Technically yes but what is it based on? Human nature. The vast majority has no problem with mass surveillance, just like the vast majority has no problem with climate change. Either people don't care or they think it will benefit them in some way or they adapt. Humans are very good at adapting. Only a tiny minority is unable to and they can't influence politics.
You're delusional if you think that this is doomerism. And you're actually proving my point. Just like I can't influence you, you can't influence anyone else either. The difference between us is that I'm aware of it while you aren't.
I have deep seated beliefs that the common people can effect change
But that's just your belief. I rather stick to history as a foundation for any prognosis. Or psychology, especially psychology of the masses. But yeah, if scientific facts are just pseudointellectual slop for you then there is no way to have a productive conversation.
People absolutely influence each other. On the rate of a couple lemmy comments its marginally tiny. But they do.
At risk of sounding cliché, we live in a society.
And heirarchy in not inevitable. The kind of social stratification we see today has only been around roughly 10’000 years. Which is nothing in the grand scheme, in evolutionary time.
For most of human history, human relationships underwent far more egalitarian structure.
That's no machine, it's human nature. Everybody wants to get rid of their opponents. Everybody thinks "If I can get my hands on this first...".
Technically yes but what is it based on? Human nature. The vast majority has no problem with mass surveillance, just like the vast majority has no problem with climate change. Either people don't care or they think it will benefit them in some way or they adapt. Humans are very good at adapting. Only a tiny minority is unable to and they can't influence politics.
You're delusional if you think that this is doomerism. And you're actually proving my point. Just like I can't influence you, you can't influence anyone else either. The difference between us is that I'm aware of it while you aren't.
But that's just your belief. I rather stick to history as a foundation for any prognosis. Or psychology, especially psychology of the masses. But yeah, if scientific facts are just pseudointellectual slop for you then there is no way to have a productive conversation.
People absolutely influence each other. On the rate of a couple lemmy comments its marginally tiny. But they do.
At risk of sounding cliché, we live in a society.
And heirarchy in not inevitable. The kind of social stratification we see today has only been around roughly 10’000 years. Which is nothing in the grand scheme, in evolutionary time.
For most of human history, human relationships underwent far more egalitarian structure.