584
Millions have amnesia about the worst of Trump's presidency. Memory experts explain why.
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
584 points (97.7% liked)
politics
18883 readers
3593 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I remember reading something like that years ago ... that there are some historians who think that we haven't left the dark ages yet. In everything else with technology and information we've progressed but we still think and act the same way we have for the past 2000 years.
And the more I read about the subject over the years the more I realized that as human animals, our modern species have only been around for about 50,000 years. In all that time, we've only ever been fearful, short sighted, frightened creatures that wanted everything as quickly and as much as possible all the time. We couldn't do it before but now we can.
In that 50,000 year timeline we're only on the very tip of history ... it's going to take us millennia to change.
Homo Sapiens have been around for 300,000 years.
Yes ... but a human looking homo sapien from 300,000 years ago would not be able to understand our world today or be capable of imagining and thinking like we do. They might have looked like us but they didn't think like us .... that cognitive development didn't happen until about 50,000-60,000 years ago. I'm no expert but in all the reading I've done, our modern selves and people that think, act and imagine like us didn't exist until about 50,000 years ago.
Just to clarify, 50,000 years is 50 millennia. If you meant millions if years, the term for that is mega-anna. And eons for billions.
Other than that, I more or less agree. Humans have developed technologically much faster than we've been able to evolve/adapt to the changes we're creating, and the stress from that is growing. Occasionally I wonder if it'll prove too much for us in the end.
I dunno, couldn't humans short circuit evolutionary trends by hacking their own genetics?
Evolution being slow is a good thing. Trying to shortcut it would just be a more direct way to destroy the species. Also a great example of the kind of thing I'm referring to.
species could still either thrive or die out because of or in spite of the meddling.
Maybe that's what's happened to every lifeform that's managed to achieve sapience.
Yeah, I've wondered if it's something like that. Seems like a fairly easy trap to fall into, but hard to say for sure with only our singular reference point.
My guess is that in order for life to survive long enough to get to the point where it becomes sapient, it has to be selfish and short-sighted, which becomes a tragically fatal hindrance.
"We're not gonna make it, are we? People, I mean."
"It's in your nature to destroy yourselves."
"Yeah. Major drag, huh?"
I did not know about mega-anna as a term before. Is it always hyphenated, or did you add that for emphasis?
Had to look it up myself. I saw both, but went with the hyphen for clarity.