The empires enumerated in Glubb's list have lifespans between 207 and 267 years. America just celebrated its 247th birthday... Of course many nations are centuries or millennia old. Regimes, however, have a finite lifespan. Glubb's analysis echoes that of Alexander Tytler:
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
The short version asserts: hard times create strong men; strong men create good times; good times create weak men; weak men create hard times.
Wrong premise, wrong conclusions, interesting story. The premise is that we have a civilization. “We” meaning the total population of this small enclave called Earth. Well, we don’t. We have local communities, large and small and in between, artificially organized into profit-driven “states” that by (legal) definition are separate from their populations. There are no unifying views or common moral, ethical or even practical principles - other than the currencies used in trade. But money is not a determinant of civilization. Concrete killing vegetation is not a sign of civilization. Law pushing out decency and integrity is not civilization. Patenting or even selling life-saving drugs is not civilization. Spending debt money on manufacturing weapons is not about civilization.
What is more important is that we, each one of all +/- 8 bn inhabitants, do not have a common survival awareness. We don’t care about tomorrow, even if it applies to our closest neighborhood. “Win-win” is only an ultra-manipulative spell cast on the innocent when somebody decides to deprive them of the fruits of their labor or skills or efforts or wisdom. As the total population, we are a massive “lose-lose”. If you don’t agree with this, simply check covidgate.
Whatever the conclusions are, they are wrong, because you can’t have a valid conclusion derived from a false premise.
PS. It is not pessimistic. Things are as they are. You may choose to paint them in pathos, but it won’t make your position stronger. You will become an easier prey, though.
I think in essence what’s been outlined here is the decay of morality, which I don’t believe is a result of abundance. Moral depravity also festers in impoverished societies much like a disease. You rightly called out the sickness which is relativism that creeps into a society. That rejection of truth -something which must exist objectively outside of humanity to exist- is a rejection of its originator, which by default will also exist outside of humanity and its relativism.
In short, God. I believe the impetus for this dilemma is a result of the spiritual beings that have plagued humanity since the beginning of time -a belief held by humanity dating back to ancient Mesopotamia. Humanity tends to move away from these ideas and the need for spiritual intervention as technology advances. We become more self-sufficient. Problem is eventually we lose our spiritual awareness, forget the architecture of the cosmos and hubris takes over. That’s my theory anyway. 😊
Also, this feels like the last video you can make , before a final departure towards what i've been telling you for a while now :: It's time for you to find a brain trust, and begin designing and creating a new religion with it. no meaningful religion can be created by a single person, only a group. I've talked to many psychologists about projects like this. They are all a bit followers. Licensed professionals of any type usually are. You clearly are a ruthlessly honest intellectual with no legacy weighing down your creative sociological juices. it's a worthy if not quixotic task.
Jordan is distinctly anti-nationalist and has staked his position as being fully globalist.
I like him and have listened to him plenty, but I don't follow his schtick. he is promoted by the cabal, and people believe he is sincere because of his plain and sensible description of a anti-humanistic movement for what it is, but his street credit is well planned and he is thus a false prophet. he is selling bullshit, and most people don't even understand what that bullshit is. but it is the idea that you have no real religious obligation to find yourself a tribe, and that you can be 'responsible' to the whole world. this is nonsense. history is clear about this being nonsense. that doens't mean there are any really sensible answers, but preventing people from looking for them by distracting them is a huge lie and he is very guilty of it.
The group appears to be calling for decentralisation and not globalisation, I understand your concern because so many are working to centralise global governance but I don’t see this group calling for that.
if you're not against it, you're in favor of it. there is no sideline in the clash of culture and civilization. he is anti-nationalist. that means he is globalist.
The theme of this presentation explains precisely why 'the foundation' series by issac assimov as an apple tv televised series, is so popular right now. it is precisely about this theme. And people sense it's relevance, and there might be some predictive programming and self awareness to it as well. The writers and culture makers are sucked into the vortex of our collective consciousness.
Here is a link to Glubb's essay: https://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf
The empires enumerated in Glubb's list have lifespans between 207 and 267 years. America just celebrated its 247th birthday... Of course many nations are centuries or millennia old. Regimes, however, have a finite lifespan. Glubb's analysis echoes that of Alexander Tytler:
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
The short version asserts: hard times create strong men; strong men create good times; good times create weak men; weak men create hard times.
Apathy, dependence and bondage has been rife these past few years.
Wrong premise, wrong conclusions, interesting story. The premise is that we have a civilization. “We” meaning the total population of this small enclave called Earth. Well, we don’t. We have local communities, large and small and in between, artificially organized into profit-driven “states” that by (legal) definition are separate from their populations. There are no unifying views or common moral, ethical or even practical principles - other than the currencies used in trade. But money is not a determinant of civilization. Concrete killing vegetation is not a sign of civilization. Law pushing out decency and integrity is not civilization. Patenting or even selling life-saving drugs is not civilization. Spending debt money on manufacturing weapons is not about civilization.
What is more important is that we, each one of all +/- 8 bn inhabitants, do not have a common survival awareness. We don’t care about tomorrow, even if it applies to our closest neighborhood. “Win-win” is only an ultra-manipulative spell cast on the innocent when somebody decides to deprive them of the fruits of their labor or skills or efforts or wisdom. As the total population, we are a massive “lose-lose”. If you don’t agree with this, simply check covidgate.
Whatever the conclusions are, they are wrong, because you can’t have a valid conclusion derived from a false premise.
PS. It is not pessimistic. Things are as they are. You may choose to paint them in pathos, but it won’t make your position stronger. You will become an easier prey, though.
I think in essence what’s been outlined here is the decay of morality, which I don’t believe is a result of abundance. Moral depravity also festers in impoverished societies much like a disease. You rightly called out the sickness which is relativism that creeps into a society. That rejection of truth -something which must exist objectively outside of humanity to exist- is a rejection of its originator, which by default will also exist outside of humanity and its relativism.
In short, God. I believe the impetus for this dilemma is a result of the spiritual beings that have plagued humanity since the beginning of time -a belief held by humanity dating back to ancient Mesopotamia. Humanity tends to move away from these ideas and the need for spiritual intervention as technology advances. We become more self-sufficient. Problem is eventually we lose our spiritual awareness, forget the architecture of the cosmos and hubris takes over. That’s my theory anyway. 😊
Many people avoid this topic.. I think because talking about is most likely to speed up the process of decline.
It may well be destiny. If it’s up to me, I’d prefer to focus my energies on driving that destiny farther over the horizon.
No, it can't collapse, however much it hurts, I'm holding its ass!
https://liborsoural.substack.com/p/astrid-s-hurts-so-good
https://liborsoural.substack.com/p/i-am-your-fruitcake
https://liborsoural.substack.com/p/camouflage
Also, this feels like the last video you can make , before a final departure towards what i've been telling you for a while now :: It's time for you to find a brain trust, and begin designing and creating a new religion with it. no meaningful religion can be created by a single person, only a group. I've talked to many psychologists about projects like this. They are all a bit followers. Licensed professionals of any type usually are. You clearly are a ruthlessly honest intellectual with no legacy weighing down your creative sociological juices. it's a worthy if not quixotic task.
Haha. Loser reveal party.
Have you looked into Jordan Peterson’s Alliance for Responsible Citizenship?
Jordan is distinctly anti-nationalist and has staked his position as being fully globalist.
I like him and have listened to him plenty, but I don't follow his schtick. he is promoted by the cabal, and people believe he is sincere because of his plain and sensible description of a anti-humanistic movement for what it is, but his street credit is well planned and he is thus a false prophet. he is selling bullshit, and most people don't even understand what that bullshit is. but it is the idea that you have no real religious obligation to find yourself a tribe, and that you can be 'responsible' to the whole world. this is nonsense. history is clear about this being nonsense. that doens't mean there are any really sensible answers, but preventing people from looking for them by distracting them is a huge lie and he is very guilty of it.
The group appears to be calling for decentralisation and not globalisation, I understand your concern because so many are working to centralise global governance but I don’t see this group calling for that.
if you're not against it, you're in favor of it. there is no sideline in the clash of culture and civilization. he is anti-nationalist. that means he is globalist.
The theme of this presentation explains precisely why 'the foundation' series by issac assimov as an apple tv televised series, is so popular right now. it is precisely about this theme. And people sense it's relevance, and there might be some predictive programming and self awareness to it as well. The writers and culture makers are sucked into the vortex of our collective consciousness.