Do you want to live back then?

[drkitten]

Er are we talking having to go back hundreds of years or ANY time in the past? If the latter, yeah, I'll take post WW II-era Alex. Lack of technology more than made up for by a much less obnoxious, much more disciplined and much saner society. Easily. No rap "music" blasting away at every street corner? No schools where kids have to be checked for weapons? Drug use and irresponsible sex among teens basically unheard of? Marriage vows that are taken seriously? No fear of leaving your doors unlocked? Give me 60 seconds, my bags are packed.

No problems with "uppity n-----rs" wanting to sit in the front of the bus or at the same lunch counters? No issues with women wanting to be educated and then competing with you for the same high-paying jobs, since they were naturally meant to be confined to suburban kitchens.? No problems with having to deal with Jews socially, since they were excluded from the company where you worked? Poliltically-motivated show trials for unnamed "anti-Americanism" to keep the population scared and in-line.

Why, what could anyone possibly find to object to about the 1950s?

I think you've just proven G-K-4's point.

 

[Piscivore]

Er are we talking having to go back hundreds of years or ANY time in the past? If the latter, yeah, I'll take post WW II-era Alex. Lack of technology more than made up for by a much less obnoxious, much more disciplined and much saner society. Easily. No rap "music" blasting away at every street corner? No schools where kids have to be checked for weapons? Drug use and irresponsible sex among teens basically unheard of? Marriage vows that are taken seriously? No fear of leaving your doors unlocked? Give me 60 seconds, my bags are packed.

I'm sorry, you can't get to "Leave it to Beaver" with a time machine, and that's the only place your idea of the "post WW-II era" existed.

 

[bigred]

No problems with "uppity n-----rs" wanting to sit in the front of the bus or at the same lunch counters? No issues with women wanting to be educated and then competing with you for the same high-paying jobs, since they were naturally meant to be confined to suburban kitchens.? No problems with having to deal with Jews socially, since they were excluded from the company where you worked? Poliltically-motivated show trials for unnamed "anti-Americanism" to keep the population scared and in-line.

Why, what could anyone possibly find to object to about the 1950s?

I think you've just proven G-K-4's point.

Figured it wouldn't take long for that response -

I have no idea what "GK4's point" was but I didn't say or mean to imply society was perfect then by any means. You're right, those were glaring flaws of those times. I can see why a minority or career-minded woman today wouldn't exactly be thrilled w/the idea of living in those times. But the question wasn't which times do you think were "better" but what if any time would one prefer to live in. Since the things you mention wouldn't apply to or really affect me, the positives I mentioned far outweigh such negatives (ie for me).

 

[drkitten]

Figured it wouldn't take long for that response -

I have no idea what "GK4's point" was but I didn't say or mean to imply society was perfect then by any means. You're right, those were glaring flaws of those times. I can see why a minority or career-minded woman today wouldn't exactly be thrilled w/the idea of living in those times. But the question wasn't which times do you think were "better" but what if any time would one prefer to live in. Since the things you mention wouldn't apply to or really affect me, the positives I mentioned far outweigh such negatives(ie for me).

"No further questions, Your Honor. The State rests."

 

[bigred]

I'm sorry, you can't get to "Leave it to Beaver" with a time machine, and that's the only place your idea of the "post WW-II era" existed.

I'm sorry, but that's not what I'm saying. For the 2d (but probably not last) time: I am not saying it was a perfect world. But IMO the pros outweighed the cons. That's all I'm saying.

 

[bigred]

"No further questions, Your Honor. The State rests."

Good one. Whatever.

 

[Piscivore]

I'm sorry, but that's not what I'm saying. For the 2d (but probably not last) time: I am not saying it was a perfect world. But IMO the pros outweighed the cons. That's all I'm saying.

All the "pros" you listed are fantasies, born of under-reporting and general willful ignorance of the media and priviledged few.

 

[bigred]

All the "pros" you listed are fantasies, born of under-reporting and general willful ignorance of the media and priviledged few.

Hardly. Re-read my post; those things I listed were generally (of course not always - is it really necessary to spell out such absurdly obvious things) true. I've talked to numerous people who lived it, have also read about it from various historians, sociologists etc and in fact have yet to hear of anything to the contrary. Oh should I have also clarified I'm not talking about living in the worst parts of the inner city?

PS and speaking of fantasies, FYI not all black people were living under horrific ghetto-like conditions, some women did have successful careers (granted mostly as teachers, nurses or the like), and of those who didn't, many were happy to have the primary "job" of what we now call "stay-at-home mom."

 

[Piscivore]

Hardly. Re-read my post; those things I listed were generally (of course not always - is it really necessary to spell out such absurdly obvious things) true. I've talked to numerous people who lived it, have also read about it from various historians, sociologists etc and in fact have yet to hear of anything to the contrary.

Well, start with this, then.

 

[Ladewig]

Figured it wouldn't take long for that response -

I have no idea what "GK4's point" was but I didn't say or mean to imply society was perfect then by any means. You're right, those were glaring flaws of those times. I can see why a minority or career-minded woman today wouldn't exactly be thrilled w/the idea of living in those times. But the question wasn't which times do you think were "better" but what if any time would one prefer to live in. Since the things you mention wouldn't apply to or really affect me, the positives I mentioned far outweigh such negatives (ie for me).

Wow. I'm a white male. If I knew everything I know today and was placed in the middle of the 20th century, then I cannot imagine looking at segregated busses, trains, restrooms, restaurants, schools, hospital wards, and drinking fountains and not being emotionally affected (as well as intellectually outraged)! If I were sent back and was unable to make any changes, I would be frustrated beyond belief. If I were sent back and was able to make changes I'd go in a minute.

 

[bigred]

Well, start with this, then.

OK....

Partly it's because we compare the complex and diverse families of the 1900s with the seemingly more standard-issue ones of the 1950s, a unique decade when every long-term trend of the 20th century was temporarily reversed. In the 1950s, for the first time in 100 years, the divorce rate fell while marriage and fertility rates soared, creating a boom in nuclear-family living. The percentage of foreign-born individuals in the country decreased. And the debates over social and cultural issues that had divided Americans for 150 years were silenced, suggesting a national consensus on family values and norms.

Some nostalgia for the 1950s is understandable: Life looked pretty good in comparison with the hardships of the Great Depression and World War II. The GI Bill gave a generation of young fathers a college education and a subsidized mortgage on a new house. For the first time, a majority of men could support a family and buy a home without pooling their earnings with those of other family members. Many Americans built a stable family life on these foundations.

....as well as the other things I've already mentioned, and more. Wow sounds rought but I think I could handle it.

The cons have alread been brought up and I've already addressed them.

 

[kbm99]

Hardly. Re-read my post; those things I listed were generally (of course not always - is it really necessary to spell out such absurdly obvious things) true. I've talked to numerous people who lived it, have also read about it from various historians, sociologists etc and in fact have yet to hear of anything to the contrary. Oh should I have also clarified I'm not talking about living in the worst parts of the inner city?

That era also brought us HUAC blacklists, Tailgunner Joe and stifling conformity, just off the top of my head. At the very least, I doubt that the more outspoken atheist or agnostic members of the forum would have been welcome guests at the Cleaver dinner table.

 

[Piscivore]

OK....

....as well as the other things I've already mentioned, and more. Wow sounds rought but I think I could handle it.

The cons have alread been brought up and I've already addressed them.

So basically for you it comes down to the fact that as a white male it would be easier back then for you to enjoy the various double standards working in your favour because the suffering of everyone else was hidden from your sight and their complaints supressed and stifled?

What a guy.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

All the stars had a pretty face
Children and Negroes knew their place
Blocks of happy families
With moms and dads all in love
Or are these wholesome memories
Really from reruns on TV
And ads in old garage sale magazines?

--Jello Biafra "Nostalgia for an Age That Never Existed"

 

[G-K-4]

Wow, talk about turning a thread around. But at least people are talking about more than just gadgets.

Keep in mind that even without time machines, there are people around today who want to revive what they perceived as the good life of the 1950's. I think that a worthwhile question to consider is whether or not Bigred's favored attributes of that time could only exist because of the bad things that everyone else is pointing out. Maybe there is a better way, but I don't think you'll find it in the past.

And as for the preference of time-periods, it may be that we simply have a clash of personal interests. I know that, like Ladewig, I would not enjoy that period even though I'd be one of the most-privileged people in it. And I'd still miss my biodegradeable, solar-powered MP3 player.

 

[bigred]

So basically for you it comes down to the fact that as a white male it would be easier back then for you to enjoy the various double standards working in your favour because the suffering of everyone else was hidden from your sight and their complaints supressed and stifled?

What a guy.

So basically for you it comes down to the fact that as a fool suffering from a serious lack of reading comprehension you'd rather lower the thread to personal attacks by twisting my words around vs asking for clarification or just discussing the topic in general?

What a...whatever.

lol @ talking about double standards while being in love with them youself, eg talking about the "intolerance" of that era yet demonstrating no tolerance for differing views by going out of your way to misrepresent and attack someone who has them. Gee what a surprise.

PS and FYI I'm done bothering to even acknowledge this BS, but thx for reminding me of another thing that favors that era: people like you were much rarer.

 

[bigred]

Wow, talk about turning a thread around. But at least people are talking about more than just gadgets.

Keep in mind that even without time machines, there are people around today who want to revive what they perceived as the good life of the 1950's. I think that a worthwhile question to consider is whether or not Bigred's favored attributes of that time could only exist because of the bad things that everyone else is pointing out. Maybe there is a better way, but I don't think you'll find it in the past.

And as for the preference of time-periods, it may be that we simply have a clash of personal interests. I know that, like Ladewig, I would not enjoy that period even though I'd be one of the most-privileged people in it. And I'd still miss my biodegradeable, solar-powered MP3 player.

Oh there you go trying to stay on topic n stuff, what's up w/that...

Anyway I think the vast majority of good and bad of any era wasn't generally dependent on each other per se, but of course that's a very broad statement with undoubtedly varying shades of gray, depending on exactly what you're talking about. There are things about any era that people would like or dislike, of course.

I wouldn't miss my biodegradeable, solar-powered MP3 player though.

 

[Polaris]

Inspired from discussion on

"The Dark Ages are coming back fast… " , would one ever want to live 'back then', where 'back then' is any time in the past?

Who'd want to forsake all the improvements that we know have occured since that time in the past?

Or, would you forsake the known improvements to avoid the un-improvements. For example, give up dental care and cable TV to give up destruction from atom bombs?

I wouldn't mind living in the Age of Reason to see what it was like.

 

[SirPhilip]

I wouldn't mind living in the Age of Reason to see what it was like.

It rocked muchly. Everyone, I mean, everyone, had beards and acted stoic. The women were also super frustrated because the stoics, haunted by solipsism, wept when it came time to make love.

Don't listen to me.

 

[Polaris]

It rocked muchly. Everyone, I mean, everyone, had beards and acted stoic. The women were also super frustrated because the stoics, haunted by solipsism, wept when it came time to make love.

Don't listen to me.

Riiiiiiiiight...

...


So, about those Existentialists...