you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Agreed, much of the American-style faux-optimism is based on the ignorance of history.

Push the plebs too far and there is some risk that they will rebel. No LLM or smartphone is going to change that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    We’re a lot more comfortable these days though. I think more people are struggling and stressed, but what counts as poverty is still better than the poverty of 1900s recession, as living standards have risen. It’s when people get hungry that violence begins and I don know that enough people are hungry to cause violent upheaval. It’s a good thing, but a lesson to the ruling class about the limits hey can push.

    However, with Trump in control, I don’t know that those limits will be as precise or as considered. So, we may speedrun to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    As a counter arguement (not necessarily in the US context), commoners in say 1100 had it way worse than than commoners in 1900.

    By 1900 there were already certain moral standards and expectations, nothing like we have now especially in more developed countries, but in comparison 1900 is much closer to 2025 than to 1100.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Yes, and it's all relative to what we see and expect. There has been a general trend of improving living standards. However, since the boomer generation, there has been a continued rise in standards but their kids are the first, in the west, that didn't necessarily have a step up in standards apart from technological advances. Food and shelter being huge and sanitation being effectively solved.

  • source
  • parent