“Si miras fijamente al pudú, el pudú te devuelve la mirada.”

  • 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • I agree with basically everything you say until you establish the sole culprit of all ills being a socioeconomic philosophy. Everyone’s favorite culprit of the ills of society is capitalism. Not that I have any sympathy for it. It’s just the flavor of subjugation that was working last century. I’ve also seen hypernormalization and I enjoyed it very much, but I think Curtis has the same issue you’re having. Theocracies, feudalism, centrally planned economies such as those that communism often push for, monarchy and anarchy don’t do any better. They all enslave people in their own ways.

    The way I see it, the world is run by empires, their vassals and then there are client states and places where there’s nothing to steal left. Empires stay dominant by harnessing the power of three things: thought control, warfare and slaves. Always has been like this and it still is. Show me any human society of over 100.000 people where their most underprivileged aren’t being horribly abused. You might point to scandinavia, but… Who makes their phones and electronic devices? Who handpicks blueberries for them when it’s winter on their hemisphere? Who ends up paying the price for the weapons, the oil and the drugs they sell?

    They just managed to sweep their slavery under the rug, just like we comfortably buy our presliced bacon and have a delicious breakfast without ever having to face the death of the animals that were sacrificed for them.

    If you think any system fixes what you’re describing, i ask you to paint a picture for me and tell me why it will not eventually devolve into the most ruthless members within eventually getting to positions of power (be it within the private sector, the government or a dominant religious institution) and becoming even more corrupt. I don’t even need any historic examples of it working. Just what it would look like.

    Cause empires, societies and ideologies have life cycles, just like organisms do. Sometimes they can renew themselves and gain new strength after big events or compelling leadership come by, but they all collapse eventually. In the vedas they describe the golden age, silver age bronze age and eventually the kali yuga of societies, where corruption, depravity and distrust become so widespread the people stop believing in anything and no longer care about anything but themselves. In the west we prefer talking about decadence, and it’s always the same. Be it with the mongols, the romans, the french, dutch, chinese…

    The people on top get so rich it poisons their minds and alienates them from society. The hierarchies become distant from each other, a peasant or slave so far removed from an emperor, they’re unable to consider each other human. The creation myth and the promises of a better tomorrow for all becomes evidently a lie and people stop finding meaning in unity.

    Cults of abundance and paganism emerge (cryptobros, technocrats, ecoterrorists, utopian marxists, etc). The people that can afford to drench themselves in hedonism (all decadent empires become completely obsessed with food, sex, drugs, sports and entertainment) while the underprivileged do the shit work and die in wars. Most people stop having kids. The blatant hypocrisy makes people claim for a hero and populism emerges. Unrest comes. Revolutions start bubbling and get crushed by the forces that are kept well trained and fed by the corrupt leadership, until eventually, either some other emergent and younger empire sweeps in or a revolution becomes successful.

    Doesn’t really matter which of those happens. The result is the same. The poor get it the worse, the rich flee or break deals and only end up inconvenienced and humiliated but not dead, and people in between either go to other parts of the world because “fuck this place” or become slaves to the new regime, which will do the same thing all over again.

    This is no different than a rotten tree falling apart and if you think killing every last capitalist, intel agent and rich person will make any difference, I’d say you’re not looking at the big picture.

    The problem with polarization isn’t that you the powerful remain in power and keep oppressing the poor. That part’s inevitable. The problem is they show weakness to foreign enemies who start sharpening their teeth. Then come the proxy wars and if a direct confrontation can be avoided, whoever loses must forever pay tribute to the victor… until it happens to them.

    Nature is unfair, life is unfair and politics and societies are extremely unfair and cruel. Doesn’t matter what systems or leaders you choose. Take your pick. Nations either run on warfare, slaves and propaganda, or are the victims of those that do.


  • The sad truth is it doesn’t matter how true or fabricated whatever it is people believe, as long as it keeps them coordinated and united as a nation… Or else the other nations that really like your stuff and land might make their people all believe the same thing and they can gain advantage over time.

    No one likes hearing this cute little opinion I have but I think the greatest enemy the USA has today is not the right wing nut jobs nor the left wing jobs, it’s division itself.

    Believe it or not, american citizens today are experimenting two things history is very familiar with:

    • religious wars and
    • slave revolts.

    Sorry, sorry, I mean:

    • fundamentally incompatible world views about what people should aspire to be, what they should aspire to become as a collective identity and how to get there and
    • society’s most vulnerable people engaging in violence against the armed forces who follow the orders of those who have societal power…

    Cause those are totally different.

    Either way, when things get this polarized, fights get ugly. Pushing and shoving cannot be unpushed or unshoved… trust and good faith are lost, and they don’t fix themselves.

    Only thing that can possibly unite the US with the current level of polarization is nothing short of an atrocity within borders.

    Sorry if it’s insensitive to talk about these kinds of opinions out loud. just sharing my honest perspective.


  • I agree with all your predictions and the geopolitical risks you mention, but as far as I’m concerned, you’re cool. All around the world, everyone is ruled and bossed around by horrible people. Yours just happen to have bigger guns and the gold standard for central bank reserve currencies. I don’t think it’s fair to consider every single person that lives in a country/empire/whatever a bad human being or someone who deserves bad things, no matter how horrible the empire in its collective efforts.

    You guys have good valuable people. I’ve had the fortune to meet a few and stay friends with them. I’m sure this is true for even the most perverse organizations. Some people are just there cause they didn’t have any better alternatives.

    The value of someone is a case by case basis thing as far as I’m concerned. There’s no passport that skips the line to condemnation or salvation.

    I figure it’s just like in poker, you know? The cards we have, we got dealt. The question isn’t why didn’t we get the hand we wanted, or how could we redesign the game in order for everyone to get good cards… The game will be over by then. Only thing that matters is how we play what we’re dealt.

    And yes, I realize the cards both of us might get very soon might be very bad, but I guess i’d rather see if I can make some kind of play with whatever I have and have fun with the other people around me than endlessly grieve about the ones I wanted or the people that stopped me from getting em.

    Much love, my friend. It’s not your fault and nothing is the end of the world (believe it or not, not even the end of the world). You have nothing to apologize for that you didn’t personally do freely and knowingly, and even if you have those, everyone does and most are less reflexive about it. Stay strong.





  • Agree 100% to every statement you made.

    But umm… you realize that just by changing religion’s name it doesn’t stop being religion? Like, just because now instead of striving to go to heaven or achieve enlightenment or some other afterlife or any other form of supernatural transcendence, we now strive for a better society of tomorrow and understanding the universe… as long as people are willing to kill and die for their version of how to achieve their notion of paradise/transcendence/whatever is meaningful to them, and leaders are capable of using this conviction to build empires, there isn’t any meaningful difference?

    You might argue we got rid of “magic”, but again… changing names… Statistical anomalies, higher curled up dimensions, superimposed states… Just because we have observed bizarre phenomena that has blown our minds and have the ability to predict some of it’s behavior does not mean the eradication of all the unknown is possible. And that’s all “magic” is and was. The unknown over which we have little control.

    Yes, the world is a lot more than psychopaths, and yes, religion was and is fucked up, and there is enormous value to kindness and compassion which we should all strive for, but I’m sure we can agree psychos play a big role in leadership and people have a hard time seeing the stories of their time for what they are.

    And, as a reminder, if someone has an advantage over others in the game of achieving power does not mean it’s wise to do as they do or that they are any more (or less) valuable than anyone else. They’re just good at a game. My comment was in no way a message of admiration, rather a declaration of resignation.



  • Yeah, I’m aware. It’s like that in most of the americas, possibly excuding uruguay, surinam and canada. Even in countries with great education, 50% will be below average by definition, leaving lots of room for the sneaky people, and we are living in post truth.

    Even when what gets reported is verifiable, the tools of manipulation and manufacture of consent that are available nowadays are unprecedented.

    With social media we invented the most state of the art, effective brainwashing machines to date and quickly started using them to start wars (of course).


  • I wrote a long reply to explore some ideas I’ve been entertaining recently. I guess I just wanted to straighten my own thoughts out, so please don’t take this as pontificating or “this is how it is for sure”. I just like thinking while typing. Feel free to not read.

    I see your point and definitely agree with the conclusion:

    Clearly, when it comes to certain kinds of problems, the response must be collective, supported by public effort

    But umm… Sometimes the larger threat isn’t bears that randomly come over from the woods. Sometimes the people that were elected to protect you from bears and were supported by the public, even cheered and applauded… Idk, circumstances are important.

    I also feel like lots of people focus a lot on the inherent flaws of different systems of political organization that they don’t adhere to, while turning a blind eye on their own.

    Libertarianism

    Yes, libertarianism is flawed and fails at a certain scale for both individuals and large populations as a whole in the presence of widespread distrust or relevant threats within or outside the population and will inevitably devolve into “anarchy” (which means warlords/cartels each with as much territory their ruthless leaders can secure and handle). Won’t disagree with you there.

    Capitalism

    What about good, old fashioned, standard American capitalist democracy? Well then it seems people get ruled by what results of the negotiation between corporations and political parties, who are largely controlled by the psychos who are ruthless enough to climb to the top of those systems… Ok so I guess this means getting ruled by psychos again. But at least people get to vote! At least people respect the law! right? Well… elections are basically a competition on what individuals and organizations are most effective at persuading or manipulating, and the law is the result of those competitions through time.

    Communism

    But now let’s think about communism. How’s that turned out historically? Seems to me like people stop accumulating private property and start accumulating political influence to improve their position within a state that attempts to control or at the very least regulate everything to impose equal distribution of different resources, except… you know… for the people that have influence. This has happened time and time again. Seems devolve into authoritarianism really fast because people get desperate about trying to get to the top of that ladder of influence that decides who gets what. (trust me on this one, I live in south america). And when you have authoritarianism you have literally every psychopath in the country doing everything they can to have access to the absolute power its leadership entails. So… ruled by psychos.

    Socialism

    Ok, ok, but maybe communism was too extreme. How about socialism? That works, right? I mean, sure! It works under the following conditions: Your country has so much wealth it can afford to secure services to the less fortunate (as defined culturally), the struggle for power between people that want large powerful governments and those who want large powerful corporations is relatively balanced and carried out in good faith (or else unstable system), and both your private sector stays competent enough to keep the country rich and your government stays sharp enough to promote adequate legislation in order for corporations to not wreak havoc… So wait… Doesn’t this mean that this is just like American Capitalism or Communism, where this happens but in an earlier stage of its life cycle, before it devolves into “corporations win” or “the state wins”? Because the population is still able to identify charlatans and the culture is cohesive so people don’t consider their political rivals to be sworn enemies yet?

    Final thoughts.

    Given enough time, whatever system a country uses or constitution it adheres to, the psychos will rise to different positions of power, they’ll fight each other for a bit and then one team will win, turning the lives of everyone who isn’t in their team a living hell. Then, given enough time, the oppressed seize a victory and then change stuff up, for the better or the worse and on and on it goes until an idea/creation myth powerful enough to unite a fractured society comes and money can be made and things can be built again with idealism and unity… But nothing lasts forever.

    That’s just how it works. There are no good systems. Elections are as useless as royalty or theocracy. It’s not about systems, it’s about where in the life cycle of the society/empire you randomly got born into. All we can really do is adapt.

    If you made it this far, I’m impressed. Thanks for reading! Appreciate you hearing out my thoughts and would love to hear your opinion.



  • Both empathy and the lack of it are required. Humans are pack hunters. We work best as teams. Someone has to lead those teams. Guess what traits tend to make for people better at securing and conserving power within groups, and keeping loyalty within their ranks? Yep, you guessed it! Psychopaths! :D

    There are benevolent leaders, yes, that exists, but in a competition where anything goes, a psychopath which is difficult ton detect will have the advantage over someone with more empathy and robust moral limits.

    There’s a reason why they’re roughly estimated to be around 10% of the population. Hierarchies need few leaders. The higher the ladder, the more vicious the psycho it gets, because they’ll have to be competent enough to defend themselves from the other psychos that want all their tasty tasty power.

    The reason why all our leaders are psychopaths is this is the same reason why basketball players are all tall. If you don’t have that trait, you just don’t get the fucking job (edit: unless you’re like REALLY good at it despite your disadvantage).

    This used to depress me, but I chose to stop thinking about it. I don’t think there’s any fixing it.


  • Err… I’m not trolling or taking any sides here but couldn’t that also be claimed about communism? And the vast majority of monarchies if you start your analysis then… And I guess if we look at the current day, one could argue contemporary democracy tends to devolve into fascism…

    But, you know, It’s almost like the systems in use are irrelevant when there are generalized hostile war scenarios with huge foreign threats that might exterminate your nation state or make it implode through sabotage… And this seems to happen roughly every hundred years or so.

    And after the horrors of war, the general population unifies to pick up what’s left and swear they will never let anything like this happen again. But then they have kids and grandkids that are like “oh, gramps you so silly”.

    A basic notion of history and some critical thought shows us this has happened time and time again, the only significant contemporary difference being the existence of aerial and nuclear warfare.

    Empires have life cycles, and they get old. Then they get corrupt and other empires start challenging them… And then you have a big big war, and then someone wins, and then people calm down for roughly 50 years… and on and on it goes.