You could try to bring some bigger historical perspective and answer with a question:
Would the average Roman ever ask if the Roman empire failed? What about the Egyptians? Everyone living during the medieval and colonial eras never believed their own society had failed. Would the average Spanish or British person in 1750 predict their empires would be reduced to nothing in less than 200 years? Sure critics and haters also always existed but the majority of the population would never believe the point of no return unless they were engulfed in some sort of crisis or war that inevitable changed their material conditions and the foundation of their society.
The first step is to realize the difference between failed and failing and it is possible to see the inevitable end of an economic system or society even as you participate in it, it means failing is an ongoing process and your perception of that process will depend on where and how comfortable you are as part of the audience.
Once you lead with this perspective it is easy to contrast how living in the third world and suffering from all kinds of poverty related issues an preventable diseases would prove to you the system is "failing" if not failed already , while being a rich fuck living in the richest American/European cities would lead you to believe capitalism is great, full of innovation, the whole "Rockefellers did not have microwaves" bullshit.
If the person can't put themselves on the shoes of the majority of the population outside the western influence then you should point that this person is not realy sympathetic to what is best for humanity as a whole but rather completely biased by their own fortunate circumstances.
They are the Roman patricians believing the empire will live on, its too big to fail, maybe it will all be alright in the east, and most importantly There Is No Alternative because "the barbarians" are just right outside.
just as an interestin aside theres actually a lot of literature declaring, predicting, and bemoaning the falling roman empire. usually wrapped in pagan or christian pretenses---we abandoned the gods, we're not christian enough yet sorta stuff
Well noted, we also have to make a distinction between doomsday mythology(eschatology) and the sort of social economic analysis that is realy necessary.
A modern historian could go back to 100 AD and reliably point to every single point of failure that is inevitably going to lead to the collapse. the question of the Roman collapse becomes a fact even if it hasn't happened yet, but contemporary normal people would probably not acknowledge that with the exception you mention.
You could try to bring some bigger historical perspective and answer with a question:
Would the average Roman ever ask if the Roman empire failed? What about the Egyptians? Everyone living during the medieval and colonial eras never believed their own society had failed. Would the average Spanish or British person in 1750 predict their empires would be reduced to nothing in less than 200 years? Sure critics and haters also always existed but the majority of the population would never believe the point of no return unless they were engulfed in some sort of crisis or war that inevitable changed their material conditions and the foundation of their society.
The first step is to realize the difference between failed and failing and it is possible to see the inevitable end of an economic system or society even as you participate in it, it means failing is an ongoing process and your perception of that process will depend on where and how comfortable you are as part of the audience.
Once you lead with this perspective it is easy to contrast how living in the third world and suffering from all kinds of poverty related issues an preventable diseases would prove to you the system is "failing" if not failed already , while being a rich fuck living in the richest American/European cities would lead you to believe capitalism is great, full of innovation, the whole "Rockefellers did not have microwaves" bullshit.
If the person can't put themselves on the shoes of the majority of the population outside the western influence then you should point that this person is not realy sympathetic to what is best for humanity as a whole but rather completely biased by their own fortunate circumstances.
They are the Roman patricians believing the empire will live on, its too big to fail, maybe it will all be alright in the east, and most importantly There Is No Alternative because "the barbarians" are just right outside.
just as an interestin aside theres actually a lot of literature declaring, predicting, and bemoaning the falling roman empire. usually wrapped in pagan or christian pretenses---we abandoned the gods, we're not christian enough yet sorta stuff
Well noted, we also have to make a distinction between doomsday mythology(eschatology) and the sort of social economic analysis that is realy necessary.
A modern historian could go back to 100 AD and reliably point to every single point of failure that is inevitably going to lead to the collapse. the question of the Roman collapse becomes a fact even if it hasn't happened yet, but contemporary normal people would probably not acknowledge that with the exception you mention.