Monday, December 26, 2016


Logically, if as a society we want to help struggling young mothers, we need more mothers.  More hands rocking the cradles.  Less stress and more love.

What if in our largest cities we started building places specifically designed to help ensure secure bonding?  Places young mothers could live, where a lot of very matronly older women also lived, to take care of their babies while they worked, to make sure someone always came running when they were in distress?  Communal kitchens.

I feel I saw something like this in Denmark.  It is an excellent idea, in my view, with a strong ROI, in that these kids thereby become much, much more likely to be happy and productive, and much less likely to become wards of the State, by winding up in jail, rehab, or out of work.  And in turn, they are much less likely to become single parents themselves, hopefully.

We have the knowledge we need to build a better society, but far too much of it is lost in drama, propaganda, horrible emotionality, power mongering, and rote stupidity.

As things change, as we move into the future, it is so hard to guess what the effects of robotics and other structural changes will be, so hard to imagine life 30 years from now, but we may as well assume good things are on the way, and that the psychopaths will lose.

On that note, I would assert there are really two ways of envisioning the future: one with universal government and control--most "futurists" seem to assume that the only way to reduce conflict is to make all conflict but that between citizen and the government impossible--and one with universal freedom, where we develop as a species to the point where we largely don't need government.

For my part, I do think we need to work to reduce overall global population.  I think as a human race we can make that decision.  Less people means less bumping into each other, and much greater viability of localized control of resources and lifestyle.

No comments: