[heavyset_go]

> I think this is pretty consistent with the old school 1950s views of the current administration.

The effects are functionally the same, but I think the ideology and rhetoric behind then and now have changed.

There really isn't a purportedly "principled" system of logic behind these decisions, in the past these decisions would be dressed in principled rhetoric no matter how heinous they realistically were.

They aren't even bothering to dress it up in rhetoric that says there is something noble behind these decisions.

[tehjoker]

The principle is the rate of profit is falling, competing countries are rising, and they want to unleash the private sector in the hopes of raising GDP growth significantly enough to retain hegemony. This won't work, because they're fucking stupid, and they'll damage the health of the population and the productivity of the land and waters going forward, but there is a logic to it.

[heavyset_go]

I agree, I'm commenting on the outward justifications that are used to placate the public.

In the past, a mountain of ideology and rhetoric would justify these decisions to the common person in an effort manufacture consent. They aren't even bothering to do that.

[atmavatar]

It's more like the current administration and the billionaires behind them are acting like private equity. Now that they have control of the government, they'll dismantle anything they can and set us on a path to destruction to squeeze out every bit of value they can for themselves.

Those most responsible are either betting they won't be around long enough to deal with the smouldering wreckage or planning to ditch before the country hits rock bottom.

[Euphorbium]

Remember when putting lead into atmosphere made entire gnerations stupid by lowering IQs? Maybe that is the goal.

[potato3732842]

In a kind of ironic way, if those people hadn't been so goddamn stupid maybe the government institutions they created and expanded wouldn't all be reputationally bankrupt and subject to dismantling by populist billionares.

[hedora]

The 1950’s were when the US set up many of the post war institutions that are being dismantled now. Maybe you mean the 1850’s? (Though I’d guess the government was probably more forward looking back then too.)

[PicassoCTs]

The ideology of "infinite growth" is driving on bare metall by now, every movement proofing more and more, that it has used it all up, the momentum, the resources, the people who belief in its tale.

The building up backlash is going to be horrific and i hope it will not lead to decomplexification movements ala pol pot or islamism.

[immibis]

Is THIS not the decomplexification movement?

[mistrial9]

looking at this at a different angle, some companies do practice health and safety AND there are egregious acts of pollution.. consider this next part .. many practices in the early 1900s would be outrageous today and even bad actor companies have changed since then, as a given. It is IMHO both the avoidable, known acts today AND the unknown, under-counted actions of today that will be so painfully obvious at some time decades from now. A legal environment where cost cutting in the cost centers of environmental compliance are openly prioritized, includes disasters of knowns and the unknowns.

In closing, I do not think it is like the 1950s in that basic science has identified and amplified many fundamental advances since then, materials science is sci-fi now compared to then, but it is similar in the economic-first and actively thumbing the nose at all things green and eco regarding the market.