You know, if you spend a week without looking at the news or the internet, the world seems a much nicer, happier, safer place. I think all the dramatic people and angry depressives live in those two places. Maybe we feel the times we live in are screwed because we hang out in the places where the absolute most negative people in our populations like to publish their views. Like a huge unhappy echo chamber #weekofftheinternet
@@taylorc2542 Yahoo, must took away the comments section, which almost always provided more accurate and more facts related to the story, than the original author did. Sometimes, embarrassingly so.
Almost every time Niall Ferguson takes a contrarian stance, my reaction is that he's being a troll. But then I listen to his argument and often times I find myself agreeing at the very least with the broad outline. Niall is a wonderful historian. It's why I've read most of his books and keep coming back for more.
He’s regarded by some schools of thought to be quite pro-empire so, just like all historians (who each have their own angle), everything he says and writes should be taken with the ever-so-slightest grain of salt
I have to concur. The truth of this does give me great apprehension, though, that we are only just at the beginning of what will a very tumultuous time in western culture.
It's a frightening prospect but I think I'm witnessing the very thing unfolding around me, in the news, in my own life. There has been a dramatic polarisation of opinion in the last decade as exampled in the Brexit campaign and result. There is little actual meaningful debate anymore. The opposite is the case, with universities of all places denying the right of individuals to argue a case and for students to listen and adjudge different sides of the issue. Even silence is being viewed as a political stance. Are we headed for the extremes as indicated in this talk? The signs are there......
"Even silence is being viewed as a political stance." - This is more terrifying than rioting. This allows those you don't even communicate with to decide for you what you think.
It's the false dichotomy or "false choice" logical fallacy. Since you're not for us, you're against us! Since you are silent, you condone racism! Since you didn't applaud the statue being torn down, you want slavery returned. "You're a heretic." "No, You're a heretic!" Wow. Good and timely stuff.
It is well and good to see you posting, Mr. Buckley. Yes, it is agreed that many Americans know little about history and the 30 Years War was the product of the first information revolution. However, Mr. Buckley, I am loathe on taking your advice because you're - ahem - dead. Well, as you know, it's rather bad form to take advice from a zombie even if said zombie is quite correct in his pontifications on the current political stratums affecting the aggregate politics of the United States.
It's analogous to teenagers and young adults implicitly marking their birth dates as the inception point of historical relevancy. As a teacher, I can't tell you how many times I've seen that. It seems that you have to live enough history yourself in order to understand what history means.
@Zarbi Zigoto .... Hell that is just the beginning of an America Critique. By spending too much time pursuing money, which you have to because that is the way the system works, you miss out on the rest of the world and its history. By needing to be armed you have to be weary of others who may also be armed. By not having not having a national health system you are always just two short steps from bankruptcy. A the same time you are under pressure to keep spending because the GDP is a measurement of national success...... As America is the greatest country in the world and that needs to be proven.
@@robinbeckford314 many white Americans have been manipulated by misinformation outlets like QAnon and the thousands of Twitter accounts, including Donald Trump's, who spread dangerous nonsensical conspiracy theories.
If it took 130 years to pass through the last period of unrest and upheaval, and history moves 10 times faster now, then everything will be calmed down in 13 years. *_Quick maths_*
This is the subtext of his speech. It's what he's really saying. It is meant to direct concern away from clear rising authoritarianism and corporate hegemony and toward powerless people on Twitter. On one hand you have Trump caging children and kidnapping people in Portland, Modi in India, Bolsonaro in Brazil, etc. On the other you have @Foucaultfan6969 shouting on social media. Think about how much power these two sides have, if you are inclined to be worried about anti racism, which I am not. This is why I don't like this speech.
We need to be kinder and more respectful of each other, no matter how difficult it is to do in the face of verbal and political violence, in this age more than in any other.
I had a similar thought a few months ago in relation to the "red states" and the "blue states" in the US being similar to the Catholic states and the Lutheran states in the Holy Roman Empire (Germany) prior to the Thirty Years War. This includes that people in those days moved between states because of their religion/ideology, ie from 1546 they had the choice of EITHER following the (Catholic or Lutheran only - religion of their prince OR moving to where the prince was of the other religion. It's not quite the same in the US now but, as ideologies (and the associated government policies) become more polarised in each state, and their being only two main political parties, more and more people - on the left OR the right - will, I am assuming, exercise their option to move to a state more aligned with their values, in turn creating further polarisation. Any Americans out there, what do you think?
@@stephenconway2468 Yes it would but the urban and rural divide is already largely reflected in the blue and red state divide. The reason I thought of states specifically is because of their powers to make laws binding, and collect taxes from, their residents, and because they are already, to varying degrees, polarised. But then there's also the issue of what people want (as reflected in their online comments) and what they will accept in "real life". I have significant ideological differences of the government of the state where I live, but I'm not moving anywhere either because this is my home.
Highly unlikely to happen, because your basic premise is on shaky ground, to say the least. The reality is that most of the country is heading blue. Many of the red states are on the verge of becoming blue, e.g. Georgia, where a left-leaning black woman recently came within a hair's breadth of becoming the first black female state governor in US history. Actually, if not for voter suppression, most if not all of the Deep South states would currently be blue, mainly due to their large black populations, but also due to the fact that there are more liberal- or left-leaning Caucasian voters in those states than the hackneyed old cliches about the South would suggest. The larger cities in the South are almost uniformly blue, e.g. Birmingham, Alabama and Jackson, Mississippi, both being the largest cities in their respective red states while those cities are themselves deeply blue. And liberal, blue Metropolitan Atlanta makes up nearly sixty percent of the state of Georgia. On the conservative, red side, Trump's shrieking hordes of cult followers are overwhelmingly old and will have died off within the next twenty years. Also, in reality, hardly anyone in the US relocates from one state to another simply because they don't like how that state tends to vote in Presidential elections, which is the main criterion for calling a state red or blue. For one thing, most Americans do not have the financial resources to just up and move to a different part of this vast country. Moving from one region to another within the US is not like moving from Kent to Cornwall; it's more like moving from Ireland to Georgia (the country, not the US state). So no, the US is not going to bifurcate into two or more countries, no matter how much Professor Amy Chua and her handlers in the Chinese intelligence services would like us to.
His book the square and the tower goes into the significances of networks and hierarchy as well as more of this. Fantastic read if anyone is interested.
If you think that was great you should search for his ''The six killer apps of the western civilization''. I saw this series on tv and it was comprised of 6 different episodes, each talking about a different aspect (''app'') that propelled the west to economic and political power.
@@TheJoelC17 Rome had for many centuries successfully incorporated migrants into the Empire, in fact that was the source of their military strength, and (as used to happen in the US) those migrants quickly became fully Roman. However those ideals went downhill over the centuries, and the Roman ruling class mismanaged the massive influx of Goths (who were refugees from the Huns) by exploitation, discrimination, corruption, and sanctioned profiteering from their deprivation (eg selling them dog meat at vastly inflated prices). I personally think it's a stretch to blame this on Christianity's teachings -- a "post hoc" argument -- when those teachings would have led to the opposite treatment, and the decline in governance and ideals had been steadily downwards since long before Constantine. I'm willing to be persuaded there are ways in which I'm wrong on both points, though. Or that I'm joining the dots incorrectly.
@@TheJoelC17 You fail to mention the attack of political Islam from about 720 until the 787 when the Catholic Church took seriously the intrusive Muslims. The purveyors of history are clueless or are they? Especially in regard to the Muslim attacks. Eaglegards 🦅...
The new ideas spread by the printing press resulted in social upheavals and the wars that changed the European continent. It shifted the balance of power away from Spain and to northern Europe, establishing the world-leadership of the Northerners in the new oceanic era. Buckle up Buttercups!!!
He did say it took 130 years. Mostly empires, colonisation and expansion was far more interesting. A certain amount of acceptance between protestants and catholics, as well but religion did help shape foreign policy.
We got out of it in the past by inventing the nation state and giving it a monopoly (or near monopoly) on legitimate violence. But that monopoly is one thing that is now breaking down.
Simplistic, but very valid. I agree that we are living in a time similar to that of the creation of the printing press, which was not a pleasant time to live, especially if you resided in Germany. Even England had some major issues. Other missing links are rising population without the corresponding rise in the ability to feed people. I am uncertain at what point we are at, but we could well be close to the equivalent of 1618, which is disturbing.
Unless Ferguson can show that the development of prices & quantities of radio (and later on television sets) during the course of the 20th century wouldn't constitute the same graphs, this argument proves little. There was a lot of polarization, civil unrest, iconoclasm and wars in the thirties and fourties of the 20th century as well, and one might argue the then recently mass commodified technology of radio had a lot to do with that. But of course, this cuts against the grain of his claim no analogy with the mid-20th century is of any use to understand what's going on today.
Yes yes technology, nevertheless the lessons from the past are there to be learned. As a dedicated "free" marketeer, one thing Ferguson will never do is blame 40 years of an economic system which has given to the rich and taken from the rest of us.
I am watching the full version on their website. What troubles me about it is that Niall Ferguson (in the full version) makes the judgement that the events of 2016 (Brexit and Trump) are bad. He calls it the 'Annus Horibulus' and states that it is when the utopian dream "went horribly wrong". He is an historian. He should know better. Perhaps a 100 years from now folks will look back and say, "Thank God they did that in 2016". Ferguson's short-term, left-wing liberal bias is clearly showing at the expense of any academic objectivity that he might attempt to claim.
Peter Eastwood He also foretold, wrongly, that "there would be blood" ie violence following the 2008 financial crisis, such was its magnitude. Nevertheless he is an interesting mind.
My god, man. Ferguson is neither left-wing nor a liberal. Far, far, from it. This is a man that proclaimed the British Raj to be beneficial to the 'development of India', despite the many massacres, because the British left some railway tracks behind. He simply prefers his racism to be a little more genteel, less vulgar than some of the worst excesses of Trump or the Brexiteers.
Don Burgundy - The definition of right wing is something like adherence to minimal government intervention, free market economics, and acceptance of natural law inequalities. The present Tory party does not subscribe to any of those principles. So, Ferguson being a Tory does not make him a right-winger. Theresa May is a Tory, but to call her rightwing is ridiculous. Ben Tolhurst - Up to 1874 the British Raj was run by the British East India Company, which was a Crown Chartered monopoly. Free markets were the last thing they were in favor of. In fact, the whole British Empire was a rigged, paternalistic globalist endeavour for the benefit of insiders. One can't say it was left wing in the marxist sense as its genesis pre-dates Marx, but it was far from rightwing by todays standards. Empires and Imperial aspirations per se are not necessarily anti-left-wing. Look at the Soviet empire, the USSR. To imply (or assert) that Trump is rascist is to show that you have drunk too much MSM Koolaide. To say Ferguson is rascist when he is married to Ayaan Hirsi Ali is just ludicrous. I repeat, Ferguson is a left leaning, globalist, acedemic. I'll grant he is not an out and out marxist and has spoken against socialist regimes and restrictions. But he is still a big-government globalist, i.e leftist.
He sounds a lot like this guy: "In those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and, as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.' By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of the 'freedom of the press.' In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless slave of the owners, molds public opinion." -Adolf Hitler.
The problem is relativism and the abandonment of truth and reason. Truth has been supplanted by feelings and altruism. All due respect to Niall, but this polarisation started in the 60s - long before the internet.
“Truth has been supplanted by feelings and altruism” could be applied to any point in history. You’re talking about something very generic and very different than what he is talking about and saying he’s wrong. I think you missed most of what he was saying.
You guys need to have a free membership for people who are unemployed or cannot simply afford a membership fee but believe in the principles of your organization
Thanks to the financial support of members of Long Now, we are able to keep most of our content freely available! You can subscribe to our audio podcasts (longnow.org/seminars/podcast) and watch the highlights and full videos of the lectures that we produce (longnow.org/seminars). We also publish articles and long-form essays on our blog and Medium channel. Thank you for your interest in Long Now and we hope that you enjoy these resources on long-term thinking!
Well, on the plus side, if it took 130 years back in the 16/17th century to resolve then it should ONLY take 13 years now, so about a decade. That seems to fit in some way. Just re-watched this after several years. It still fits the Zeitgeist.
The biggest thing today is EROI. We are living in a falling EROI and debt is taking the place of lowering energy. The chart of oil and population are identical. Oil had an EROI of 100 to 1 at the end of the depression. Today it's 17 to 1 and falling. Solar is 3 to 1, wind is 14 to 1. Our society needs between 20 and 30 to 1 to function. Unless a new energy source is found the world will enter a depression that will never end.
@@bigdog5128 expected return on investment. He's saying that human society has become dependent on the ability to reliably extract energy and grow to ever increasing bounds.
2:41 Not as terrifying as you would suggest. First, I would refer you to the two graphs that you showed at 1:20. The timescales relating to the printing press extend to the year 1635. The timescale relating to the sale of personal computers go up to 2005. By 1635 all the religious wars had been fought and done while it is now 2018 and we have not seen the kind of terrifying catastrophic wars that you seem to be implying.
It always take a match to start the fire. This is pure speculation on my part but I speculate the match that will set the USA on the road to an information war will be the three events in 2019 that will set the nation ablaze: 1. Economic instability due to the stock market. 2. The collapse of the Federal Government executive branch. 3. Massive terrorist like attacks. You're seeing all three taking place.
What he doesn't mention is that Erasmus was the 1st best seller of the 15th C. Publishers competed to publish his works. Erasmus was an Enlightened thinker feted by all the crown heads of Europe, offered official positions and in correspondence with the great & good. He was rejected because of the counter-reformation when both sides retrenched into absolutist positions ; there was no room for thinking only dogma. The persecution of witches by both sides came from the retrenchment not from the invention of printing . Nor did it facilitate the persecution as it was performed by officials who would have acted the same way communicating with parchment. The century of persecution culminated in the 30yrs war (1618-48) and ended, not with the Enlightenment but with mysticism. All the great thinkers spent the majority of their time on mysticism : Newton, Keppler, John Napier (logarithms), Tych Brahe etc All of whom devoted far more energy to mysticism and made scientific advances as a by-product.
@@vinm300 In Praise of Folly - A difficult book to read (for me) but still a works required for our sakes to chew and chew on to unlock the mental and spiritual nutrition contained therein.
@@peterjongsma2754 I agree, although Luther's intention was reform the consequence of his actions was to divide. Erasmus was extremely popular across Europe : in Spain everyone read his book Enchiridion militis Christiani (1503) When the Reformation occurred BOTH sides became entrenched in extremism (that's why there was massive witch and heretic persecution). When both sides entrenched themselves in extremism there was no place for Erasmus and he died in rejection.
The chronology skimmed at the very end of this segment is not quite right: the Peasants’ Revolt took place 60 years before the printing press. I’m going to try to find the rest of this talk, in there hope that it’s not going to play as fast and loose with chronology as this moment. (I’m all for “bigger picture” approaches, but I don’t think “blending” things is a good way to get there.)
'when he said at the start "it's not like the 1930's, the 1970's...." i guessed he was going to say the 16th century after the printing press was invented
@Kojii Naz i'm guessing it's because Niall and I both saw the same newspaper article a couple of decades ago saying the internet was going to make the modern world most like the era after the printing press was invented
Today's political polarisation may echo the religious polarisation of the Reformation, but technology does not explain its cause, only its amplification. The question is why people take different views to the extent of fighting for them to the death.
My dude, saying you disavow the concept or don't consider it important is one thing, but to refuse to accept it's existence strikes me as a strange species of ignorance.
@@PantomimeHorse The term "verbal violence" is a contradiction. Violence is physical. "Verbal" indicates the use of words. You might as well tell me that there's round squares.
@@Aristocles22 That's a fair point. And I hear you, I do. I just did a quick google hoping to add intellectual ballast to my argument, but the OED agrees with you. But words have a power of their own, and that power can damage other human beings, just a surely as a punch. I believe that all of us, as members of our shared society, have a duty to each other, to try to allow each other to live as freely as they can, and to reject the imposition, verbal or otherwise, of force onto others.
@@PantomimeHorse You were good until the fourth sentence. Then you degenerated into a mess of ideological polemic unsupported by the facts. Stop giving us these rambling speeches filled with nice-sounding buzzwords and phrases ("shared society", "duty to each other") which are vague to the point of meaningless and start making sense. There's no such thing as forcing someone to do something with words alone. Actions impose. Words are just sound.
well if we're replaying the events following the invention of moveable type but at 10 times the speed the near global war should only last about 13 years and kill 1.5 billion. just to give some perspective on what he's hoping we can avoid
Deception of this video is that it drops it with an an accusation against the “peasants because of Martin Luther”. Wrong!!! It was the evil oppression by the Roman Catholic Leaders and the “peasants” had enough.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996. Started the divide. Suddenly politics became a pastime and anyone who didn't have an opinion before were now choosing sides.
You know, if you spend a week without looking at the news or the internet, the world seems a much nicer, happier, safer place. I think all the dramatic people and angry depressives live in those two places. Maybe we feel the times we live in are screwed because we hang out in the places where the absolute most negative people in our populations like to publish their views. Like a huge unhappy echo chamber #weekofftheinternet
Ignorance is bliss, then?
Spot on! I got off the youtwittokface over a month ago, and I am more productive, I sleep better, I enjoy my days.
@@ignaciobenjamindebortoli7819 no.
Internet companies like FB, Instagram and online news outlets are designed (unintentionally) to make us unhappy.
@@ignaciobenjamindebortoli7819 which is better ? To be ignorant of something or to be horribly misinformed about something ?
OP, so true.
Too bad we're all hopelessly addicted to our internet fix.
He was my Professor at LSE, never have I met a more educated and wise man.
How about compared with Starkey? You had him too?
The irony is that the very thing he talks about is happening in the comments section.
The printing press of the people, and the high priest of our time (journalist/Big Tech) are so scared of it that they are taking it away.
No it ain't, ya jerk!... Just kidding. You're right, of course.
@@taylorc2542 Yahoo, must took away the comments section, which almost always provided more accurate and more facts related to the story, than the original author did. Sometimes, embarrassingly so.
You're a heritic!
Almost every time Niall Ferguson takes a contrarian stance, my reaction is that he's being a troll. But then I listen to his argument and often times I find myself agreeing at the very least with the broad outline. Niall is a wonderful historian. It's why I've read most of his books and keep coming back for more.
🎯
"history happens 10 times faster now"
No wonder it's so exhausting
Yep, at the speed of light.
@Xadion And soon we might be the machines. Something-something #Transhumanism
Wow, these comments were quite accurate and timely. I need to read more of him.
It's scary how a lot of switch on people predicted this coming. Yet the wider western public was blinded.
Dr. Ferguson is very interesting to read and watch.. To me, he's one of the most poignant and profound thinkers of our time.
He’s regarded by some schools of thought to be quite pro-empire so, just like all historians (who each have their own angle), everything he says and writes should be taken with the ever-so-slightest grain of salt
He’s a wanker folks!
That backdrop is going to give me an aneurysm.
At least you'll be anesthetized from this talk.
It made my mind travel into a different dimension.
LMAO.
Now my head hurts......Thanks.
came down to the comments to see if I was the only one. Glad to see it was the first comment.
lol
I can't believe this video is in 2019. It says a lot about what's happening in 2020
This guy is a crystal ball. I need to find what he's saying today.
*It's 2021 now*
But wait, there's more!
We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us
- Marshall McLuhan
Wow, that was probably the best historical analogy for this day and age I've seen. 18mo. later it seems even MORE accurate if that's even possible.
I have to concur. The truth of this does give me great apprehension, though, that we are only just at the beginning of what will a very tumultuous time in western culture.
It's a frightening prospect but I think I'm witnessing the very thing unfolding around me, in the news, in my own life. There has been a dramatic polarisation of opinion in the last decade as exampled in the Brexit campaign and result. There is little actual meaningful debate anymore. The opposite is the case, with universities of all places denying the right of individuals to argue a case and for students to listen and adjudge different sides of the issue. Even silence is being viewed as a political stance. Are we headed for the extremes as indicated in this talk? The signs are there......
"Even silence is being viewed as a political stance." - This is more terrifying than rioting. This allows those you don't even communicate with to decide for you what you think.
It's the false dichotomy or "false choice" logical fallacy. Since you're not for us, you're against us! Since you are silent, you condone racism! Since you didn't applaud the statue being torn down, you want slavery returned. "You're a heretic." "No, You're a heretic!" Wow. Good and timely stuff.
No, we are not "headed" there. We are there.
"Anything that happened before the United States, is irrelevant to the history...."
[BANG!!]
Sorry, fellow Americans, but he's exactly correct!!
It is well and good to see you posting, Mr. Buckley. Yes, it is agreed that many Americans know little about history and the 30 Years War was the product of the first information revolution. However, Mr. Buckley, I am loathe on taking your advice because you're - ahem - dead. Well, as you know, it's rather bad form to take advice from a zombie even if said zombie is quite correct in his pontifications on the current political stratums affecting the aggregate politics of the United States.
"History started in 1776. Everything before that was a mistake." -Ron Swanson
[[[BIGGER BANG]]]
William F. Buckley Jr, I'm sorry...did you say something??
It's analogous to teenagers and young adults implicitly marking their birth dates as the inception point of historical relevancy. As a teacher, I can't tell you how many times I've seen that. It seems that you have to live enough history yourself in order to understand what history means.
@Zarbi Zigoto .... Hell that is just the beginning of an America Critique.
By spending too much time pursuing money, which you have to because that is the way the system works, you miss out on the rest of the world and its history.
By needing to be armed you have to be weary of others who may also be armed.
By not having not having a national health system you are always just two short steps from bankruptcy.
A the same time you are under pressure to keep spending because the GDP is a measurement of national success...... As America is the greatest country in the world and that needs to be proven.
Recorded in 2020 yet so incredibly prescient. Amazing snippet of this lecture.
2018 I think, but yes, prescient as you said.
He's so right. There was also a huge wave of misinformation being disseminated at the time of the invention of the printing press. Sound familiar?
Yes, exceedingly so. When in the history of human culture was there not a huge wave of misinformation disseminated?
Jet fuel can melt steel beams. That's what "they" told me.
No. Burning jet fuel can compromise steel beams.
What are you saying? That the media was manipulated? How could that happen? |-)
@@robinbeckford314 many white Americans have been manipulated by misinformation outlets like QAnon and the thousands of Twitter accounts, including Donald Trump's, who spread dangerous nonsensical conspiracy theories.
There's something quite telling about human nature when two similar things happen 500 years apart and we react very similarly to both of them.
"The more things change, the more they stay the same."
Human behaviour hasn't changed one iota in thousands of years. We've just improved the technology with which to slaughter one another.
If it took 130 years to pass through the last period of unrest and upheaval, and history moves 10 times faster now, then everything will be calmed down in 13 years. *_Quick maths_*
Maybe but the energy has to go somewhere so it will probably be 13 years of unrest and upheaval but orders of magnitude greater.
“You’re a heretic, no you’re a heretic!” can easily be replaced today with “you’re a racist, no you’re a racist!” today. Scary stuff.
or "you're not a real American".
@@DylanVotaire or you are no Black enough
I have seen that on Twitter
@@WolfsH0ok I've heard that from Biden himself. That's a DNC-approved take. xD
This is the subtext of his speech. It's what he's really saying. It is meant to direct concern away from clear rising authoritarianism and corporate hegemony and toward powerless people on Twitter. On one hand you have Trump caging children and kidnapping people in Portland, Modi in India, Bolsonaro in Brazil, etc. On the other you have @Foucaultfan6969 shouting on social media. Think about how much power these two sides have, if you are inclined to be worried about anti racism, which I am not. This is why I don't like this speech.
God, this man is a good speaker. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is persuasive
We need to be kinder and more respectful of each other, no matter how difficult it is to do in the face of verbal and political violence, in this age more than in any other.
I had a similar thought a few months ago in relation to the "red states" and the "blue states" in the US being similar to the Catholic states and the Lutheran states in the Holy Roman Empire (Germany) prior to the Thirty Years War.
This includes that people in those days moved between states because of their religion/ideology, ie from 1546 they had the choice of EITHER following the (Catholic or Lutheran only - religion of their prince OR moving to where the prince was of the other religion.
It's not quite the same in the US now but, as ideologies (and the associated government policies) become more polarised in each state, and their being only two main political parties, more and more people - on the left OR the right - will, I am assuming, exercise their option to move to a state more aligned with their values, in turn creating further polarisation.
Any Americans out there, what do you think?
Interesting comment. Would the Metropolitan versus Rural also be a good split?
@@stephenconway2468 Yes it would but the urban and rural divide is already largely reflected in the blue and red state divide. The reason I thought of states specifically is because of their powers to make laws binding, and collect taxes from, their residents, and because they are already, to varying degrees, polarised.
But then there's also the issue of what people want (as reflected in their online comments) and what they will accept in "real life". I have significant ideological differences of the government of the state where I live, but I'm not moving anywhere either because this is my home.
@@maddyg3208 - The reason I was interested in the increasing move to cities is changing the dynamic. However, you raise some excellent points
Highly unlikely to happen, because your basic premise is on shaky ground, to say the least. The reality is that most of the country is heading blue. Many of the red states are on the verge of becoming blue, e.g. Georgia, where a left-leaning black woman recently came within a hair's breadth of becoming the first black female state governor in US history. Actually, if not for voter suppression, most if not all of the Deep South states would currently be blue, mainly due to their large black populations, but also due to the fact that there are more liberal- or left-leaning Caucasian voters in those states than the hackneyed old cliches about the South would suggest. The larger cities in the South are almost uniformly blue, e.g. Birmingham, Alabama and Jackson, Mississippi, both being the largest cities in their respective red states while those cities are themselves deeply blue. And liberal, blue Metropolitan Atlanta makes up nearly sixty percent of the state of Georgia. On the conservative, red side, Trump's shrieking hordes of cult followers are overwhelmingly old and will have died off within the next twenty years.
Also, in reality, hardly anyone in the US relocates from one state to another simply because they don't like how that state tends to vote in Presidential elections, which is the main criterion for calling a state red or blue. For one thing, most Americans do not have the financial resources to just up and move to a different part of this vast country. Moving from one region to another within the US is not like moving from Kent to Cornwall; it's more like moving from Ireland to Georgia (the country, not the US state). So no, the US is not going to bifurcate into two or more countries, no matter how much Professor Amy Chua and her handlers in the Chinese intelligence services would like us to.
@@stephenconway2468 Thanks
That is a very scary analogy but when you think about it........
Wow, this was 2 years ago. Deja vu!
So that's an alarmingly frightening analogy...
gotta see the entire talk-outstanding!
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's husband, what an amazingly important couple ❤️️
Wonder what their exes think about that? - hey, you started it!
His book the square and the tower goes into the significances of networks and hierarchy as well as more of this. Fantastic read if anyone is interested.
This is brilliant, where is the full talk ?
The link on the bottom left at the end. longnow.org/seminars/02018/nov/19/networks-and-power/
@Scranvan Thank you.😊
If you think that was great you should search for his ''The six killer apps of the western civilization''. I saw this series on tv and it was comprised of 6 different episodes, each talking about a different aspect (''app'') that propelled the west to economic and political power.
I was looking for this. Thank you!
"History began on July 4th, 1776. Everything before that was a mistake." - Ron Swanson
Anyone who thinks like that is refusing to learn from the wide breadth of human history available to them.
@@nicholashildenbrand8632 It's a joke from a popular comedy in the US.
Wow, the potential for 130 years of the same political unrest that we’re dealing with today? Thank you Internet!
Actually, there are considerable similarities with the collapse of the Roman Empire. Civilization is under attack, from outside and inside.
What was the revolutionary innovation of that time?
@@TheJoelC17 Rome had for many centuries successfully incorporated migrants into the Empire, in fact that was the source of their military strength, and (as used to happen in the US) those migrants quickly became fully Roman. However those ideals went downhill over the centuries, and the Roman ruling class mismanaged the massive influx of Goths (who were refugees from the Huns) by exploitation, discrimination, corruption, and sanctioned profiteering from their deprivation (eg selling them dog meat at vastly inflated prices). I personally think it's a stretch to blame this on Christianity's teachings -- a "post hoc" argument -- when those teachings would have led to the opposite treatment, and the decline in governance and ideals had been steadily downwards since long before Constantine.
I'm willing to be persuaded there are ways in which I'm wrong on both points, though. Or that I'm joining the dots incorrectly.
@@TheJoelC17 You fail to mention the attack of political Islam from about 720 until the 787 when the Catholic Church took seriously the intrusive Muslims. The purveyors of history are clueless or are they? Especially in regard to the Muslim attacks. Eaglegards 🦅...
The 2020s is going to be like living on an alien planet. Buckle up kids.
LOL you were right
@@MW-vg9dn hahaa indeed...
You don’t even know......
You were right
Goddamn on the money with this comment
I am more interested in how did we get out of it in the past? I mean can we apply those ideas, processes etc today?
The new ideas spread by the printing press resulted in social upheavals and the wars that changed the European continent. It shifted the balance of power away from Spain and to northern Europe, establishing the world-leadership of the Northerners in the new oceanic era. Buckle up Buttercups!!!
Everyone gets tired of fighting eventually.
well, the Thirty Years' War happened...
He did say it took 130 years.
Mostly empires, colonisation and expansion was far more interesting. A certain amount of acceptance between protestants and catholics, as well but religion did help shape foreign policy.
We got out of it in the past by inventing the nation state and giving it a monopoly (or near monopoly) on legitimate violence. But that monopoly is one thing that is now breaking down.
When I heard 'verbal violence' I cringed.
Ah, you're a victim of it then.
@@tzenophile Can you expound on this?
@@mike9250 Never explain a good joke, they told me. Sorry you didn't get it.
@@tzenophile Just got it. Nice. I had thought maybe you were eluding to a form of sjw trope. My apologies!
I had a similar reaction from reading your comment. How's that for irony?
He does indeed make some very good points.
“Hey, lads. It’s 1510 and I’ve just invested in books. Wish me luck!”
Fantastic, brilliant analogy. I'll put that in my back pocket and pull it out when needed. Thanks for uploading.
Our politics are not the same. However, what i have seen in your publications, is a call for reasonable discourse. I appreciate that.,
A meaty, cogent thesis. So rare these days. Please Sir, may I have some more.
Listen to him in the Reith Lectures 2012. Very interesting public lectures he delivered.
I heard this comparison to the inbox 15th century back in the 90's. It is apt.
A good mind. A great speaker.
Well said.
I just found this guy and I will have to check more out
I bet the Americans thought Martin Luther was from the 1960's.
Lutheranism is very popular in the US
That would be Martin Luther Koenig?
MLK believed in conversion therapy
he would be cancelled today
Not all americans have US public school educations.
Dang I’ve made the witch analogy myself without realizing the printing press played a role like the internet is.
Same, watching this video had a light bulb go off for me.
Brilliant, thanks.
Simplistic, but very valid. I agree that we are living in a time similar to that of the creation of the printing press, which was not a pleasant time to live, especially if you resided in Germany. Even England had some major issues. Other missing links are rising population without the corresponding rise in the ability to feed people. I am uncertain at what point we are at, but we could well be close to the equivalent of 1618, which is disturbing.
How do you agree that you are living in a time similar to that?
Yes indeed, he has this bang-on correct.
Critical thinking is adaptive to the age of mass media. For those that have it.
Curiously, there was a communication revolution in the 1930s, too: radio.
Unless Ferguson can show that the development of prices & quantities of radio (and later on television sets) during the course of the 20th century wouldn't constitute the same graphs, this argument proves little.
There was a lot of polarization, civil unrest, iconoclasm and wars in the thirties and fourties of the 20th century as well, and one might argue the then recently mass commodified technology of radio had a lot to do with that. But of course, this cuts against the grain of his claim no analogy with the mid-20th century is of any use to understand what's going on today.
Is it possible to watch the full talk anywhere? This little taste left me wanting to hear the rest!
replace "your're a heretic" "no your're a heretic" to "your're a racist" "no your're a racist" or "your're a fascist" and this is us today
Spot on. Nothing new under the sun, you just need to look further back. Recommend Barbara Tuchmans' A Distant Mirror.
Brilliant and scary book indeed!
A pox on whoever cut off this fantastic analysis prematurely! And all your family and kin and the horse you rode in on, too!!!
Damn that’s an interesting perspective
Very compelling!
Something to think about history happens 10X faster now than late 15th century
Yes yes technology, nevertheless the lessons from the past are there to be learned. As a dedicated "free" marketeer, one thing Ferguson will never do is blame 40 years of an economic system which has given to the rich and taken from the rest of us.
This is the capitalist system at work How can you blame It
Solid.
I am watching the full version on their website. What troubles me about it is that Niall Ferguson (in the full version) makes the judgement that the events of 2016 (Brexit and Trump) are bad. He calls it the 'Annus Horibulus' and states that it is when the utopian dream "went horribly wrong". He is an historian. He should know better. Perhaps a 100 years from now folks will look back and say, "Thank God they did that in 2016". Ferguson's short-term, left-wing liberal bias is clearly showing at the expense of any academic objectivity that he might attempt to claim.
Well his book on Empire certainly displayed no left-wing liberal bias
Peter Eastwood He also foretold, wrongly, that "there would be blood" ie violence following the 2008 financial crisis, such was its magnitude. Nevertheless he is an interesting mind.
My god, man. Ferguson is neither left-wing nor a liberal. Far, far, from it. This is a man that proclaimed the British Raj to be beneficial to the 'development of India', despite the many massacres, because the British left some railway tracks behind. He simply prefers his racism to be a little more genteel, less vulgar than some of the worst excesses of Trump or the Brexiteers.
Don Burgundy - The definition of right wing is something like adherence to minimal government intervention, free market economics, and acceptance of natural law inequalities. The present Tory party does not subscribe to any of those principles. So, Ferguson being a Tory does not make him a right-winger. Theresa May is a Tory, but to call her rightwing is ridiculous.
Ben Tolhurst - Up to 1874 the British Raj was run by the British East India Company, which was a Crown Chartered monopoly. Free markets were the last thing they were in favor of. In fact, the whole British Empire was a rigged, paternalistic globalist endeavour for the benefit of insiders. One can't say it was left wing in the marxist sense as its genesis pre-dates Marx, but it was far from rightwing by todays standards. Empires and Imperial aspirations per se are not necessarily anti-left-wing. Look at the Soviet empire, the USSR.
To imply (or assert) that Trump is rascist is to show that you have drunk too much MSM Koolaide. To say Ferguson is rascist when he is married to Ayaan Hirsi Ali is just ludicrous.
I repeat, Ferguson is a left leaning, globalist, acedemic. I'll grant he is not an out and out marxist and has spoken against socialist regimes and restrictions. But he is still a big-government globalist, i.e leftist.
Is the full lecture available? Does anyone have the link?
He sounds a lot like this guy:
"In those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and, as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.' By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of the 'freedom of the press.' In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless slave of the owners, molds public opinion."
-Adolf Hitler.
The problem is relativism and the abandonment of truth and reason. Truth has been supplanted by feelings and altruism. All due respect to Niall, but this polarisation started in the 60s - long before the internet.
“Truth has been supplanted by feelings and altruism” could be applied to any point in history. You’re talking about something very generic and very different than what he is talking about and saying he’s wrong. I think you missed most of what he was saying.
It's not PCs it's mobile phones.
It's not cost it's accessibility/ease.
The time and ease to access all info has been shrunk immeasurably.
mobile phones are used by village idiots to watch cat videos & "pro wrestling"
This is brilliant! Now where is the full lecture!
You can watch the full seminar here: longnow.org/seminars/02018/nov/19/networks-and-power/
You guys need to have a free membership for people who are unemployed or cannot simply afford a membership fee but believe in the principles of your organization
Thanks to the financial support of members of Long Now, we are able to keep most of our content freely available! You can subscribe to our audio podcasts (longnow.org/seminars/podcast) and watch the highlights and full videos of the lectures that we produce (longnow.org/seminars). We also publish articles and long-form essays on our blog and Medium channel. Thank you for your interest in Long Now and we hope that you enjoy these resources on long-term thinking!
Niall is very smart.
Excellent
Well, on the plus side, if it took 130 years back in the 16/17th century to resolve then it should ONLY take 13 years now, so about a decade.
That seems to fit in some way. Just re-watched this after several years. It still fits the Zeitgeist.
Great as always.
don't you just love the English subtitles for English speakers...
I hope you never lose your hearing, good sir.
cine pobre it must be Fergusons heavy Scottish accent.lol
The deaf exist
@@bazzatheblue Its as soft a Scottish accent as its possible to have.
It's necessary for deaf people and for people who don't speak english as their first language and find subs useful in case they lose a word or two.
Yes Niall, but where is volume 2 of the Kissinger biography?
The biggest thing today is EROI. We are living in a falling EROI and debt is taking the place of lowering energy. The chart of oil and population are identical. Oil had an EROI of 100 to 1 at the end of the depression. Today it's 17 to 1 and falling. Solar is 3 to 1, wind is 14 to 1. Our society needs between 20 and 30 to 1 to function.
Unless a new energy source is found the world will enter a depression that will never end.
movieklump what is eroi?
@@bigdog5128 expected return on investment. He's saying that human society has become dependent on the ability to reliably extract energy and grow to ever increasing bounds.
Niall does do a good turn for folks that don't know any better
2:41 Not as terrifying as you would suggest. First, I would refer you to the two graphs that you showed at 1:20. The timescales relating to the printing press extend to the year 1635. The timescale relating to the sale of personal computers go up to 2005. By 1635 all the religious wars had been fought and done while it is now 2018 and we have not seen the kind of terrifying catastrophic wars that you seem to be implying.
It always take a match to start the fire. This is pure speculation on my part but I speculate the match that will set the USA on the road to an information war will be the three events in 2019 that will set the nation ablaze: 1. Economic instability due to the stock market. 2. The collapse of the Federal Government executive branch. 3. Massive terrorist like attacks. You're seeing all three taking place.
I fear we have failed to learn the lessons of History.
This is a very interesting perspective. I can't say he's wrong.
is there anywhere we can find the full talk?
We would all do well to be students of history, there we have all errors of the past that we are destined to repeat in our ignorance.
Has he published anything on this?
Now I didn't see that coming 🤔
What he doesn't mention is that Erasmus was the 1st best seller of the 15th C.
Publishers competed to publish his works.
Erasmus was an Enlightened thinker feted by all the crown heads of Europe,
offered official positions and in correspondence with the great & good.
He was rejected because of the counter-reformation when both sides retrenched into absolutist positions ; there was no room for thinking only dogma.
The persecution of witches by both sides came from the retrenchment
not from the invention of printing . Nor did it facilitate the persecution as it was
performed by officials who would have acted the same way communicating
with parchment.
The century of persecution culminated in the 30yrs war (1618-48) and ended,
not with the Enlightenment but with mysticism.
All the great thinkers spent the majority of their time on mysticism : Newton,
Keppler, John Napier (logarithms), Tych Brahe etc
All of whom devoted far more energy to mysticism and made scientific
advances as a by-product.
Full disclosure : everything I've written is from a book by Hugh Trevor-Roper called Age of Expansion 1559-1660.
@@vinm300 In Praise of Folly - A difficult book to read (for me) but still a works required for our sakes to chew and chew on to unlock the mental and spiritual nutrition contained therein.
As a Catholic your analysis makes a lot of sense.
Luther did not unite :He divided.
@@peterjongsma2754 I agree, although Luther's intention was reform
the consequence of his actions was to divide.
Erasmus was extremely popular across Europe : in Spain
everyone read his book Enchiridion militis Christiani (1503)
When the Reformation occurred BOTH sides became entrenched
in extremism (that's why there was massive witch and heretic persecution).
When both sides entrenched themselves in extremism there was no place for Erasmus and he died in rejection.
Excellent vinm300
great video
Where can I watch the full talk?
The chronology skimmed at the very end of this segment is not quite right: the Peasants’ Revolt took place 60 years before the printing press. I’m going to try to find the rest of this talk, in there hope that it’s not going to play as fast and loose with chronology as this moment. (I’m all for “bigger picture” approaches, but I don’t think “blending” things is a good way to get there.)
There is no such thing as "verbal violence". He should have simply said vulgarity.
Well, and what came after the printing press? Revolution.
“You know how people want to tear down states these days, and rename things?” Oh yes we do
Great description of the Democratic Party.
This Is VERY WELL SAID!!! If I may point out one other little thing. Columbus bumping into a big chunk of land.
Mildest Edinburgh accent needs subtitles?! Lol.
took me half the talk to figure out that he was scottish and not english lol
@@trn0m961 wait hes scottish?
'when he said at the start "it's not like the 1930's, the 1970's...." i guessed he was going to say the 16th century after the printing press was invented
@Kojii Naz i'm guessing it's because Niall and I both saw the same newspaper article a couple of decades ago saying the internet was going to make the modern world most like the era after the printing press was invented
@Kojii Naz Get the stake, hay, and matches anyways. We have to play it safe
what is the Malleus Malificarum of our time?
Erica Worhatch White Fragility
Rape Culture
The Reformation was an example of a meme war.
Today's political polarisation may echo the religious polarisation of the Reformation, but technology does not explain its cause, only its amplification. The question is why people take different views to the extent of fighting for them to the death.
There's no such thing as "verbal violence."
My dude, saying you disavow the concept or don't consider it important is one thing, but to refuse to accept it's existence strikes me as a strange species of ignorance.
@@PantomimeHorse The term "verbal violence" is a contradiction. Violence is physical. "Verbal" indicates the use of words. You might as well tell me that there's round squares.
@@Aristocles22 That's a fair point. And I hear you, I do. I just did a quick google hoping to add intellectual ballast to my argument, but the OED agrees with you. But words have a power of their own, and that power can damage other human beings, just a surely as a punch. I believe that all of us, as members of our shared society, have a duty to each other, to try to allow each other to live as freely as they can, and to reject the imposition, verbal or otherwise, of force onto others.
@@PantomimeHorse You were good until the fourth sentence. Then you degenerated into a mess of ideological polemic unsupported by the facts. Stop giving us these rambling speeches filled with nice-sounding buzzwords and phrases ("shared society", "duty to each other") which are vague to the point of meaningless and start making sense. There's no such thing as forcing someone to do something with words alone. Actions impose. Words are just sound.
@@Aristocles22 Verbal violence is just like when calling a woman ma'am is a microaggression
well if we're replaying the events following the invention of moveable type but at 10 times the speed the near global war should only last about 13 years and kill 1.5 billion. just to give some perspective on what he's hoping we can avoid
Deception of this video is that it drops it with an an accusation against the “peasants because of Martin Luther”. Wrong!!! It was the evil oppression by the Roman Catholic Leaders and the “peasants” had enough.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996. Started the divide. Suddenly politics became a pastime and anyone who didn't have an opinion before were now choosing sides.
The archetype of the Lion is found in various types of men. Here, we see it in Niall Ferguson.