How about this

So progressive politics doesn't seem to be progressing much at all... The snail's pace is a long way off the sprint it's becoming obvious that's required to get in front of the suite of looming catastrophes being brought on by stupid old hegemonic hierarchies clinging on for grim death.

Do you reckon we could get most folks to agree with that? (If not, then we're absolutely fucked, to the third power.)

So if a degree of consensus on the above is possible, how about this - a worldwide campaign to drive this point home, coupled with a proposition: give it to the kids.

The world has been comprehensively fucked, almost entirely by people over 40, who are going to escape the vast majority of the consequences. These consequences will have to be borne by the youngest of us, along with all future generations, who will righteously curse us.

So, what possible excuse can you have, for voting according to your own preferences rather than those of your kids, or grandkids? Give your vote to the kids, so that they can take the controls before this civilational nosedive reaches its readily extrapolated conclusion.

This is the only hope I can see for sidestepping the ossified duopolies strangling the democracy out of our governments. The only way to overthrow these cartels is to multiply the power of youth, kind of like the boomers nearly made a dent with the 60s counterculture... But if this idea could catch on, perhaps it could blow that revolution into the weeds.

Think about it - what right do you have to keep your tiny token of a say for yourself, when the kids need it more than anyone? Hopefully they haven't yet succumbed to the indoctrination and tribalism perpetuating the scum of filth floating above, blocking out the light at the end of the tunnel.

Right on brother. Have you actually got kids?

My kid can't even eat Weetabix without dropping it on the floor, so he's probably overqualified for running the country

About to meet him in a week. Bit bloody old to become a dad at 49, but that's the way the cookie crumbles I guess.

Wouldn't bring someone into this dying world if it was my choice alone, but the missus is an expert arm-twister...

Anyway, do peeps reckon this notion could have legs?

Now it makes sense, you appear to be suffering from an existential crisis due to imminent baby induced insomnia. Actually perfectly normal. The cure will present itself in the form of a screaming shit machine whom you will fall in love with but wouldn’t trust to make a credible nuanced decision for at least sixteen years.
Oh and the only major flaw in your idea is there are no candidates worth voting for. You’re preaching to a fairly nice and lefty corner of the internet who I dare say have their kids futures in mind, getting the adults to politically engage beyond the apathy of middle age would be a start.

Btw I like the way you write, good luck with the sprog.

Kids are overrated, but yeah shit's broken.

Had my first kid at 42 and the second at 44. Oldest started school last september and honestly I'm old enough to be the dad of the some of the other fathers!

I do love having kids though (even though its bloody hard work).

“The world has been comprehensively fucked, almost entirely by people over 40”

But the 20 somethings of today will go on to do the same, yes they are less likely to have beliefs and opinions of boomers but they do not all worship Greta/veganism/world peace.
Plenty of them just want a cheap Maccy-D, designer clothing and a flash BMW, they do not really cogitate much beyond that.

Oh and the only major flaw in your idea is there are no candidates worth voting for.

Well, it would have to be a sustained campaign, giving enough time for decent folks interested in standing to realise they have a chance and to mobilise... I'd say the idea's major flaw is that it assumes we're not in Frank Zappa's theatre; that democracy can work as advertised, and that we can achieve real progress in spite of capitalism.

With enough luck and effort, it has maybe a 10% chance of getting off the ground, but probably doesn't aim high enough... I actually have a better idea; a plan to kick the Death Star right in the ventilation duct, but of course it's <1%...

Obviously the solution to all this stupid hierarchical bullshit is anarchy, where anybody's better idea is free to gain traction, and money has to go away because of all the stupid evil shit that gets done for it and all the super necessary stuff that gets neglected because nobody's paying for that. Money is like KPIs - fuck that noise.

But of course, the problem is how you get from here to there. I've been pondering this for a while now.

So how about this - a game, where at first it's about figuring out the rules for such a society, and it's kind of like The Sims or something, but it allows people to donate goods and services on a pay it forward sort of basis, and could work as a bit of a tax dodge like LETS. Except rather than keeping score, it's just from ability / to need - the only currency is reputation (history of contribution) and probably time should be a factor somehow too.

As this thing grows and involves people of significant means, it can develop into a protective bubble, shielding its most vulnerable members from capitalism, and unlocking their potential to contribute. It's not a game on people's phones anymore; it's the (obviously open-source) foundation of a proper civilised civilisation. When it's grown enough, then we can give the billionaires the finger because their money isn't worth anything, and nation states can fuck right off too, because folks have seceded from that shit into the future, where we're actually getting shit done.

Seems to me, it should be possible to gather significant means to get this thing off the ground by posing this question - where is the famous, well-funded effort to find a better way to organise ourselves? Because at this point, anyone trying to say we don't need such a thing is clearly taking the piss. What little sense there is, thinly distributed amongst the wealthy and powerful, would surely be interested in sponsoring an effort to turn away from circling the drain, wouldn't you think?

Would you be interested in installing a game on your phone that could feed you, and maybe even pay off your house in a few years? That wants to help you quit your job sucking off The Man, so you're free to spend your time actually helping the world?

It's called... Hack Reality.

Hope shouldn't be an obscene shambling zombie.

https://youtu.be/YMX29YeKuPI

the game is a terrible idea. though I love where you are coming from.

But people don’t want to fuck the billionaires. they want to be them

the game is a terrible idea

Compared to what? This space is fucking empty.

There are reportedly 2,781 billionaires worldwide, controlling combined assets of $14.2 trillion (source: Forbes). As a thought experiment, if you divided those assets equally between a world population of 8.1 billion people, it amounts to $1,753 per person. A sum roughly equal to the annual GDP per capita in some of the world's poorest countries, or one month's rent cheque in a major global city.

The real issue with billionaires then is not the sum of the assets they control, per se, but the ability to convert that into power. The politics of almost every country is distorted in the interests of those 2,781 billionaires. In other words, the top 0.0000003% determine the fundamental aspects of how our societies function.

I don't have any solutions, beyond quantifying the problem in simple terms. A suggestion is that we ought to think in terms of inequality of power, instead of inequality of access to resources, even if they are indelibly linked.

Plenty of them just want a cheap Maccy-D, designer clothing and a flash BMW, they do not really cogitate much beyond that.

Right. Is this 'human nature' or culturally produced?

This is not an attack on anyone (and I very much include myself within it), but it depresses me how much of this site is dedicated to consumerism.

If you give it to the kids
70% would vote Andrew Tate as supreme leader, 20% Greta and 10% fucking pikachu or whoever would them a pair of crocs/nasty trainers in return for their dna

Pretty much the same as any age group to be honest just with different generational figureheads

But at least as they watched the global emergency reach a crescendo as the mounting catastrophes destroy everything, they wouldn't feel left out of the blame.

What would it look like if every person on the planet had basic access to a reasonable standard of food, housing, education and healthcare, and we all lived within sustainable environmental means?

Not sure that’s possible- you’d be asking people in the first world to fundamentally change their lives for the benefit of people in the developing world, and the people in the developing world would like what the current first world have.

I agree, and acknowledge it is a naive and simplistic question.

But how is the alternative acceptable?

I agree, and acknowledge it is a naive and simplistic question.

It is and it isn't.

Why does someone want an insanely fast BMW that they'll get upset about receiving the inevitable supermarket scratches, which isn't very comfortable or practical and they can only ever use it's potential in the overtaking lane of a motorway slip ramp entrance for a second or two?

I mean let's be real here. It's is nothing but marketing that makes someone buy an M3.

Let's run with another thought experiment; What if that marketing was given to say, status massages? How would that change the environmental impact of consumerism? OK it wouldn't change the global inequity, but it's just an initial random e.g. of how if you shifted society to experience spending over buying useless shit.

There are options to how we drive consumerism.

s a thought experiment, if you divided those assets equally between a world population of 8.1 billion people, it amounts to $1,753 per person.

Not that I disagree with your overall point. But for me the more interesting thought experiment in that scenario is: what if we divided say 80% of that wealth among the bottom 80%? Ie from a lifestyle pov a negligible change for billionaires.

“First world” “Developing World”

There’s better terminology tbh

Even before the romans came along we were embellishing horse bridles with fancy metal work and wanting the finest swords, fabric was dyed different colours and merchants traveled great distances to trade precious stones.
All this when just staying alive was not an easy task.
After millennia of wanting fancy pointless embellishments I can’t see consumerism going out of fashion very soon.

Wanting nice stuff isn’t the same as a choice of 50 different toothpastes obscuring your capacity for self determination.

The power of commerce was nowhere near as pronounced as it is now. Freedom is now defined as what products you can by rather than what you can do where you can go or live