Recently, a popular term on the Internet is tittytainment. Tittytainment was probably first translated by Yu Ligong as "nipple music". According to his introduction, in 1995, a conference of 500 political and economic elites from around the world was held in San Francisco to analyze and plan for a globalized world. Participants agreed that the high, rapid and fierce competition of globalization would "marginalize" 80 per cent of the world's population, and that the conflict between that 80 per cent of the population and the 20 per cent of the population that had hitched the globalization express would be a major problem in the future. Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former national security adviser in the United States, proposed the "nipple music" theory — tittytainment is a combination of titts and entrantment, which means that in order to make 80% of himself safe, this 20% sit back and relax, and it is necessary to take a warm, anesthetic, low-cost, semi-satisfying approach to remove the dissatisfaction of the "marginalized" population.
The Globalization Trap describes the Fairmont Conference in San Francisco in 1995: Pragmatists at the Fairmont Hotel reduced the future to a pair of numbers of "20 to 80" and a concept of "tittytainment."
In the next century, the use of 20 per cent of the able-to-work population will be enough to sustain the prosperity of the world economy. According to the manager of West Jeep in Washington, D.C., "More and more of the workforce will be abandoned. "The use of only one fifth of all job-seekers is sufficient to produce all the goods available to the world community and to provide the first-class services it needs. As a result, these 20% will be actively involved in life, earning money and consuming – no matter what country they are. Debaters envision that a generous inheritance of 1 or 2 per cent should be added.
What about the rest? 80% of people who want to work don't have a job? The American writer and author of The End of Labor, Jeremy S. Rivkin said: "Definitely. "There will be a huge problem among 80% of the people." Suns manager Gage added again, citing their company's president, Scott Gage. In McNeely's words, the question in the future is "do you go to dinner or turn it into a meal that someone else swallows."
Then, this senior panel of people studying the "future of labor" focused on the problem of the future unemployed. The Roundtable was convinced that perhaps tens of millions of people around the world so far thought that the prospect they faced was not a dying struggle without a permanent job, but a comfortable life in the San Francisco Bay Area. At the Fairmont Hotel, the outlines of a new social order are sketched: there will no longer be a numerically worthy intermediate hierarchy in rich countries – and no one disputes this.
Battle-hardened veteran Zbignu? Brzezinski's "living by feeding" spread quickly. He was born in Poland and served as president of the United States, Jimmy Bergeron. Carter's national security adviser lasted for 4 years. Since then, he has specialized in regional strategic issues. As Brzezinski puts it, feeding by breastfeeding is a combination of the words "entertainment" and "tits," the American term for breasts. Here Brzezinski refers to the milk flowing from the breasts of a lactating woman, not sexy. If intoxicating pastime is combined with adequate food, the frustrated inhabitants of the world will remain in good shape.
The law of two and eight is everywhere in life, but whether we belong to the 80% or the 20%, we are actually actively choosing or passively accepting tittytainment, which reminds me of Aldous? Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. A passage in the preface to Entertain to Death is impressive: "Orwell is afraid of those who forcibly ban books, Huxley is worried about losing any reason for banning books, because no one wants to read anymore; Orwell is afraid of those who deprive us of information, Huxley is worried that people are becoming increasingly passive and selfish in the vast sea of information; Orwell is afraid of the truth being concealed, Huxley is worried that truth is drowned in boring and tedious things; Orwell is afraid of our culture becoming a controlled culture, Huxley feared that our culture would become a vulgar culture full of sensory stimuli, desires, and irregular games. As Huxley notes in Revisiting Brave New World, libertarians and rationalists who are ready to rebel against dictatorship "completely ignore the endless desire for entertainment." In Nineteen Eighty-Four, people are subject to suffering, while in Brave New World, people lose their freedom because of pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hated would destroy us, while Huxley feared that we would be destroyed by what we loved. ”