Replying to Avatar Prince Aleph

Yes, this is very good. I've decided that X is also a form of procrastination as well, and I need to take an extended break from it as you have done, until I accomplish some urgent things. Often I say well I will just look at this or that but it turns into a few hours of scrolling.

I do seek out contrasting people to the extent that I seek out people at all. My method of late is, if I seek out people, it is for specific goals rather than just the generic "make friends". So for example I know people who like to take road trips and do photography. This is not for money, it's just a kind of idealistic artistic pursuit I guess.

And as for women, I don't approach them at all but sometimes women get sexually aggressive with me and then maybe I will respond. Several of these have been quite good-looking but they are never really looking for anything lasting as you well know.

For example, I recently met that tall chick and she both acted sexually aggressive and wanted to meet up for dance practice. I would be OK with this. But she looks like a mentally ill hoe and so far has been unreliable, so I remain skeptical. This is not just about hoes, either - people flake all the time, everywhere now. It's a feature of American society more and more since before Covid.

Another example of this is a friend of mine who wanted to start a podcast. I was willing, but it never went anywhere. We never got to step one. This is why I think it's a bigger, collective problem as to whether anything much can be accomplished collaboratively in our kind of society. Sure, women flake in particular, but it's part of a wider trend also.

So far, and sad as it is to say, but my experience is "transactional relationships" have worked best in our time. Why? I guess because expectations are in line with what actually happens when money is involved. For example, if I go to the dance studio then I at least (in theory) get what I pay for. That hour of material will be covered, guaranteed. Unless literally no one shows up. That hasn't happened except for a few of the lesser attended classes.

This kind of thing is both a voluntary social organization and a business. Things can actually get done in that context. Getting people to commit to something creative outside of that context is a much riskier proposition nowadays. Social atomization is complete. And I'm not judging - we all put ourselves first.

It's just an interesting situation - without certain incentives nothing really gets done in this country and there's always some excuse (I'm married and have to spend time with the wife, I have work in the morning, I am too busy, etc). If money doesn't change hands, nobody is showing up. In some ways it's remarkable that the engine of commerce still runs with how lackadaisical everyone is about everything.

Truly images of a civilization in decline.

now as for your point about atomization and transactional relationships i think this is a double edged sword ...

( Part 1 - why Atomization is good akshully )

i actually didn't notice this while living in US but i did notice it when i CAME to US ( that everything is more transactional ) and my Grandma who was born in the 1920s has REALLY noticed it complained about it. so it's definitely happening, has been for a while, and is probably accelerating BUT it's not necessarily a bad thing ...

we all seen those videos of Amish people moving a barn. that is only possible in a tightly knit community but also such a community is only capable of doing things like moving a barn. they can't build an international space station.

network effects tell us that to achieve any particular goal ( like build a nuclear reactor or a space ship ) requires a network of a certain size. you can't have five guys building something like that. or 500 guys.

the Manhattan project ( subject of movie "Oppenheimer" ) which produced the first nuclear bomb according to google has involved 130,000 people at it's peak. you CAN NOT have over 100,000 people collaborating on the basis of being friends with each other or related by blood.

in fact the elites have determined that human brain can only have 150 people in your phone book so to speak. the kind of relationships our brains evolved for ( like the ones Amish still have ) only work in communities of 150 people or less. but as i said achieving the kinds of things humanity has been doing for the past 100 years requires collaboration of a much larger number of people.

so we developed all these systems of law and finance and professional ethics and so on that allow strangers who don't even like each other to collaborate on projects. i guess that's what the movie "Oppenheimer" is really about - the friction between people who are working on a common goal yet come from different backgrounds and and in many cases are jealous of each other or hate each other and are all also looking how to benefit personally even if at the expense of this larger goal or thousands of people dead and so on.

it's ugly but without this you have to be content with being able to build a barn and nothing fancier than that.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.