How you see the World in 100 Years from now - Page 3

On September 17 2004 07:22 Ceril wrote:


So when the aliens come, they will have no chance of winning over our strategic minds? The only message sent to them will be: gg?

On September 17 2004 09:51 BishopONe wrote:
We are destroying the earth and we will have to find somewhere else to go, guess what happened to mars ^^

On September 17 2004 12:37 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
I'll be dead, so why should I care?

On September 17 2004 12:45 ShAsTa wrote:

I concur

On September 17 2004 04:52 Arbiter[frolix] wrote:
Without major changes to the dominant socio-economic systems I see little to be hopeful about. The capitalist system as it stands is inherantly destructive. That is just inherant in the logic of the system. Beside the social issues, it is slowly but surely eroding the environment around us. Now the system as it stands has no means to deal with these kinds of problems because the fundamental basis is short-term profit, this fact is just institutional in that it is built into the very structure. One of the oldest mottos or catchphrases of the capitalist system is 'private vices, public benefits', that somehow everything is going to work out. Well it is not going to, and it never was.

Considering the environment once again, we can go on thinking of the world as possessing infinite resources and having an infinite capacity to absorb the endless waste and pollution we are generating, but of course this is not true and even as we all sit here reading this site there are forests being cut down, seas being polluted and on and on and on. Now the capitalist socio-economic systems we have in place in the 'developed world' are not going to deal with these problems, that is just an institutional fact. If the CEO of Ford woke up tomorrow and had an epiphany and decided to, for example, scale down the production of internal combustion engine vehicles in favour of massive investment in long-term development of 'greener' cars then he would be lucky to have a job by the afternoon. The institutional structure does not allow this kind of development. Profit comes first. There is no second.

Of course, people have faced tough problems for centuries. The major difference is that we now have the technology to not only destroy the world in an instant but to expand our voracious appetite for the world's resources at a frightening rate.

At the present time there is no apparatus, internal democracy or international organisations to even begin to cope with the problems we may well face over the next 100 years. Under the current system, with its stranglehold on the mainstream media, the idea of social planning, even of the most democratic kind, is regarded as virtually subversive, an interference with the 'free market'. Change to a more equitable system, the breaking down of major concentrations of illegitimate private power and the development of a truly participatory economy must come from below. Mass grass roots movements for change within the populations of the developed countries are the only hope for a more just and ultimately viable future.

These kinds of concerns are those which have motivated much of the anti-globalisation movement over the last 10 to 15 years, whatever the predictably hysterical harangues in the mainstream media may say. This movement demonstrates that such essential organisation is possible, even across national boundries and even within a media system which cannot admit of any possibility of a different world. There is still hope yet.

On September 17 2004 12:58 BroOd wrote:


Maybe your grandchildren would like a nice world to live in also.

On September 17 2004 13:16 JazZ[AutO] wrote:
A few countries will be wiped off the map by nukes, probably usa at the rate our foreign policy is going.. the air will be a disaster from polution which we will be starting to fix. Fyling Cars!! j/k. China will be the world's superpower.