![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
"Inconceivable."
There's something interesting about that word. Most people keep using it...and maybe some of them actually do know what it means. To someone several years ago, the concept of the Internet would have been something that people did with magic, rather than technology. Robots, though, they might have been able to figure out - steel golems, although they are missing the animating word.
And at times, I can mention the Past That Never Was, usually derisively. A lot of people mention it when they want to complain about how degenerate the modern society is, as if it were inconceivable that a society that was so upstanding, moral (and devoutly Christian) to have become this Roman (Greek?) parade of vices, idleness, and a lack of patriotism. Yet, if one goes back in time, one finds a few things - one, the graffiti is the same (right down to the penis comparisons and boasts of sexual contests), and two, the philosophers of the day were complaining about how degenerate the youth of the nation had become and how they were not living up to the Past That Never Was (or, perhaps, the Platonic Form That Never Can Be). "Inconcievable" goes back, well, a very long way.
I think, though, there are some things that the past would find inconcievable in us moderns. Mostly, they're to a particlar degree, though. The past, even twenty years ago, could easily conceive of partisan fighting, and feel like the opposition was deliberately doing all they could to get in the way of the Right Party (whether on the right or the left). I doubt they would have conceived of it as something powerful enough to gridlock the government into utter inaction. I don't think they would conceive of the abuse of the filibuster rule to force the majority into a supermajority. They'd have an inkling of an idea about the influence of the religious right in politics, but to them, the wife-beating apologist James Dobson, super-televngelist Pat Robertson, and the megachurches that routinely advocate "issues" to their congregations are not yet a regular fixture of their lives.
The Tea Party has not yet made their ascent, nor has Occupy Wall Street. I'm not sure either of those are inconceivable to the past...although they might find it inconceivable that we have once again managed to let the banks run away and crash the economy after the S & L scandal they just went through.
The future will look back at us and say "Hey, those people, they couldn't conceive of this. They couldn't conceive of the idea of gender as a spectrum, rather than a binary. They were stuck on portable devices, instead of implants. They thought surgery could just alter their form of humanity, and dying their hair was a radical statement."
But you know, we have people who can concieve of it, and then people that will build it, and then it will become normal. Whether our future is 1984 or Transmetropolitan.
Then again, there are some things that are inconceivable that shouldn't be. Like the idea that a peaceful protest can exist somewhere in the United States without droves of police being sent in with military-style gear and tactics to clear them out. Despite the constitutional protection that guarantees the "right to assemble, and to request a redress of grievances".
That we let the banks ruin the economy again with gambling practices, despite the S&L scandal.
That we continue to deny basic rights to people, even after black people rose up to get their basic rights, after the Hispanic farm workers rose up to get their rights, the Stonewall Inn incident, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, and many others.
That our elections process has been hijacked by moneyed interests who carefully select candidates loyal to them and then tell us to vote for one.
That multinational corporations report billions in profits to their shareholders and claim legalized penury to the government to avoid paying any taxes, the government does not audit the living daylights out of them every quarter they do so, and that the legislature seems quite content to look the other way on this.
And that we let other corporations buy legislators to pervert the idea of trademarks, patents, and copyright so as to remain a money-making vehicle, rather than a vehicle to promote the useful arts and sciences.
That should be inconceivable. But instead, it's reality.
There's something interesting about that word. Most people keep using it...and maybe some of them actually do know what it means. To someone several years ago, the concept of the Internet would have been something that people did with magic, rather than technology. Robots, though, they might have been able to figure out - steel golems, although they are missing the animating word.
And at times, I can mention the Past That Never Was, usually derisively. A lot of people mention it when they want to complain about how degenerate the modern society is, as if it were inconceivable that a society that was so upstanding, moral (and devoutly Christian) to have become this Roman (Greek?) parade of vices, idleness, and a lack of patriotism. Yet, if one goes back in time, one finds a few things - one, the graffiti is the same (right down to the penis comparisons and boasts of sexual contests), and two, the philosophers of the day were complaining about how degenerate the youth of the nation had become and how they were not living up to the Past That Never Was (or, perhaps, the Platonic Form That Never Can Be). "Inconcievable" goes back, well, a very long way.
I think, though, there are some things that the past would find inconcievable in us moderns. Mostly, they're to a particlar degree, though. The past, even twenty years ago, could easily conceive of partisan fighting, and feel like the opposition was deliberately doing all they could to get in the way of the Right Party (whether on the right or the left). I doubt they would have conceived of it as something powerful enough to gridlock the government into utter inaction. I don't think they would conceive of the abuse of the filibuster rule to force the majority into a supermajority. They'd have an inkling of an idea about the influence of the religious right in politics, but to them, the wife-beating apologist James Dobson, super-televngelist Pat Robertson, and the megachurches that routinely advocate "issues" to their congregations are not yet a regular fixture of their lives.
The Tea Party has not yet made their ascent, nor has Occupy Wall Street. I'm not sure either of those are inconceivable to the past...although they might find it inconceivable that we have once again managed to let the banks run away and crash the economy after the S & L scandal they just went through.
The future will look back at us and say "Hey, those people, they couldn't conceive of this. They couldn't conceive of the idea of gender as a spectrum, rather than a binary. They were stuck on portable devices, instead of implants. They thought surgery could just alter their form of humanity, and dying their hair was a radical statement."
But you know, we have people who can concieve of it, and then people that will build it, and then it will become normal. Whether our future is 1984 or Transmetropolitan.
Then again, there are some things that are inconceivable that shouldn't be. Like the idea that a peaceful protest can exist somewhere in the United States without droves of police being sent in with military-style gear and tactics to clear them out. Despite the constitutional protection that guarantees the "right to assemble, and to request a redress of grievances".
That we let the banks ruin the economy again with gambling practices, despite the S&L scandal.
That we continue to deny basic rights to people, even after black people rose up to get their basic rights, after the Hispanic farm workers rose up to get their rights, the Stonewall Inn incident, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, and many others.
That our elections process has been hijacked by moneyed interests who carefully select candidates loyal to them and then tell us to vote for one.
That multinational corporations report billions in profits to their shareholders and claim legalized penury to the government to avoid paying any taxes, the government does not audit the living daylights out of them every quarter they do so, and that the legislature seems quite content to look the other way on this.
And that we let other corporations buy legislators to pervert the idea of trademarks, patents, and copyright so as to remain a money-making vehicle, rather than a vehicle to promote the useful arts and sciences.
That should be inconceivable. But instead, it's reality.
