What happened to us?

[Mark J]

Last night I was watching a Discovery special on the Apollo 11 moon landing mission (and all the preceding missions that got them to that point), and something struck me. The unity, focus, and sacrificing for the greater good undertaken by all participants was unbelievable to achieve this task. In addition, the public rallied around the event like perhaps no other in the history of mankind, with the possible exception of WWII. I personally remember the electricity in the air watching the whole event unfold on our TV set, and I remember everyone in our neighborhood celebrating when they first stepped on the moon's surface (yes, that's how old I am! ).

So here we are in 2010, four decades later. What happened to that unity? That esprit de corps? Perhaps it's just me being nostalgic, but I think we have definitely lost something precious. I know it was far from perfect in those years (e.g., Vietnam, Cuban Missile Crisis, Watergate), but what do you think? Have we lost something as a society/nation, and if so, what is it? Why did we lose it, and perhaps more importantly, what if anything can we do to get it back? Thanks for your thoughts.

- Mark

 

[555]

How can we answer this without politics?

In short. We were Americans then and less Hyphenated in those days.

 

[555]

I also believe there was a majority of the population with a common culture, not so much in race or religion. But more in the way of thinking like what is right or wrong.
Now, we, the country is so diversified that even families are too divided to even live together under one roof.

At this point there isn't a common good or cause. IMHO

 

[Jeff Clark]

Back then we were in "races" against our arch rival and foe, the Soviet Union / Communism. The mentality had been around before WWII, but it crystallized then with the "race for the atom bomb". Technology was tightly associated with military supremacy and when the soviets displayed that they could make H-bombs and ICBMs the technology race got scary. The "race to the moon" gave us a chance to go all out for an adventuresome purpose that we could display with pride while it also helped spin off more clandestine technology to enhance our security (and eventually help to end the cold war). It used to be that we drove technology to serve national purposes. Now technology is almost synonymous with computer technology and it runs on ahead of us with no guidance.

We just can't find anybody with which to have a good race anymore. The "war on terror" is kind of silly and intrusive in our own lives. Wars against cancer or AIDS are just too slow and boring. Unless China starts doing some major saber rattling it will be hard to support a "race to mars". We need a threat or some highly focused competition to get us couch potatoes interested. We live in comparatively safe/boring times. How charged up are we supposed to get over global warming? This is a problem that literally described as advancing (or retreating) with glacial slowness. Who are we competing against? I can't help thinking that advances in technology will probably beat global warming without any of the sacrifice that is being proposed for us. Where is that killer comet threat when you need it?

 

[kycolonel]

....Have we lost something as a society/nation, and if so, what is it? Why did we lose it, and perhaps more importantly, what if anything can we do to get it back?

Either a stack of books on various political and social topics, or a summariztion in one word to describe where this country and its leadership have declined and are now virtually bankrupt. The word is "Honor" at both the individual and national level; and there is very little left of it. I think people have completely forgotten what it is.

 

[cgwbear]

i believe the blame can be placed on the developement of the micro-processor. here in my part of so cal, all the kids , and half the adults, walk around with headsets on, texting on their celphone at the same time, laptops running in the car. how can there be any commonality when their biggest concern is the wonder of their own private worlds? the insulated, self-indulgent culture .............................b

 

[555]

i believe the blame can be placed on the developement of the micro-processor. here in my part of so cal, all the kids , and half the adults, walk around with headsets on, texting on their celphone at the same time, laptops running in the car. how can there be any commonality when their biggest concern is the wonder of their own private worlds? the insulated, self-indulgent culture .............................b

People come together in what they have in common or have a common interest in.
The internet is an excellent example of this. So are motorcycle clubs, car clubs, etc.
The internet and cell phones are how people find Community.
We are doing this right now.
We are a diverse culture and people being people, they will seek those who are like minded or have a common interest.

Hi I'm 555 and I've had an interest in pocket knives for over 45 years.

 

[Mark J]

I also believe there was a majority of the population with a common culture, not so much in race or religion. But more in the way of thinking like what is right or wrong.
Now, we, the country is so diversified that even families are too divided to even live together under one roof.

At this point there isn't a common good or cause. IMHO

You're right that American culture has become more fractured. I also think that it has turned inward, instead of the way it used to be focused outward on the common good. Similarly, moral relativism was not a force that substantively shaped society in the 1950s -1970s; it sure does today.

Back then we were in "races" against our arch rival and foe, the Soviet Union / Communism. The mentality had been around before WWII, but it crystallized then with the "race for the atom bomb". Technology was tightly associated with military supremacy and when the soviets displayed that they could make H-bombs and ICBMs the technology race got scary. The "race to the moon" gave us a chance to go all out for an adventuresome purpose that we could display with pride while it also helped spin off more clandestine technology to enhance our security (and eventually help to end the cold war). It used to be that we drove technology to serve national purposes. Now technology is almost synonymous with computer technology and it runs on ahead of us with no guidance.

We just can't find anybody with which to have a good race anymore. The "war on terror" is kind of silly and intrusive in our own lives. Wars against cancer or AIDS are just too slow and boring. Unless China starts doing some major saber rattling it will be hard to support a "race to mars". We need a threat or some highly focused competition to get us couch potatoes interested. We live in comparatively safe/boring times. How charged up are we supposed to get over global warming? This is a problem that literally described as advancing (or retreating) with glacial slowness. Who are we competing against? I can't help thinking that advances in technology will probably beat global warming without any of the sacrifice that is being proposed for us. Where is that killer comet threat when you need it?

A common enemy or competitor certainly helps bond us as a society/nation. You're right, there is no big bad enemy looming right now, just this amorphous economic downturn.

Either a stack of books on various political and social topics, or a summarization in one word to describe where this country and its leadership have declined and are now virtually bankrupt. The word is "Honor" at both the individual and national level; and there is very little left of it. I think people have completely forgotten what it is.

I agree that honor is not a concept that holds much meaning for today's culture, but I can't help but think that it's more of a symptom than the underlying cause (hmm - gonna have to think about that one a bit longer).

i believe the blame can be placed on the development of the micro-processor. here in my part of so cal, all the kids , and half the adults, walk around with headsets on, texting on their celphone at the same time, laptops running in the car. how can there be any commonality when their biggest concern is the wonder of their own private worlds? the insulated, self-indulgent culture .............................b

Technology certainly has its dark side and can distance us as a society, although I can also think of cases where it has helped (e.g., my kids can video Skype with their Grandpa on the other side of the country, medical advances). I think that your comment, "the insulated, self-indulgent culture" starts to get the larger underlying problem.

Great thoughts and input - thanks folks.

- Mark

 

[Nordic Viking]

"Nostalgia is a seductive liar"
- George Wildman Ball

 

[Mark J]

"Nostalgia is a seductive liar"
- George Wildman Ball

Very true The years tend to gild one's memories.

- Mark

 

[555]

Removed for forum rules.

 

[Gollnick]

In Genesis Ch. 11, the people were all together toward one goal, to build tower to reach the heavens. God confused their language so that they would focus on their differences instead of on their unity. And so the project ended and the people -- who had been a great nation -- scattered and collapsed.

Today, man has built a sort of tower that has taken him high into he heavens. But, again, today, we spend more time focusing on our differences than our unity. "Tolerance," "diversity," "multiculturalism," these are the confused languages of today.

I saw a presentation the other day given by a lawyer who was arguing that the problem in our society today is too much law. One example he cited was the inability to undertake any major projects. He used the example of building a high-speed railroad system. It can't be done. No, not because the technology doesn't exist. It absolutely exists in other countries. It can't be done IN AMERICA because the whole project would be tied up for decades in environmental reviews and studies and even if it got through that, one person who still opposed it could tie it up in courts forever.

Those are the reasons we can't accomplish great things in America today.

 

[Lycosa]

We don't follow the Natural Laws. That's what happened.

 

[Gollnick]

How can we answer this without politics?

Politics is part of the answer, but the question is bigger even than politics. This is an issue which pervades our entire nation and culture even beyond politics.

 

[Lawmandan]

Back in 1969 you were all proud to be American, and you foresaw an empire of liberty stretching from Kennedy to the Moon. Something to be very proud of.

Now you are worried about being American, and you see a total betrayal of all that you once hoped for.

Somewhere between the Moon and now you lost America.

 

[java]

Back then we were in "races" against our arch rival and foe, the Soviet Union / Communism. The mentality had been around before WWII, but it crystallized then with the "race for the atom bomb". Technology was tightly associated with military supremacy and when the soviets displayed that they could make H-bombs and ICBMs the technology race got scary. The "race to the moon" gave us a chance to go all out for an adventuresome purpose that we could display with pride while it also helped spin off more clandestine technology to enhance our security (and eventually help to end the cold war). It used to be that we drove technology to serve national purposes. Now technology is almost synonymous with computer technology and it runs on ahead of us with no guidance.

We just can't find anybody with which to have a good race anymore. The "war on terror" is kind of silly and intrusive in our own lives. Wars against cancer or AIDS are just too slow and boring. Unless China starts doing some major saber rattling it will be hard to support a "race to mars". We need a threat or some highly focused competition to get us couch potatoes interested. We live in comparatively safe/boring times. How charged up are we supposed to get over global warming? This is a problem that literally described as advancing (or retreating) with glacial slowness. Who are we competing against? I can't help thinking that advances in technology will probably beat global warming without any of the sacrifice that is being proposed for us. Where is that killer comet threat when you need it?

We are already sorta, kinda, in a race maybe. Without going into a rant on what else ails our general population and the short sightedness and lack of vision shown by the current leadership, this article provides a few reasons why we are falling behind:

China Space Program Shoots for Moon

And in February, after the Aries I launch, delivery and build of the Orion CEV to White Sands for the launch abort system (LAS) test, delivery and testing of improved space suits, and continued field testing of the long range, 1 atmosphere lunar/Martian manned rover, further funding for our space exploration program was cut by the administration. As one of those aging members of the Constellation Program team, I am outraged, and dismayed by Obama's decision to cancel Constellation barely 5 years into the program leaving an inexperienced collection of civilian corporations to compete with the full resources of China, Russia, India, Japan, and the ESA. We have forfeited our technological lead, abandoned our pioneering spirit, and retreated from the high ground of space exploration.

[youtube]a2IQVZmHnJQ[/youtube]

By the end of this year, there will be no shuttle, no U.S. manned space program, no way for us to get into space.

Obama's NASA budget perfectly captures the difference in spirit between Kennedy's liberalism and Obama's.

Kennedy's was an expansive, bold, outward-looking summons. Obama's is a constricted, inward-looking call to retreat.

Fifty years ago, Kennedy opened the New Frontier. Obama has just shut it.

At least I'll have pictures and memories of working with a great energized team of scientists, engineers, technicians, and astronauts who gave us innumerable advances and conveniences as a result of their effort.....what will the nation have in the future?




j

 

[Gollnick]

The other thing which has happened to us as a nation and society is that we've become very risk-averse and failure-intolerant. Actually attempting a moon mission -- much less a manned trip to Mars or something -- is fraught with risk and has serious potential for failure. So, we are adverse to it and the adverse not only to the risk of it but to the potential fallout of failure. As a result, it is very easy and very good for one President to set a goal, lay down a challenge, to return to the moon or journey to mars or whatever... in ten years.... after his own term is up. There is no risk for him in this. If we actually accomplish the goal, he will be celebrated for his vision and courage and inspirational leadership. If it's never even attempted, well that's not his fault because his successor obviously dropped the ball due to his short-sighted lack of committment and leadership. And, if it is attempted and fails, well the failure was not in the vision or the leadership but in the execution which was done under the administration of his successor.

But what of a President who inherrits such a goal? What he gets is not a bold , visionary, leadership opportunity; his predecessor already took that. What the new guy gets is the opportunity to be the caretaker of the bold vision set forth by his predecessor; but there's no glorry in that for the new guy.

If he does go forward in in and it is successful during his term, then he will achieve considerable glory. But, if it isn't done during his term, then he will benefit nothing from it at all. And, if it is attempted during his term and fails, then he will take all of the blame. This isn't a good position for the new guy to be in.

For the new President, the best course is actually to burry it and burry it quick. Discontinue the project. Blame technical problems. Blame budget cuts or the economy. But whatever you blame it on, get that project dead and that goal and vision errased fast, as early as you can in your administration, so that the memory if it will fade as much as possible before re-election.

As a result, we will not attempt any such grand project which can be completed in one presidential term because of the risk to the President if it fails. And we will not attempt any which spans two Presidents because of the risk it involves for the second President.

 

[severtecher]

All great powers suffer the same fate,Brits, Romans, many before. Sort of a "To Big For Your Britches" syndrome.

 

[timcsaw]

Two words; "Moral Relativism".

 

[Gollnick]

Two words; "Moral Relativism".

"Two words which you may have overheard which could not possibly have any meaning to you or anyone in your organization."

-- Auric Goldfinger in the movie Goldfinger


Two words. Maybe you can expand on them a bit, explain what you mean by them, explain why they explain the situation in our society vis a vis big projects such as space programs.