probably never going to be as strong in the West as it was 100 years ago. And so on and so forth, with so many changes that the landscape of politics in the West has changed in ways that will never be reversed, or if they are, it will be under such bizarre and extreme circumstances that I doubt the regular cycles would survive as well. And insofar as cycles do repeat, it's in such a faint and weak way that it's scarcely a repeat at all.
Modern history rhymes in ways that you can be forgiven for believing imply a cycle, but times have changed. In 1853, when France, Britian and the Turks went to war with Russia, largely in the Crimea, 50,000 men were killed in action on all sides, and one-half-million died from disease. In 2014, when Russia invaded the Crimea, a collective total of 6 Ukrainians, Russians, and protesters died. The entirety of all deaths in the Ukrainian civil war - rebel, Russian, Ukrainian, and civilian (10,000), only just equals French soldiers killed in action in the siege of Sevastopol, and is half the French deaths from disease in the same campaign. Things have changed in 160 years, in many regards.
>>49099
>If we were young adults in 1960s we would be at Woodstock
I have a feeling I'd be behind a riot shield
But not every factor that leads into political happenstance is cyclical. Some are linear. Technology has not proceeded in cycles, at least not to any meaningful degree, but has progressed linearly. Similarly, the migrations of peoples lead to permanent changes. Extreme poverty is probably eternally banished in the west, certainly as a general condition. Violence in general is down, and interstate violence is also down massively relative to 500 years ago. Monarchism is probably never going to make a comeback. The use of a class of landed clergy is probably not going to make a comeback, at least not in the West. Disease is forever down, with some diseases literally extinct or close to it. Religion is probably never going to be as strong in the West as it was 100 years ago. And so on and so forth, with so many changes that the landscape of politics in the West has changed in ways that will never be reversed, or if they are, it will be under such bizarre and extreme circumstances that I doubt the regular cycles would survive as well. And insofar as cycles do repeat, it's in such a faint and weak way that it's scarcely a repeat at all.
Modern history rhymes in ways that you can be forgiven for believing imply a cycle, but times have changed. In 1853, when France, Britian and the Turks went to war with Russia, largely in the Crimea, 50,000 men were killed in action on all sides, and one-half-million died from disease. In 2014, when Russia invaded the Crimea, a collective total of 6 Ukrainians, Russians, and protesters died. The entirety of all deaths in the Ukrainian civil war - rebel, Russian, Ukrainian, and civilian (10,000), only just equals French soldiers killed in action in the siege of Sevastopol, and is half the French deaths from disease in the same campaign. Things have changed in 160 years, in many regards.
>>49099
>If we were young adults in 1960s we would be at Woodstock
I have a feeling I'd be behind a riot shield
>>49109
You raise a lot of good points. One of the things about cycles, and perhaps a permanent "get out of jail free" card, I can use is just to say that any "permanent trend" is simply a very very large wave. For example, the universe is expanding, it will forever, or will it?
So I can't meaningfully refute your claim that "some things are linear". But I could always find ways out which, because they describe the future, are imaginary. eg. After the nukes drop old disease will rise.
Neither of us can win the "not all things are cycles debate" we both have our bias.
My main interest in cycles is as it pertains to my life only. And I have been sitting on this perspectively quietly for a number of years as I watched the West sink. This West sinking correlates with my wave belief and that is sufficient for me to make my plans for the future. I see no obvious counter to this view. In fact as I look deeper (demographics) I only find more evidence.
I would LOVE to be wrong. But I prefer truth over fantasy. Prove me wrong with facts that the West is OK and I will love you forever.
You raise a lot of good points. One of the things about cycles, and perhaps a permanent "get out of jail free" card, I can use is just to say that any "permanent trend" is simply a very very large wave. For example, the universe is expanding, it will forever, or will it?
So I can't meaningfully refute your claim that "some things are linear". But I could always find ways out which, because they describe the future, are imaginary. eg. After the nukes drop old disease will rise.
Neither of us can win the "not all things are cycles debate" we both have our bias.
My main interest in cycles is as it pertains to my life only. And I have been sitting on this perspectively quietly for a number of years as I watched the West sink. This West sinking correlates with my wave belief and that is sufficient for me to make my plans for the future. I see no obvious counter to this view. In fact as I look deeper (demographics) I only find more evidence.
I would LOVE to be wrong. But I prefer truth over fantasy. Prove me wrong with facts that the West is OK and I will love you forever.
File (): 31B82872F4FE9156C01801BAFFEFA077-349489.jpg (341.3 KB, 1243x847, ECM-1970-2084-colin.jpg)
File (): 91D8852B07F12850D1FCF6AC59206FB4-490242.jpg (478.8 KB, 1622x1048, ecm-6thwave.jpg)
These images are from Martin Armstrong. He uses a computer to extract cycles from historic data. He got me onto this concept and then I dug into it to see how true it was. What I found underneath it all was demographics, baby booms and baby busts (contraception). These charts might show the future.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_A._Armstrong
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_A._Armstrong
>>49120
are you the guy that made the thread dealing with how the west is failing because of terrible birthrates?
are you the guy that made the thread dealing with how the west is failing because of terrible birthrates?
>>49116
>After the nukes drop old disease will rise
If a circumstance that extreme happens, I don't think the problems we are concerned with here will remain our biggest concerns
>the West is OK
I don't think the West is okay. Where I don't agree with you is in believing that cycles mean the West will reverse its decline.
>>49120
As I have stated before I think contraception has less influence on birthrates than economic changes, but contraception is itself another one of those wrenches in the machine of history, forever altering its course and inhibiting old circles from returning in as full a strength as they used to
>After the nukes drop old disease will rise
If a circumstance that extreme happens, I don't think the problems we are concerned with here will remain our biggest concerns
>the West is OK
I don't think the West is okay. Where I don't agree with you is in believing that cycles mean the West will reverse its decline.
>>49120
As I have stated before I think contraception has less influence on birthrates than economic changes, but contraception is itself another one of those wrenches in the machine of history, forever altering its course and inhibiting old circles from returning in as full a strength as they used to
>>49135
Point 1. Agreed.
>Where I don't agree with you is in believing that cycles mean the West will reverse its decline.
Is this sentence mistyped? I am suggesting we had ~50 years good based on pre-condom population growth and GD/WW2 baby boom. I view the USA in the same way as I view the German, French, British and Roman Empire. The wheel of time turns. I think that the fall of the USA helps pull down Europe too.
Usually the next empire goes where the gold is. Currently that is China more and more.
I do agree that contraception is not the only actor, but I think it amplified the economic influences. Further a condom creates economic influences that support itself.
Assuming I know who you are ;) The confusion about 45% contraception failure was 45% of people who got pregnant. That survey does not include the class of people who were never surveyed those where contraception worked. So the sample is biased.
|------------------contraception/no-baby--------------------|unplanned|planned|
Your cited survey only asked the two small groups and left out the large group.
Point 1. Agreed.
>Where I don't agree with you is in believing that cycles mean the West will reverse its decline.
Is this sentence mistyped? I am suggesting we had ~50 years good based on pre-condom population growth and GD/WW2 baby boom. I view the USA in the same way as I view the German, French, British and Roman Empire. The wheel of time turns. I think that the fall of the USA helps pull down Europe too.
Usually the next empire goes where the gold is. Currently that is China more and more.
I do agree that contraception is not the only actor, but I think it amplified the economic influences. Further a condom creates economic influences that support itself.
Assuming I know who you are ;) The confusion about 45% contraception failure was 45% of people who got pregnant. That survey does not include the class of people who were never surveyed those where contraception worked. So the sample is biased.
|------------------contraception/no-baby--------------------|unplanned|planned|
Your cited survey only asked the two small groups and left out the large group.
File (): E971D7755AC482F4F891EE6249F4A393-275112.jpg (268.7 KB, 1390x903, war-kill-capacity-cycle.jpg)
Fun with cycles and human misery.
Thanks nukes!
Thanks nukes!
>>49116
Europeans are always pushed to the brink of destruction before they realize what is truly happening and save themselves from the Eastern invaders. It has happened countless times throughout history. Thermopylae, Muslim invasion of Iberia, basically all of the Mongolian invasions, siege of Vienna, ect
Europeans are overly altruistic due to their larger frontal lobes, and are used to living in high-trust societies as a result. Only when the danger is undeniable and right at their doorstep will the average European rise to the fight.
It is always a few wise men crying from the walls that Rome is burning, while those still in the city continue about their business happily.
Europeans are always pushed to the brink of destruction before they realize what is truly happening and save themselves from the Eastern invaders. It has happened countless times throughout history. Thermopylae, Muslim invasion of Iberia, basically all of the Mongolian invasions, siege of Vienna, ect
Europeans are overly altruistic due to their larger frontal lobes, and are used to living in high-trust societies as a result. Only when the danger is undeniable and right at their doorstep will the average European rise to the fight.
It is always a few wise men crying from the walls that Rome is burning, while those still in the city continue about their business happily.
29 replies | 13 files | 9 UUIDs | Archived