Quote .ren:Conditioning to social norms is something humans also do. That conditioning creates a world view, and people tend to act according to the world they see, or at least think they see. So, getting people to see a world in a certain way influences whether or not they will go along with things. In a form of government where people need only legitimize the elites who make the key decisions that shape their society conditioning people to see that society as the best way life can be turns out to be a very effective way to maintain the system. And a Technological Society is one that is shaped primarily through hierarchical systems, both governmental and corporate so you just need to get people to be willing to believe in the efficacy of that system. That's simply what people like Ellul (and many others I could reference) attempt to reveal.
Not wanting bad news may be part of it, as you note, but changing social belief systems and norms that seem to be working is the real issue I see in getting people living within this system to recognize the need to act to move outside their daily routines, which are deeply embedded in the system, now a globalized system.
Ren, thanks for clarifying what I have long been very aware of — but never understood that it was social conditioning that brought most people to stay and work within a system where they have no power and are required to give up their sense of importance and allow other human beings, whom they had no part in choosing, to have authority over them. I just always thought that it was the result some sort of fear that was passed on from one generation to the next, but which people in my own family of creative artists and medical doctors seemed to lack.
"Now a globalized system." That's disconcerting.
Quote .ren:Quote olenzekm:The 1980 election set the template for governance ever since and the template is to continue our non-sustainable ways as long as possible. I have seen no evidence that we are prepared to behave differently.I do believe, by the way, that template was set a long time ago, and was just reiffied when corporations got their front man into the nation's Presidency. About that time their legal staff was developing the Unitary Executive Theory, and the Federalist Society (also see Wiki for a decent overview) came out of that around 1982 (five of the current Supreme Court Justices are associated with it and its legal philosophy). After all, you can best control a hierarchy by controlling its head. That's the nature of a corporate system. Fortunately for those who want to maintain that system, the U.S. Constitution appears to be compliant.
If the Federalist Society members were all patriotic lawyers, the U.S. Constitution would be "compliant" to creating a strong Constitutional Republic, as it was meant to do. There was a reason why Ben Franklin coming out of the Constitutional Convention answered a lady who asked him "What kind of government did you give us?" by saying "A Constitutional Republic, madame, if you have the wits to keep it."
Instead the Fedralist Society has been a "wonderful" place where conservative & libertarian lawyers have been getting together for over 25 years to "discuss ALL sides"— and to decide that the US should turn into an oligarchical plutocratical corporatocracy, that should be driving full speed ahead towards Fascism. So very NOT the plan of the "Founding Fathers" !