I just had a weird thought.....

Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
32,688
Reaction score
31,393
Location
(outside) Charleston, SC
I'm finding new life in old "The Outer Limits" episodes. Now watching 'The Architects of Fear' were a man volunteers to become an alien 'scarecrow', a common enemy, in order to frighten countries on earth to work together instead of fighting each other.

Here's the thought. The last time we had a 'common enemy' was in our rivalry with the Soviet Union. It was a 'scarecrow' that kept us united. It seems that the USA (though we have always been going to hell, but SLOWLY) but we really started the unstoppable downhill slide about the time the Sovielt Union failed. Since then we've had a multitude of enemies, a confusing arry. Not one main one that we can focus on. Thoughts anyone????:confused:;):rolleyes::cool:
 
Register to hide this ad
People always coalesce when opposing a common enemy. the enemy needs to be tangible, not some philosophy or non-descript ideology. There's plenty to choose from these days....
 
One that terrifies me even as an adult......

The Outer Limits made sense. Today's world, not so much.


"O.B.I.T." They said '1984' didn't happen. Well, we sure have some aspects of it today. In "O.B.I.T" aliens plant machines on earth that can be used to spy on other people. And people use them not only to spy on, but discipline 'non-team players'. Consequently, morale at a military base plummets and a senator is sent to investigate. The investigation comes to a head when one of the witnesses shouts:

""NOBODY CAN LAUGH ANYMORE!!"


Durned if that hasn't come to pass. Internet, drones, cell phones, surveillance cameras,facial recognition, now AI.......

When I was a kid, I didn't appreciate the gravity of this episode. But 60 years later it scares the hell out of me.:eek:
 
That's just it....

People always coalesce when opposing a common enemy. the enemy needs to be tangible, not some philosophy or non-descript ideology. There's plenty to choose from these days....

...The government made the Soviet Union a very tangible threat back in the day. And now, with plenty of enemies to choose from, there is no COMMON enemy to rally the populace.
 
We humans seem to be naturally warlike. I can think of no other species that kills for reasons other than survival. And preparing for war, and engaging in war, actually forms the basis for some nations' economies.

In my misspent youth, I naively believed that world peace was actually possible. Now I realize how unrealistic that notion is. Mankind is in a state of perpetual warfare...only the locations and combatants change.
 
That's exactly.....

Common enemy, are you kidding? The current model is to have us fighting among ourselves while both sides take us to the cleaners. Read George Washington's comments on the the 2 party system during his farewell address. He nailed it


...what I was getting at. Besides having enemies capable of doing us harm all aound the world, we are fighting amongst ourselves. The last time we had a 'common enemy' was the Cold War.
 
What I am getting is this quote by Washington " However political parties may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. "

He goes on to make the case that "the alternate domination" of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents have led to horrible atrocities, and "is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism." From Washington's perspective and judgment, political parties eventually and "gradually incline the minds of men to seek security… in the absolute power of an individual",[2] leading to despotism. He acknowledges the fact that parties are sometimes beneficial in promoting liberty in monarchies, but he argues that political parties must be restrained in a popularly elected government because of their tendency to distract the government from their duties, create unfounded jealousies among groups and regions, raise false alarms among the people, promote riots and insurrection,[peacock prose] and provide foreign nations and interests access to the government where they can impose their will upon the country.
 
I am referring to these quotes by Washington as part of his farewell address

" However political parties may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. "

"the alternate domination of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents will led to horrible atrocities, and is itself a frightful despotism".



Washington warns the people that political factions may seek to obstruct the execution of the laws created by the government or to prevent the branches of government from exercising the powers provided to them by the constitution. Such factions may claim to be trying to answer popular demands or solve pressing problems, but their true intentions are to take the power from the people and place it in the hands of unjust men.

Constitution and political factions


Washington goes on to state his support for the new constitutional government, calling it an improvement upon the nation's original attempt in the Articles of Confederation. He reminds the people that it is the right of the people to alter the government to meet their needs, but it should only be done through constitutional amendments. He reinforces this belief by arguing that violent takeovers of the government should be avoided at all costs and that it is the duty of every member of the republic to follow the constitution and to submit to the laws of the government until it is constitutionally amended by the majority of the American people.

DEBT

He urges the American people to preserve the national credit by avoiding war, avoiding unnecessary borrowing, and paying off any national debt accumulated in times of war as quickly as possible in times of peace so that future generations do not have to take on the financial burdens. Despite his warnings to avoid taking on debt, Washington does state his belief that sometimes it is necessary to spend money to prevent dangers or wars that will cost more if not properly prepared for. At these times, he argues, it is necessary for the people to cooperate by paying taxes to cover these precautionary expenses. He emphasizes how important it is for the government to be careful in choosing the items that will be taxed, but also tells the American people that, no matter how hard the government tries, there will never be a tax which is not inconvenient and unpleasant to those who must pay it.
 
We humans seem to be naturally warlike. I can think of no other species that kills for reasons other than survival.
There are plenty of animals that kill for reasons other than survival. You might want to look up "surplus killing".

And preparing for war, and engaging in war, actually forms the basis for some nations' economies.
Like the US? Perpetual, endless wars is what the United States government does and the only thing it's good at.

In my misspent youth, I naively believed that world peace was actually possible. Now I realize how unrealistic that notion is. Mankind is in a state of perpetual warfare...only the locations and combatants change.

Man is war.
War is Man.
It's what we do.
Killing folks, large numbers if folks is what we are good at.
 
Last edited:
War is both the ultimate break down in humanity and its ultimate evolutionary tool. The strong and the smart survive, the weak and dumb don't.

The US became the world power because of WWII. Not just by man power either. We did it by producing more steel, then more airplanes, ships, tanks and guns. Yes, the greatest generation fought hard in the battle fields, but also at home in the steel mills, manufacturing and sacrifice that gave them what they need to do the job. Don't forget that the women of America stepped up to the plate in a big way.

Since then our attempts at war have never had that same support, but then the wars that followed never had anywhere near the justification of the WWII. You can wave the flag all you want, but getting involved and sending our young men to die in far distant lands against third world countries and making money for the military industrial complex Dwight Eisenhower warned about, with no real goal in sight, don't cut it for very long before people get tired of it.
 
Last edited:
Ya, we were told we needed to spend trillions to be ready for the Russians, then it turns out the Russians can't defeat the Ukrainians with our old second tier equipment.

We lost over 7 thousand young men's lives and got a bunch more permanently maimed and spent 8 Trillion dollars in the middle east wars and both of the countries we waged war in are just as big or bigger **** holes than when we started.

I guess that is an improvement over Vietnam where 58,220 men sacrificed there lives before we threw up our hands and left.

But, hey a bunch of people made a butt load of money every time
 
Last edited:
State of Fear - Wikipedia

In Michael Chrichton's State of Fear, he brings out the idea that without a common enemy, the governments involved need to create one as a people who have fears are much more controllable. I am afraid that many of the Worlds fears have been so created.

He wrote some great books. Anyone who has not yet read Jurassic Park ought to treat themselves to a rip snorting read. So much better than the movie
 
Back
Top