Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
MustaphaTheMond
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:28 pm

Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by MustaphaTheMond »

I have just published a new piece in response to a colleague with my take on the reform vs. revolution argument.

https://philosophical-malady.blogspot.c ... table.html

Is revolution the answer to our woes? Or should reform and revolution act synergistically?

Or perhaps societal collapse is inevitable anyway.

What is your take?

- Mustapha Mond
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Gary Childress »

Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets. Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.
OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.
These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Gary Childress »

Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.
OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.
These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.
Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.
OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.
These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.
Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?
I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Gary Childress »

Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am

OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.



These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.



Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.
Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?
I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.
Hmm. So is English not your first language? The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written
To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am

Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?
I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am able to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.
Hmm. So is English not your first language?
ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:
Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written
To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.
How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Gary Childress »

Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am

I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am able to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.
Hmm. So is English not your first language?
ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:
Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am
Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written
To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.
How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?
Enjoy your time on the forum. Have a good day.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Hmm. So is English not your first language?
ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:
Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.
How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?
Enjoy your time on the forum. Have a good day.
Here is, ANOTHER, PRIME EXAMPLE of one who makes claims but who is also completely and utterly INCAPABLE of being able to back up and support their CLAIM, AT ALL
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by Gary Childress »

Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:50 am
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 am
Age wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.



Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?



How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?
Enjoy your time on the forum. Have a good day.
Here is, ANOTHER, PRIME EXAMPLE of one who makes claims but who is also completely and utterly INCAPABLE of being able to back up and support their CLAIM, AT ALL
OK.
User avatar
MustaphaTheMond
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:28 pm

Re: Reform vs. Revolution or the Inevitable Collapse? - lessons from Ted Kaczynski

Post by MustaphaTheMond »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets. Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?
Thanks for reading, and for the response Gary, and apologies for the tardiness of my reply.
I think your point is very astute - these are in fact runaway systems that seem initially beneficial and within human control but then end up spiralling out of control or controlling us in kind. Just look at social media - initially seen as harmless, benign etc. and a way of beneficial networking. These systems now gather so much data about the user that they are able to manipulate the newsfeed/reel/whatever and launch material that IT ALREADY KNOWS we want/like. These feeds now control us rather than the other way round.

It depends how you define a revolution - a revolution such as the Bolshevik revolution may not change much at all, but a Kaczynskian revolution amounts to total system-change within a society - either that or collapse. So the idea is that the collapse or revolution had better come ASAP so that maybe some human beings can survive.

I am not sure about the last point you make. Are you referring to the newly-released information by US government agencies/sources of the flying saucers etc?
Post Reply