I have been pondering on this for some time.
Stalin, Hitler, Mao -- all had different rhetoric, but seemed to have shared the same methods of suppressing opposition:
(1) blame a group (economic class, ethnic group, etc)
(2) divide the populous using guilt-by-association with the blame group
(3) register the guilty by association,
(4) start their persecution of the registered
All 3 were bold to aggressively go and do horrible things, when their opposition (or world observers) did not expect even 1/10th of the evilness they had enabled.
All, however, 3 benefit from significant financial and economic disasters that their countries were engulfed with at that time.
Cleary, historically -- the founding fathers recognized the above dispositions. Which is why they were ok with '*any*' rhetoric, but did their best to prevent
the actions. (That is there is 'free speech' , but unchecked reign by federal powers is prohibited).
My current take, is that trying to finding analogies between now and back late 1920s-to early 1940s, would have to involve some form of amalgamation of the 3 dictators.
We do not have economic or food or health crisis to the proportion that these countries had back then.
So until we can sustain the might of US dollar as reserve currency, and until we can fight off health catastrophes --
We will not have same alignments as it was back in 1930s.
On another hand, if the pyramids that control the reserve currency or public health of the nations -- collapse.
It is not hard to imagine how the 1930s will replay, only with more speed and destructive energy.
---
Going back into the history, something becoming even more clear.
People do not change.
But the effectiveness of their tools and methods improves every generation.
Therefore...
If the tools are used for bad purposes (and by tools I mean informational as well as physical tools) -- then their application will result in deeper wounds to humanity.
If the tools are used for good purposes -- the healing and fighting off bad things, will be more effective.
---
Broadly, there are 4 categories of people in the society (this is not a political or cultural categorization)
Leaders, Followers, Un-Informed, and Independents.
The stability of the society is based on the size and effectiveness of influence of the Independent thinkers category.
The other 3 groups will always be some sort of oscillation.
Oscillation is really reflection of the significant bias. These 3 groups are consisting of personalities with significant biases.
And, therefore, they result in lack of freedom of opportunity, without freedom of opportunities,
there is no meritocracy, without meritocracy there is no fairness, without fairness, there is no stability.
That's why these 3 groups if left unchecked will always produce huge swings (oscillations).
The oscillations will be benign if the independent thinkers are dominating political, economic and military landscapes.
The oscillations will be violent, if otherwise.
The only other method to prevent oscillations is a threat of mutual destruction. However, this is like sitting on the
gasoline and playing with matches.
Which is why, to me, having the independent thinkers as a dominant force (in Capitalism, this was supposed to be the 'middle class') --
is much more preferable.
---
To figure out what's coming in the future, one would have to assess the economic and population health indicators.
As well as what categories of people dominate the above mentioned landscapes.
--
I do not have answers, clearly.
But the above describes thinking framework I had came with sofar.
I hope we have enough independent thinkers, who can filter out lies and manipulation by applying their critical thinking.
And I hope the structures we have in place to protect public health, and dominant currencies -- will remain.
Quote History Quoted:
Thanks all. Yes, this period has many echoes into today's climate, hence part of the renewed interest on my part.
View Quote