Paraguay. The more you research it, the more you’ll find it’s one of the top spots to ride out the coming decades. I do not usually advertise it cause immigration is continually growing, but I think anybody who watches Predictive History is probably the type of person I’d want to meet there.
Very cool. It’s a very self sufficient place in terms of resources and food, and geographically located in a safe part of the world away from nuclear fallout out and other issues. Maybe I’ll reach out to you if/when I visit!
You're right, the land is great for agriculture - And what the professor describes about the phases of society from village to mega cities, does apply to Paraguay and its population. I'm planning to apply for residency soon; you never know what will happen in a year or two regarding visa issues.
Was just there. It's a dump. The weather is horrendous (95F/80 percent humidity) 10 months a year. They can barely pave the roads in the "nice" parts of town (near Sol). The apartments smell like sewage. No tax base for civic improvements. In the middle of literally nowhere (the Chaco). A few ugly tax dodging glass towers above increasingly large favelas on the edge of town. But they have soybeans, I guess. And cheap power.
It’s a lot hypocritical, though I’m not an immigrant yet. I generally don’t promote it. I mentioned it here because people are immigrating anyways and there’s nothing I can do to stop it. So it might as well come from likeminded people. Scarcity is a real concept in the world, so it’s a bit like telling your friends about a nice beach spot while simultaneously (intentionally) not telling other people. It’s not that I don’t think there should be any immigrants at all.
In my country, the immigrants who make the prices go up are usually the wealthy ones who buy the houses from locals and use them sell them as rentals or Airbnb. I don't have problems with immigrants, rich or poor, but countries must implement mechanisms that allow the locals to get the priority in housing.
Great summary and overview. I'm personally quite happy I've come across your material from the YT channel and now your substack.
However, I can't help but shake the feeling that while "keeping it simple" (in terms of the explanation) is a very positive sign of being correct ("on the money"), and keeping in mind it's better to be generally right than exactly wrong, when we step into the weeds and look under hood about how societies function, it gets very complicated and complex.
For instance, today I read a wonderful short essay here on substack on psychopaths and their proclivity towards working in the financial industry and politics. And in my comment I lamented the lack of justice in our Western societies, how decreasing institutional trust and social capital are symptomatic of perceived and actual injustices, from financial services and bureaucracy/politics, when encountering dishonesty and psychopaths, which can be connected to your metric of openness and/or cohesiveness.
But finding an adequate solution for psychopathy, both in terms of a corrective and preventive, or even acknowledging this, at the very least it's complex and otherwise downright complicated.
It's clear smaller communities (village vs Town vs city) can overcome the coordination problem and can use social reputation to better effect, but even here, this requires a degree of honesty (a complicated metric to measure if ever there was one).
In general I really like your work. Thank you for sharing it and all the best!
A more appropriate answer ... immigrants are often used as cheap labor when the domestic workforce gets too demanding. It isn't any worse than, say, automation, but a society that outsources its workforce by either shipping it to other countries or pulling in laborers from other countries is ignoring the resentment growing in their workforce.
This leads to things like nationalism and racism. The immigrants are *not* the problem, it is those who would exploit them to manipulate society.
You are on point. If the United States or Canada would get rid of all illegal immigration, the locals who are accustomed to a higher quality of life won't fill the low wage positions which are essential for society like farming, cleaning the streets or livestock farming, even with a wage increase.
It has to do with the idea of elite overproduction.
Forest Kingfisher got it. We can see this all the way back to the founding days of the country. they once hated irish, italian, jewish--blaming everything on the weakest group of people. now they want to blame it on the mexicans and the chinese. Me being vietnamese also takes on the blunt of this hatred.
These poor uneducated masses, are used and discarded by their masters. But entirely helpless against their masters. Unable to organize. Unable to get educated on their own. lashes out at the very people they should ally with.
I agree that people are people and each human being is owed respect. That’s the problem. Immigration in the west is not about respect or providing opportunity. It’s about getting immigrants to do the work that natural born citizens are unwilling to do. You can see it in the west. I would bet good money that the janitor at your place of work is an immigrant because most consider that work beneath them. The west is hypocritical too. They love immigrants when they’re willing to do that kind of work, but if they try to climb the ladder resentment grows quickly. In the US I have heard shocking statements about Indian immigrants in particular which I think is due to their high ambition.
You're right in many respects, though it is not wise to frame it is a immigrant problem. One of the biggest reasons that immigrants take over jobs of the Canadians is the same as Europe or America: The Canadians are not willing to work at the same working conditions or wages as the immigrants.
The problem is not immigrants, the problem is that countries don't make policies that prioritize the necessities of its citizens, because it is easier to abuse immigrants, especially illegal immigrants.
Why do you think outsiders contribute to these things worsening as opposed to the natives? Both groups apport and extract from these systems.
Most people that immigrate are poor, so it makes sense that the average wealth, education, health declines, though it does not affect the natives.
Cohesion, employment and intelligence are not affected in any meaningful way. I would like to know you're reasoning for thinking this.
The only quasi-valid preoccupation is crime and public safety, since a lot of immigrants come from violent and war-torn countries and if they are kept in poverty ridden ghettos they might develop much of the violent tendencies that are commonplace in poor neighborhoods.
If immigration was such a problem, the United States, Canada, France, Spain, France and England wouldn't be the best countries in the world in regard to quality of life, though I know you may have differing opinions.
I respect you for trying to understand my point of view. However, I cannot agree with any of the statements in your post and I feel somewhat overwhelmed by where to begin.
I see two levels of misconception:
1. Misunderstanding of cultural and societal structures
There seems to be an implicit assumption that civilisation, culture and tradition do not really matter because they supposedly do not affect cohesion. I believe the opposite is true. A clear example is the professor’s reference to the hypothetical annexation of Canada into the USA: migrants would likely vote for the economically best outcome (annexation), while many Canadians would feel that such a development would undermine their culture and traditions.
In addition, there seems to be the idea that a nation state is entirely flexible with regard to its population, services and assets. But social security is a closed national system. If a large group of below-average productivity is added, then by definition the above-average group must bear the cost. The outcome is negative for the existing population. On top of this, rising demand for real estate shifts financial power significantly towards those who already own property – in most Western countries, that means baby boomers, as the professor also highlights.
2. Misinterpretation of data
There is ample empirical evidence for the points I raised earlier. Denmark, for example, publishes statistics comparing national productivity across groups (Danish, EU, MENA etc.). The MENA group significantly underperforms, with costs to the state and society exceeding their contribution. In Germany, studies confirm that immigration overall has a net negative fiscal effect. The impact of migration on real estate markets has likewise been thoroughly analysed in economic literature.
It is true that first-world countries with high immigration show high living standards. But looking only at averages misses important dynamics. These figures often fail to capture the negative trajectory over time or the decline in soft factors such as cohesion, community, trust and cultural continuity. Wealthier does not necessarily mean better if the trade-off is higher crime, loss of traditions and disintegration of social fabric. To put it polemically: is it really better to live in a wealthier English town facing those downsides, compared to a Polish town with stronger community and culture?
There are also misconceptions that cut across both levels, such as the claim that migration does not affect national average IQ. Logically, migration from countries with lower average IQ must reduce the host country’s average. Whether one likes the IQ metric or not, it is ultimately a test of cognitive ability, which can be tested and which is the IQ test.
I had not planned to write this post because the subject is vast, but I decided to respond nonetheless and link my points back to the professor’s work. If you watch more of his content, you will notice that he recognises these dynamics and does not present them as positive for civilisation or culture.
My recommendation is to move beyond mainstream public intellectualism. I used to be much closer to the position you seem to hold, but I have come to see that “convenient answers”, like blaming racists for negative developments, do not reflect reality. Many of the arguments I outlined are easily verifiable and work in context.
I really don't believe that social cohesion, culture or cohesion is such a big deal. If Canada wants to be a part of the United States, let it be. Cohesion is something that is easily achieved regardless of cultural difference. I would rather live in Poland because their public healthcare is better though I would not mind living in the "incohesive", multicultural England.
Besides, poor people are not of below average productivity because they work in essential sectors; I think that you are referring to the quantity of taxes they pay, because they pay less taxes, but generally require more government assistance.
I think that in discussions like this there is a dimension of the reality missing which is that people from Rich countries usually don't have many children which may result in an eventual population collapse. Immigration is a way to counter that, and I believe that many people will realize that they need more young foreigners in their country for the country to be able to sustain itself.
Nothing providing the immigrants assimilate into a functioning cohesive society. I haven't witnessed much of this. Division amongst cultures normally ensues. First rule of war........
The United States and some European countries are cohesive societies and very culturally diverse. The only meaningful divisions I see are from racist and xenophobic people.
I’m an ER physician, quite interested in transformational changes of our institutions. I’m intrigued by this content, lots of thoughts, but not organized well enough to comment intelligently. I’ll keep listening.
Lovin It, but I have doubts about the transition from decline to rise of societies. I think It IS something like this: Sometimes declining societies just get eaten by other more cohesive societies, other times groups Will break away like the semites Who became sheepers and rejected cities and lastly societies can get Revolution.
Rethinking money by Bernard Lietaer offers alternatives to our current parasitic money system. Search LETS (Local Exchange Trading System) or spender-signed currency.
Bernard Lietaer argues that communities need to have their own currencies, which are not affected by the petrodollar. Crypto is a good example, in his opinion, but it still lacks transparency and perpetuates the holding problem.
I love Lietaer’s works because he’s a true financial justice warrior. I love your works too, Prof. Jiang. You guys restored my humanity.
I would join your community professor. I would love the opportunity to grow my knowledge and bring my own skills to a community of good people. To build a better future for my children is my new purpose in life.
Rome to Byzantium: When the Western Roman Empire fell, its eastern half, the Byzantine Empire, survived for another thousand years. This was not a death but a transformation, preserving Roman laws, traditions, and administrative systems in a new form. This is a powerful example of a culture "rising" from the ashes of a collapsed predecessor.
The Rise of European Powers: You then note the rise of the French and British empires. You see the British as a successor to the Romans because Rome occupied the island of Britain. This highlights how new cultures can inherit and build upon the legacies of those who came before them, even in a "fragmented" way. The Roman occupation introduced infrastructure, law, and a foundational cultural layer that influenced the future development of Britain.
Let me help you flesh out the vision for the hope for humanity. I had been at this since 2013. I defended the USA 11 years and was a top contributor. They accused me of a chinese spy and imprisoned me without due process and broke every laws ever written. There is an imminent danger that average people cannot comprehend. You can build the discord channel, private invite only. I will contribute ideas and solutions for the issue you cited.
the United States as an extension of Roman culture. The American founders were heavily influenced by Roman republican ideals, architecture, and political thought. The very name of the U.S. Senate and the concept of a republic are direct links to ancient Rome. This suggests that the cultural lineage, beginning in Rome, continued its journey and re-emerged on a new continent. England/France, were all Romans when Rome ruled. when the USA fall, part of it will rise. It may be like another Italy, or another empire. who knows.
But we know if we create the new community, we can breath the life and culture into it.
Energy is the measure of how many people are working, and their attitude towards work. A society on the rise is one in which young people are being mentored in the trades and professions, and taking pride and satisfaction in their work. A society on the decline is one in which people hate their jobs, try to do as little work as possible, and engage in day-trading.
Openness is the measure of how mobile and meritocratic a society is. Are people rewarded for the work they do, or are they rewarded for who they know? Are people allowed to voice dissent and criticism, or are people who point out problems considered the problem?
Cohesion is the measure of trust and empathy in society. Are people willing to help strangers in need? Do people have genuine concern for the well-being of others? Are people willing to make sacrifices for the good of society?
When we stop asking other people to live as we say, we can start building that way of life.
I had been at this since 2013. instead of looking around at other community. I developed concepts that could be the solution.
1. simple and low cost. the network nation. similar to the nation state you mentioned. but moving it to the next phase 4.0 or 4th industrial revolution ready etc.
2. building an entirely new city with new gov, charter, management, economy, education, and culture that is the right kind.
I have a question. In this lecture, you speak about how no amount of external threat can divert the natural cycle of society, resulting in the fall of such a society. How then can one make the case, such as with Putinism, that a constant external threat, what you say, is not at all a medicine to this natural cycle? As with Russia, we learned that this continuous war and threat is what the Russian style of thinking requires to evolve, and this will serve as an antidote to what I assume is the natural cycle.
First, thank you so much for your great work. You make a huge difference in the world.
I have a question. Do you know a mechanism that helps communities outside of society, e.g. homeless young associations, indigenious, gypsies, punks, sea people etc., become climate change and fascism resilient? I don't mean organizing everything for them but support them in their ways to prepare themselves? Or maybe an international platform of cooperation and exchange for them (that is not bigtech)? These communities are usually ancient in culture but young in age, with as little bureaucracy as possible und quite flexible in their geography and sustenance. They've seen empires fall in the past and a couple of natural desasters and pandemics as well. I believe that's where the ressources for surviving exponential temperature rise can be found. But I'm not so sure about the political violence.
I truly believe in the next 30 years the world will look nothing like it did pre that virus. What that event in 2020 brought was a deluge of fear and yet it made the world stop turning. Not for essential workers but for the rest of us. We were all working the wheel so fast we had no time to be still and wonder why? Why am I here killing myself for me to only survive, pay bills, upgrade my car, upgrade my home, which just made me turn that wheel harder with no time to think.
After a few years our society became more self absorbed. More of let me be free, this is all bull. Working for the rich. Who made those rules? I certainly didn’t get a manual.
We all became entrepreneurs haha. Getting checks made us realize we need more life and less work. All the while the angst was brewing like a whirling dervish high as a kite.
White nationalism was given permission to raise its ugly feelings. One man gave permission to be who they ALWAYS WERE. It was a virus that spread across all continents. It will never be put to sleep again. Never. Well maybe after the fall of all societies in a few hundred years.
There is going to be a civil war. The deep rot in the roots of this tree must be expunged. The root and soil burned. The rot must be made to be gone before a new tree can be planted.
It won’t be planted. Civil war combined with cataclysms on the planet combined by new pandemics will let nature kill off segments of each continent. Europe will be barely populated. What will become is localized groups. Bands of like minded people. They will break off from each other, form their own communities.
In the end, after all is gone, humanity will begin again. The same destiny will befall humanity over and over. WHY? Because it is human nature. Until humanity learns to rise above its nature it is doomed to repeat itself. This is why people talk about raising your vibration. It’s all jumbo jumbo. What they really mean is man was made to rise above its nature for otherwise we are lower than animals who work within their nature and don’t rise. Mark my words. It will come through with pain and suffering. There is no place to hide. Not Mexico not Paraguay and not even a heaven.
I feel blessed, and I am thankful for being able to learn from your wisdom and understanding.
Your work is a bright light in the dark shadow of cultural and spiritual decay.
I myself am a strong believer in good. The love for humanity in the form of community and divine purpose.
Your classes are inspirational.
From my understanding of your class, the divine purpose of humanity is to create a prosperous and loving community through collective imagination, free from deception in love. Or rather, your intention is to point out the divine power of imagination and love.
Piketty completely ignores the role of central bank's money printer and resulting inflation when talking about causes of increasing income inequality and ROI of speculation.
Paraguay. The more you research it, the more you’ll find it’s one of the top spots to ride out the coming decades. I do not usually advertise it cause immigration is continually growing, but I think anybody who watches Predictive History is probably the type of person I’d want to meet there.
I'm in pgy
And my intuition got me there over a year ago. I left London 2 years ago.
Now that I'm watching this guys videos, I feel more assured that I made the right choice.
Very cool. It’s a very self sufficient place in terms of resources and food, and geographically located in a safe part of the world away from nuclear fallout out and other issues. Maybe I’ll reach out to you if/when I visit!
You're right, the land is great for agriculture - And what the professor describes about the phases of society from village to mega cities, does apply to Paraguay and its population. I'm planning to apply for residency soon; you never know what will happen in a year or two regarding visa issues.
Sure mate, drop me a text when you're around.
Was just there. It's a dump. The weather is horrendous (95F/80 percent humidity) 10 months a year. They can barely pave the roads in the "nice" parts of town (near Sol). The apartments smell like sewage. No tax base for civic improvements. In the middle of literally nowhere (the Chaco). A few ugly tax dodging glass towers above increasingly large favelas on the edge of town. But they have soybeans, I guess. And cheap power.
It is a little bit hypocritical to criticize a country for their growing immigration when you are calling for people to immigrate there.
It’s a lot hypocritical, though I’m not an immigrant yet. I generally don’t promote it. I mentioned it here because people are immigrating anyways and there’s nothing I can do to stop it. So it might as well come from likeminded people. Scarcity is a real concept in the world, so it’s a bit like telling your friends about a nice beach spot while simultaneously (intentionally) not telling other people. It’s not that I don’t think there should be any immigrants at all.
What are the problem immigrants are bringing to Paraguay?
Not much yet as there aren't as many foreigners as neighboring countries
But definitely the cost of real estate, for the locals.
In my country, the immigrants who make the prices go up are usually the wealthy ones who buy the houses from locals and use them sell them as rentals or Airbnb. I don't have problems with immigrants, rich or poor, but countries must implement mechanisms that allow the locals to get the priority in housing.
Great summary and overview. I'm personally quite happy I've come across your material from the YT channel and now your substack.
However, I can't help but shake the feeling that while "keeping it simple" (in terms of the explanation) is a very positive sign of being correct ("on the money"), and keeping in mind it's better to be generally right than exactly wrong, when we step into the weeds and look under hood about how societies function, it gets very complicated and complex.
For instance, today I read a wonderful short essay here on substack on psychopaths and their proclivity towards working in the financial industry and politics. And in my comment I lamented the lack of justice in our Western societies, how decreasing institutional trust and social capital are symptomatic of perceived and actual injustices, from financial services and bureaucracy/politics, when encountering dishonesty and psychopaths, which can be connected to your metric of openness and/or cohesiveness.
But finding an adequate solution for psychopathy, both in terms of a corrective and preventive, or even acknowledging this, at the very least it's complex and otherwise downright complicated.
It's clear smaller communities (village vs Town vs city) can overcome the coordination problem and can use social reputation to better effect, but even here, this requires a degree of honesty (a complicated metric to measure if ever there was one).
In general I really like your work. Thank you for sharing it and all the best!
Wow, an immigrant hating on other immigrants. What is the problem with the increase of immigration exactly?
A more appropriate answer ... immigrants are often used as cheap labor when the domestic workforce gets too demanding. It isn't any worse than, say, automation, but a society that outsources its workforce by either shipping it to other countries or pulling in laborers from other countries is ignoring the resentment growing in their workforce.
This leads to things like nationalism and racism. The immigrants are *not* the problem, it is those who would exploit them to manipulate society.
You are on point. If the United States or Canada would get rid of all illegal immigration, the locals who are accustomed to a higher quality of life won't fill the low wage positions which are essential for society like farming, cleaning the streets or livestock farming, even with a wage increase.
It has to do with the idea of elite overproduction.
Forest Kingfisher got it. We can see this all the way back to the founding days of the country. they once hated irish, italian, jewish--blaming everything on the weakest group of people. now they want to blame it on the mexicans and the chinese. Me being vietnamese also takes on the blunt of this hatred.
These poor uneducated masses, are used and discarded by their masters. But entirely helpless against their masters. Unable to organize. Unable to get educated on their own. lashes out at the very people they should ally with.
If you know what kind of people immigrate to canada you would understand
Jiang, who is a Canadian has also expressed a similar sentiment, which I don't understand.
People are people regardless of where they come from; some are good, and some are bad.
What is the problem with the kind of people that immigrate to Canada?
I agree that people are people and each human being is owed respect. That’s the problem. Immigration in the west is not about respect or providing opportunity. It’s about getting immigrants to do the work that natural born citizens are unwilling to do. You can see it in the west. I would bet good money that the janitor at your place of work is an immigrant because most consider that work beneath them. The west is hypocritical too. They love immigrants when they’re willing to do that kind of work, but if they try to climb the ladder resentment grows quickly. In the US I have heard shocking statements about Indian immigrants in particular which I think is due to their high ambition.
You're right in many respects, though it is not wise to frame it is a immigrant problem. One of the biggest reasons that immigrants take over jobs of the Canadians is the same as Europe or America: The Canadians are not willing to work at the same working conditions or wages as the immigrants.
The problem is not immigrants, the problem is that countries don't make policies that prioritize the necessities of its citizens, because it is easier to abuse immigrants, especially illegal immigrants.
Too many people in the world— logan’s run- probably 2bn is enough
Excuse me Thanos.
Immigrants increase the following:
- real estate prices and other financial costs
- unemployment
- crime
- costs for health care
- costs for education
- different other social non-financial costs
- administrative expansion and costs
They reduce the following:
- stability
- cohesion
- wages
- (average) wealth
- (average) education level and availability of education
- (average) health level and health care availability
- (average) education and IQ level
- public safety
I could get more granular than this, but these should be the main points as to why immigrants are considered a problem.
Why do you think outsiders contribute to these things worsening as opposed to the natives? Both groups apport and extract from these systems.
Most people that immigrate are poor, so it makes sense that the average wealth, education, health declines, though it does not affect the natives.
Cohesion, employment and intelligence are not affected in any meaningful way. I would like to know you're reasoning for thinking this.
The only quasi-valid preoccupation is crime and public safety, since a lot of immigrants come from violent and war-torn countries and if they are kept in poverty ridden ghettos they might develop much of the violent tendencies that are commonplace in poor neighborhoods.
If immigration was such a problem, the United States, Canada, France, Spain, France and England wouldn't be the best countries in the world in regard to quality of life, though I know you may have differing opinions.
I respect you for trying to understand my point of view. However, I cannot agree with any of the statements in your post and I feel somewhat overwhelmed by where to begin.
I see two levels of misconception:
1. Misunderstanding of cultural and societal structures
There seems to be an implicit assumption that civilisation, culture and tradition do not really matter because they supposedly do not affect cohesion. I believe the opposite is true. A clear example is the professor’s reference to the hypothetical annexation of Canada into the USA: migrants would likely vote for the economically best outcome (annexation), while many Canadians would feel that such a development would undermine their culture and traditions.
In addition, there seems to be the idea that a nation state is entirely flexible with regard to its population, services and assets. But social security is a closed national system. If a large group of below-average productivity is added, then by definition the above-average group must bear the cost. The outcome is negative for the existing population. On top of this, rising demand for real estate shifts financial power significantly towards those who already own property – in most Western countries, that means baby boomers, as the professor also highlights.
2. Misinterpretation of data
There is ample empirical evidence for the points I raised earlier. Denmark, for example, publishes statistics comparing national productivity across groups (Danish, EU, MENA etc.). The MENA group significantly underperforms, with costs to the state and society exceeding their contribution. In Germany, studies confirm that immigration overall has a net negative fiscal effect. The impact of migration on real estate markets has likewise been thoroughly analysed in economic literature.
It is true that first-world countries with high immigration show high living standards. But looking only at averages misses important dynamics. These figures often fail to capture the negative trajectory over time or the decline in soft factors such as cohesion, community, trust and cultural continuity. Wealthier does not necessarily mean better if the trade-off is higher crime, loss of traditions and disintegration of social fabric. To put it polemically: is it really better to live in a wealthier English town facing those downsides, compared to a Polish town with stronger community and culture?
There are also misconceptions that cut across both levels, such as the claim that migration does not affect national average IQ. Logically, migration from countries with lower average IQ must reduce the host country’s average. Whether one likes the IQ metric or not, it is ultimately a test of cognitive ability, which can be tested and which is the IQ test.
I had not planned to write this post because the subject is vast, but I decided to respond nonetheless and link my points back to the professor’s work. If you watch more of his content, you will notice that he recognises these dynamics and does not present them as positive for civilisation or culture.
My recommendation is to move beyond mainstream public intellectualism. I used to be much closer to the position you seem to hold, but I have come to see that “convenient answers”, like blaming racists for negative developments, do not reflect reality. Many of the arguments I outlined are easily verifiable and work in context.
Best of luck.
I really don't believe that social cohesion, culture or cohesion is such a big deal. If Canada wants to be a part of the United States, let it be. Cohesion is something that is easily achieved regardless of cultural difference. I would rather live in Poland because their public healthcare is better though I would not mind living in the "incohesive", multicultural England.
IQ is not the same as intelligence, what you are saying implies that people from third world countries are biologically less intelligent. https://neurolaunch.com/why-iq-tests-are-flawed/
Besides, poor people are not of below average productivity because they work in essential sectors; I think that you are referring to the quantity of taxes they pay, because they pay less taxes, but generally require more government assistance.
I think that in discussions like this there is a dimension of the reality missing which is that people from Rich countries usually don't have many children which may result in an eventual population collapse. Immigration is a way to counter that, and I believe that many people will realize that they need more young foreigners in their country for the country to be able to sustain itself.
Nothing providing the immigrants assimilate into a functioning cohesive society. I haven't witnessed much of this. Division amongst cultures normally ensues. First rule of war........
The United States and some European countries are cohesive societies and very culturally diverse. The only meaningful divisions I see are from racist and xenophobic people.
https://youtu.be/CivlU8hJVwc?si=8YPnw06bXHjn7Oht
Gary Stevenson also talking about the rentier economy leading to wealth inequality.
I’m an ER physician, quite interested in transformational changes of our institutions. I’m intrigued by this content, lots of thoughts, but not organized well enough to comment intelligently. I’ll keep listening.
Lovin It, but I have doubts about the transition from decline to rise of societies. I think It IS something like this: Sometimes declining societies just get eaten by other more cohesive societies, other times groups Will break away like the semites Who became sheepers and rejected cities and lastly societies can get Revolution.
Rethinking money by Bernard Lietaer offers alternatives to our current parasitic money system. Search LETS (Local Exchange Trading System) or spender-signed currency.
Bernard Lietaer argues that communities need to have their own currencies, which are not affected by the petrodollar. Crypto is a good example, in his opinion, but it still lacks transparency and perpetuates the holding problem.
I love Lietaer’s works because he’s a true financial justice warrior. I love your works too, Prof. Jiang. You guys restored my humanity.
Yeah Brazil is coooked
I would join your community professor. I would love the opportunity to grow my knowledge and bring my own skills to a community of good people. To build a better future for my children is my new purpose in life.
Rome to Byzantium: When the Western Roman Empire fell, its eastern half, the Byzantine Empire, survived for another thousand years. This was not a death but a transformation, preserving Roman laws, traditions, and administrative systems in a new form. This is a powerful example of a culture "rising" from the ashes of a collapsed predecessor.
The Rise of European Powers: You then note the rise of the French and British empires. You see the British as a successor to the Romans because Rome occupied the island of Britain. This highlights how new cultures can inherit and build upon the legacies of those who came before them, even in a "fragmented" way. The Roman occupation introduced infrastructure, law, and a foundational cultural layer that influenced the future development of Britain.
Let me help you flesh out the vision for the hope for humanity. I had been at this since 2013. I defended the USA 11 years and was a top contributor. They accused me of a chinese spy and imprisoned me without due process and broke every laws ever written. There is an imminent danger that average people cannot comprehend. You can build the discord channel, private invite only. I will contribute ideas and solutions for the issue you cited.
the United States as an extension of Roman culture. The American founders were heavily influenced by Roman republican ideals, architecture, and political thought. The very name of the U.S. Senate and the concept of a republic are direct links to ancient Rome. This suggests that the cultural lineage, beginning in Rome, continued its journey and re-emerged on a new continent. England/France, were all Romans when Rome ruled. when the USA fall, part of it will rise. It may be like another Italy, or another empire. who knows.
But we know if we create the new community, we can breath the life and culture into it.
Energy is the measure of how many people are working, and their attitude towards work. A society on the rise is one in which young people are being mentored in the trades and professions, and taking pride and satisfaction in their work. A society on the decline is one in which people hate their jobs, try to do as little work as possible, and engage in day-trading.
Openness is the measure of how mobile and meritocratic a society is. Are people rewarded for the work they do, or are they rewarded for who they know? Are people allowed to voice dissent and criticism, or are people who point out problems considered the problem?
Cohesion is the measure of trust and empathy in society. Are people willing to help strangers in need? Do people have genuine concern for the well-being of others? Are people willing to make sacrifices for the good of society?
When we stop asking other people to live as we say, we can start building that way of life.
I had been at this since 2013. instead of looking around at other community. I developed concepts that could be the solution.
1. simple and low cost. the network nation. similar to the nation state you mentioned. but moving it to the next phase 4.0 or 4th industrial revolution ready etc.
2. building an entirely new city with new gov, charter, management, economy, education, and culture that is the right kind.
Best Prof Jiang,
I have a question. In this lecture, you speak about how no amount of external threat can divert the natural cycle of society, resulting in the fall of such a society. How then can one make the case, such as with Putinism, that a constant external threat, what you say, is not at all a medicine to this natural cycle? As with Russia, we learned that this continuous war and threat is what the Russian style of thinking requires to evolve, and this will serve as an antidote to what I assume is the natural cycle.
First, thank you so much for your great work. You make a huge difference in the world.
I have a question. Do you know a mechanism that helps communities outside of society, e.g. homeless young associations, indigenious, gypsies, punks, sea people etc., become climate change and fascism resilient? I don't mean organizing everything for them but support them in their ways to prepare themselves? Or maybe an international platform of cooperation and exchange for them (that is not bigtech)? These communities are usually ancient in culture but young in age, with as little bureaucracy as possible und quite flexible in their geography and sustenance. They've seen empires fall in the past and a couple of natural desasters and pandemics as well. I believe that's where the ressources for surviving exponential temperature rise can be found. But I'm not so sure about the political violence.
I truly believe in the next 30 years the world will look nothing like it did pre that virus. What that event in 2020 brought was a deluge of fear and yet it made the world stop turning. Not for essential workers but for the rest of us. We were all working the wheel so fast we had no time to be still and wonder why? Why am I here killing myself for me to only survive, pay bills, upgrade my car, upgrade my home, which just made me turn that wheel harder with no time to think.
After a few years our society became more self absorbed. More of let me be free, this is all bull. Working for the rich. Who made those rules? I certainly didn’t get a manual.
We all became entrepreneurs haha. Getting checks made us realize we need more life and less work. All the while the angst was brewing like a whirling dervish high as a kite.
White nationalism was given permission to raise its ugly feelings. One man gave permission to be who they ALWAYS WERE. It was a virus that spread across all continents. It will never be put to sleep again. Never. Well maybe after the fall of all societies in a few hundred years.
There is going to be a civil war. The deep rot in the roots of this tree must be expunged. The root and soil burned. The rot must be made to be gone before a new tree can be planted.
It won’t be planted. Civil war combined with cataclysms on the planet combined by new pandemics will let nature kill off segments of each continent. Europe will be barely populated. What will become is localized groups. Bands of like minded people. They will break off from each other, form their own communities.
In the end, after all is gone, humanity will begin again. The same destiny will befall humanity over and over. WHY? Because it is human nature. Until humanity learns to rise above its nature it is doomed to repeat itself. This is why people talk about raising your vibration. It’s all jumbo jumbo. What they really mean is man was made to rise above its nature for otherwise we are lower than animals who work within their nature and don’t rise. Mark my words. It will come through with pain and suffering. There is no place to hide. Not Mexico not Paraguay and not even a heaven.
I feel blessed, and I am thankful for being able to learn from your wisdom and understanding.
Your work is a bright light in the dark shadow of cultural and spiritual decay.
I myself am a strong believer in good. The love for humanity in the form of community and divine purpose.
Your classes are inspirational.
From my understanding of your class, the divine purpose of humanity is to create a prosperous and loving community through collective imagination, free from deception in love. Or rather, your intention is to point out the divine power of imagination and love.
God bless you and your family, Professor.
Piketty completely ignores the role of central bank's money printer and resulting inflation when talking about causes of increasing income inequality and ROI of speculation.
Money “printing” doesn’t even come close to the money created through fractional reserve banking.
Agree, but if there wasn't money printer, bank reserves would be much closer to 100%. Money printer = bailout machine for banks.