Explain Global Denialgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
How can most of the world be in denial?
Isn't Y2K obvious?
Are there so few who GET IT?
Do we really GET IT?
Can so many be wrong and so few maybe right?
Are we (doomers) delusional about Y2K's impact?
Are pollies really in denial?
Does the doomer mind process data differently than the masses?
Do doomers just think differently? Critically? Watch less T.V.? Admit to ourselves that to err is HUMAN?
Y2K is GLOBAL, right?
Y2K is unprecedented in human history, right?
For Y2K, there is NO STANDARD for preperations, right?
We don't know what will happen, right?
I think we see the possibilties. Y2K is scary to THINK about.
How many doomers think they have been blessed with an ability to think a certain way that allows them to see the need for preperations?
Why haven't others (denialists/pollies) been given this ability to see the potential of Y2K?
Does a doomer think he/she is special because they have this "wisdom" to prepare? Are doomers a chosen group?
Y2K seems obvious to most on this forum, does it not?
Everyone here has had, or is having doubts about their preperations?
Less than 6 months to the big event, and still no general level of concern.
Either we doomers are delusional or the world is brain dead. The answer in 5 months.
-- MarktheFart (email@example.com), July 27, 1999
The news media has told the majority that there is no Y2K problem and the majority have not seen, read, or even care about Y2K. They see it as a money making scheme for people in business and they see no reason to jump on the band wagon. Besides, what would their loved ones or neighbors think? No one wants to be labeled a Y2K wacko! Haven't you questioned your reasons for preparing? It's pretty bold of us to prepare for something that may nor may not happen. In a way it is good that thousands aren't preparing because there would surely be a shortage of everything. Can you imagine a store trying to stock 10,000 canned goods, rice, beans, etc. everyday? They restock every three days but only selected items. Just something to think about.
-- waitingforY2K (waitingforY2K@waiting4Y2K.com), July 27, 1999.
I don't know anyone who takes y2k seriously enough to prepare. I've tried to convince friends and relatives but I either get laughs or yawns. Internet access seems to be what makes the difference. Folks who get their news from TV only hear good news. RJ
-- Robbin James (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
Can u say FCC?
-- R. Wright (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
It is most perplexing to me that I see what others dont. I'll find out in 5 months whether its me or them that are crazy. I can handle that. I've looked at this thing until my eyes spin, and I always come to the same conclusion--it will be at least a 6. Therefore, I have prepared to the best of my ability to survive a 6. This does not make me a "doomer". Reasonable people prepare also. I have to follow my gut on this one. The preparations i've made so far do not hurt me and can only help if its anything bigger than the proverbial bump in the road. This forum is so polarized that sometimes it ignores us prudent preparation guys. Whats the big deal? Preparation is an individual choice based upon percieved outcome scenarios. IMHO.
-- incredulous (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
I posted a similar line about 10 days ago about converting DGI's to GI's and have essentially given up. It came to me this way: How many of you who are reading this post have in the trunk of your car some flares, a first aid kit, a working flashlight, some duct tape and maybe a container or two of vital engine fluids? I know you are nodding your heads and saying "of course I do." Well guess what? Most folks don't. Check it out. My guess is also that you can remember having these basic emergency supplies in every car you have ever driven. My conclusion: we are not the norm and we are better for it. I think a new acronym is in order: WNGI...will never get it. Pete
-- Pete (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
United Nation's Contingency Planning Meeting Articles, Etc.--June 1999
-- Late But (Not@In.Denial), July 27, 1999.
Like I said in other posts, I think this thing will be a two or a three (scale of 10).
Just the same, it's hard to talk to other family members much less co-workers. I've been ridiculed even though all I suggest is that people prepare like they would for a bad winter storm. I mean do SOMETHING to prepare for pete sake.
It was only two years ago that we lost power for six days during a snowstorm.. With small kids it was absolutely miserable.
Our utility company can't even keep the power up during normal winters, I expect things to fail.
I think the Red Cross announcements help.
-- Bryce (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
Here are my answers;
Yes, with research
Yes, with propoganda
See 1rst qtr, 2000
Yes, propoganda, and no updates of corp. status
No, doomers group data & consider macro economics pollies ensure data is kept seperate for debate
Blessed are the meek
No, and possibly yes
I have had my doubts.
-- R. Wright (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
I can think of two possibilities for the general denial going on.
1.Collecting relevant data today and projecting that into a future scenario requires a certain level of prefrontal brain lobe development that just isn't all that common. So you are in a rare crowd.
2.This is *all* unfolding exactly as the many prophesies have proclaimed and thus a general blindness, denial, inability to get it and get with it, are required. Otherwise history would change. How many people pay attention to the polution they create and what that is doing to the entire earth system? Again, denial.
-- Gordon (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
Easy. Part One-Denial is Denial is Denial, do you think Denial as a psychological concept is a figment of some psychologists imagination or a major way people in general deal with (bad for them) information? Part Two- What percentage of the population of earth basically has a low degree of control over their existence? What percentage of the population of earth has access to the (lets say)the top 200 crucial ideas/considerations/facts/etc about y2k? Point: if you have little control (lets say a broke bloke in china,india,russia,africa,etc.etc.etc.)over your existence you will say to yourself "why bother thinking or doing anything about it?" Now for someone to be a "doomer" they must be where these two groups over- lap-correct? Now a question for you M.t.F. Have you performed a satistical analysis of this group? I think not. If you did (i would be willing to guess) that you would find high levels of concern,action,and thought about the subject--and also high degrees of ability to disregard polly-annish arguments. Have a nice day (beep)
-- bud (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
Most people aren't programmers with 20 years of experience. We are we talking, probably around 1% of the population here. Besides, most of the younger crowd (at least what I've witnessed) believe that fixes are quick (just like a PC). Just run a patch and all is well. We live in a world of quick fixes according to them. Experienced programmers know better. So are we a special group? Think about it.
-- Larry (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof." -- John Kenneth Galbraith
The greater the 'change' in sight, the harder we work to avoid it. Stability is comfortable, change may not be.
-- Tom Carey (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
Although I'm running about an 8-10 and prepping for a homestead style life, you can't completely rule out the possibility that, for once, the *herd* is right.
Aren't they about due?
-- Jon Williamson (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
I see it as a typical bell curve. There's a small percentage of us preparing, a small percentage in denial and the larger percentage either don't know, don't care to know, and can't be bothered
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' Not a ' ' Clue ' ' ' Total Prepared ' ' Denial --------' ''''''''''''
Most of the people in this country are stupid, living their life vicariously through television or some event, clueless to what's going on. I don't know about the rest of the planet. I would imagine the third countries are too caught up in making a living to be worried about y2k.
I hope those who know about y2k and who are in denial are right. I really don't want any disruptions in my life. But since there is a chance that we might be affected by Y2k in a negative way - then it is only logical to prepare. Bookworm
-- Bookworm (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
Oooppps. my bell didn't come out right!!! I'm a lousy artist.
-- Bookworm (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
Dear Mr. Fart:
Your thread is good food for thought and soul searching. The best that can eventually happen is that pollys decide to read this thread. 'Cause no matter how well doomers prepare, if our neighbors don't prep up we would be just about toast anyway...
(1) y2k SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO:
The Y2K signal-to-noise ratio is very low. First you have the wacko's, the different-axe-to-grind crowd, the hidden-agenda groups. This confuses the real picture. Anyone that tries to analyze Y2K has got to get rid of all these 'distractions'. Then there are other phenomena like year-2000 terrorist attacks, year-2000 babies (havoc for hospitals), year-2000 robberies (havoc for police worldwide), year-2000 solar flare activity, etc., that, as true and real as they are, these also blurr the core Y2K problems. And then journalists and politicians and managers and business people don't help any, so the masses are left blindfolded.
BTW leading classes at large are Y2K ignorant because they either don't Get It due to confusion with any or all of the above and/or simply because Y2K is difficult to grasp anyway, and you need an anlytical enough mind to process many abstractions but not over- analytical enough to defy common sense. Such rare mix of attributes is not as common as we would all like to believe.
(2) y2k is DIFFICULT:
Y2K can be easy enough for some, but DAMN difficult for most. Let's admit it: unless you only want to scratch the surface, Y2K is SOLID, hard work. It means a lot of thorough reading, understanding new things, critical thinking, relating to unknown factors of interdependency... and the vast majority of people that could have the wits to understand Y2K just want to keep on enjoying the hunck- dory reality that, FOR THE TIME BEING, the US economy offers to just about everyone with possibilities of approaching Y2K on his/her own.
(3) y2k and THE SYSTEM:
Let's face it: Y2K analysis goes against the established system. No ideology here, just a face-value observation. If Y2K is taken seriously, the established system needs to switch gears from superfluous consumer society expending to basic, down-to-earth, commodities such as water, power, food (ANY food), etc. The system's inertia works against any or all of these changes. Under this consideration, for just a moment imagine what sponsors of mass consumer products would think of journalists who incurr in the sin of revealing Y2K to the masses. ("You are out, Sir. OUT", right?) Only when Y2K becomes self-evident will mass media jump on the bandwagon. It will be interesting to watch their relationship with sponsors then.
(4) y2k is SCARY:
And then Y2K is just plain scary. You have got to have your psyche and your guts in pretty good order to just even dare to sink your teeth (let alone your children's future) into Y2K. You better have thick skin.
And then Mr.Fart we must not be surprised by the fact that so many have trusted so much to so few. This is a repeated mantra throughout the history of mankind.
-- George (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
It is very unpopular in the US today to say that the future can really be bad. The public doesn't want to consider any of the major potential problems that we may face over the next year. Besides y2k, we are dealing with the most overvalued stock market in US history and a very shaky world economic situation. Also, there are tens of thousands of loosely controlled biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Russia that we should be concerned about. Perhaps many of these weapon and the materials and technology to build them have already been sold to enemies of the US. The public doesn't want to hear about these problems. They prefer to believe that the US is invincible.
Just look at your Sunday newspaper. There was a time when the newspapers covered serious world events, but today most of the coverage is focused on personalities. The public probably still doesn't trust the government that much, but they don't want to think about future bad news. In the US, this is truly a period of unprecedented optimism.
-- Dave (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
This forum is so polarized that sometimes it ignores us prudent preparation guys.
Thats why all the Moderators here supported the start-up of the...
TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) Preparation Forum (Y2K Prep Only Discussions)
http:// www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic= TimeBomb%202000%20%28Y2000%29%20Preparation%20Forum
And why many regular posters support it... Be Prepared... and discuss it... without the polarization here thats so indicative of the rest of the world at large.
(Good points, George).
-- Diane J. Squire (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
I don't think as a prepared person I am anything special, but I remember having an inquiring mind from childhood, I used libraries to self-educate, everything from the Holocost to Titanic, building a house, world events and anything else I could get my hands on because with each book read I found I could make informed decisions. Most people I know want 'sound bytes' and quick headlines, actual studying and weighing information just isn't done much anymore.
Just a thought ;-)
-- Sammie (sammie0X@hotmail.com), July 27, 1999.
Why is the media not paying attention? Because of the ridiculous things that were said last year: planes falling out of the sky, refrigerators not working, VCRs going berserk. It was published in the beginning as something to poke fun at. How do you turn that around? Oh we really didnt mean planes would fall out of the sky; we know better now. How can you be taken seriously? The continual ranting doesnt make it any better. You say you want others to prepare, then start talking about real possibilities, not the ten year depression, (since only you believe in that and no youre not clairvoyant). No one will listen to that. Not because of denial or they cant see the signs but because of its extremely low probability. Try to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I think that the majority of people have trouble separating the wheat from the chaff. Those that can do this are the logical thinking pollies. The doomers seem to constantly come back with more what ifs not understanding the significance of it all. As Diane once said, Everything happening this year is related to Y2K Well, quite frankly its not. The pollies have a truer picture of the credible possibilities being able to separate the wheat from the chaff. The pollies get it, they see the interconnectedness. They know that Y2K can and will cause disruptions. But they dont carry this to extremes and extrapolate endlessly. It's like watching a stone hit the water. Waves ripple but they don't go on endlessly. The water's surface "breaks" but the water's properties allow it to "mend" quickly.
George hit it when he said Y2K is scary. Only a doomer thinks its scary while pollies look at the possibilities as challenges.
-- Maria (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
Folks, people just don't like bad news....
Maria: Your analogy would be wonderful if we have only *one* Y2K related failure. However, in a complex system, with waves of different heights and frequencies originating at different points, things do become a bit more complicated (I'm still only talking about waves on water here, by the way).
Sometimes, waves will virtually cancel each other out. Sometimes they will reinforce each other. Sometimes they will have no effect.
If you wish, extrapolate that to a more (infinitely more) complicated economic/social system, where the opportunities will exist, but so will the chances for disaster.
In many cases, the final result will be determined by human choices. Fast, correct action will reduce or eliminate the effects of an "error". Slow or incorrect action can or will make problems much worse than they could have been.
Will the "good" results always happen where we need them the most? Nope. Will the "bad" results always happen where they can do the most harm? Again, no. However, in any uncertain situation, I'll always lay my money on Murphy.
Maria, I appreciate the fact that you disagree, yet stay polite. I've tried to answer in the same vein. Unfortunately, many of the decisions upon which the final results rest were made over the last 30 years by many, many programmers and managers.
Those who wish peace should prepare for war. Those who wish for a smooth and uneventful rollover might want to consider preparing for the opposite. Preparations really do bring peace of mind. If only to reduce concerns over what problems could be caused by "hysteria".
-- Jon Williamson (email@example.com), July 27, 1999.
Pete, I don't have any of the items that you mentioned in my car, nor have I ever had them in a car. But that doesn't mean I don't prepare for power outages that happen often in our area.. Once in the dead of winter, during an ice storm when the power was out seven days convinced me that having my nest stocked and ready was probably a good idea.
-- gilda (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 27, 1999.
"Either we doomers are delusional or the world is brain dead. The answer in 5 months."
Two thoughts: In Germany, you are required by law to keep certain emergency supplies in the trunk of your car, & you can be fined or lose your license if the stash isn't complete. But of course that would never work here (way too practical).
It's been pointed out before, Y2k is an Internet thang. If you don't spend time cruising the net, the odds are you know next to nothing about it. Most people either have no access to the net, or they use it only to search for porno, mp3's, or yakity-yakity-chat rooms.
I've resigned myself to the fact that January of 2000 will probably find the vast majority of people totally oblivious & unprepared. If it's more than a 7, we're toast.
That's just how it is, get used to it, get right with God, etc. etc.
-- not looking (email@example.com), July 28, 1999.