Wasn't a reference exactly. Just indicating that their tactic is largely to try and scare everyone into complying by making us think they're larger and stronger than they are.
Wasn't a reference exactly. Just indicating that their tactic is largely to try and scare everyone into complying by making us think they're larger and stronger than they are.
I wonder about the effects of that much wealth, particularly of inherited. Humans have a tendency to use oversized capabilities as crutches, leading to the neglected faculties withering.
That kind of isolation sounds soul destroying. Still. I suspect there's more to it. When everything is available, effortlessly, effort ceases to hold meaning, no? It seems like that would lead to a comprehensive degradation in skill.
But, that's speculation. I've not yet ran in those circles.
Needing to ask people for a favor and really depending on their kindness is very unpleasant, but it does keep you humble and connected to others in an important way. Never needing that, and always being able to afford even the most outlandish and personalized "free-market" solution to your problems, and being able to always shift responsibility onto others, has got to make it really fucking difficult to develop admirable qualities.
That said, I met someone from the centimillionaire class in passing, and he was polite and did not seem to flaunt his wealth or position openly (though the status markers were there if you knew where to look), but there was a subtle aura about him that was almost unreal. Best analogy I can think of: it was like meeting someone from another country, who has adapted well enough to blend into your own culture without drawing attention to himself, but if you spend any time with him, you wonder if he's really a spy for his home country, because even though he moves among your countrymen, he definitely is not one of you or on your side.
That's something that took me a while to learn. I grew up with a mindset where one should be ready to help whenever needed, but sparing in asking for help ... which, I think, isn't a bad philosophy per se, since it maximizes altruism while minimizing freeloading. But in my case it was exacerbated by an almost pathological degree of independence, where I constantly wanted to demonstrate that I really can do it all myself, damnit. That's something I've had to work on, and I'm still like that to a large degree and probably always will be, part of the hardwired sigma male lone wolf grindset. To connect this to the discussion over at Doc's, that's given me a pretty intense appreciation of those bonds that are formed by the mutual aid of one's brothers ... it's not so much water to a fish as a campfire in a dark forest, and all the more precious for that.
That mindset probably works well in a small, high-trust community, where everyone adheres to that norm. But in a culture where you barely know most of the people you encounter outside of the domain in which you encounter them, and where some people take a narcissistic delight in getting over on folks by taking advantage of morals and community norms, that mindset gets you burned out and bitter until you learn to keep people at arms length until you've vetted them, which is difficult to do when many encounters are one-off. It's something I have not been particularly good at navigating: maintaining boundaries without sometimes probably coming off as a selfish prick, while also being open to helping those that really need it in situations where my assistance will do some real good. Still working on that. And it definitely makes me value real relationships with good people.
That's absolutely correct, and a large part of the reason why urbanites are more standoffish, less open and gregarious, than the rural folk I grew up with. For myself, I certainly don't just help whoever. I test people before letting them in.
Yes, and I wonder if that's fundamentally why societies eventually must collapse: city-dwelling is unnatural and not conducive of the social cohesion required to maintain society. Especially once the traditional (generally religious) norms go by the wayside, there's really not much left to hold things together besides the carrot of economic opportunity and the stick of state-sanctioned violence, which are not stable long-term, since those wielding the carrot and stick are always tempted to misuse them for their own selfish ends.
You're probably correct.. This likely plays a big role in the Spenglerian cycle. Spengler himself considered the late civilization stage of urban concentration to be an ossification indicating civilizational winter. The golden age, by contrast, corresponds to the bulk of the population living in rural villages, with the cities being relatively small cultural centers.
If reversing the aging process is possible, reversing the flow from rural to urban is key. Same if it isn't possible: the only other option is seeding in that case, i.e. establishing the conditions for the emergence of a successor culture.
Westmen like me evolved in more homogenous, high-trust cultures that we generated. Reading the Orea Linda Codex is showing me that we were repulsed by the moral of poisons of slavery and lying, immediately, upon first encountering them in the larger world more than four thousand years ago. Our ancestors knew we best not let slavers or liars live among us.
Wasn't a reference exactly. Just indicating that their tactic is largely to try and scare everyone into complying by making us think they're larger and stronger than they are.
Very true. They are more like viruses than giants.
Lord of the Rings, only Sauron is really just the Goblin King hiding behind a curtain.
I wonder about the effects of that much wealth, particularly of inherited. Humans have a tendency to use oversized capabilities as crutches, leading to the neglected faculties withering.
That kind of isolation sounds soul destroying. Still. I suspect there's more to it. When everything is available, effortlessly, effort ceases to hold meaning, no? It seems like that would lead to a comprehensive degradation in skill.
But, that's speculation. I've not yet ran in those circles.
Needing to ask people for a favor and really depending on their kindness is very unpleasant, but it does keep you humble and connected to others in an important way. Never needing that, and always being able to afford even the most outlandish and personalized "free-market" solution to your problems, and being able to always shift responsibility onto others, has got to make it really fucking difficult to develop admirable qualities.
That said, I met someone from the centimillionaire class in passing, and he was polite and did not seem to flaunt his wealth or position openly (though the status markers were there if you knew where to look), but there was a subtle aura about him that was almost unreal. Best analogy I can think of: it was like meeting someone from another country, who has adapted well enough to blend into your own culture without drawing attention to himself, but if you spend any time with him, you wonder if he's really a spy for his home country, because even though he moves among your countrymen, he definitely is not one of you or on your side.
That's something that took me a while to learn. I grew up with a mindset where one should be ready to help whenever needed, but sparing in asking for help ... which, I think, isn't a bad philosophy per se, since it maximizes altruism while minimizing freeloading. But in my case it was exacerbated by an almost pathological degree of independence, where I constantly wanted to demonstrate that I really can do it all myself, damnit. That's something I've had to work on, and I'm still like that to a large degree and probably always will be, part of the hardwired sigma male lone wolf grindset. To connect this to the discussion over at Doc's, that's given me a pretty intense appreciation of those bonds that are formed by the mutual aid of one's brothers ... it's not so much water to a fish as a campfire in a dark forest, and all the more precious for that.
That mindset probably works well in a small, high-trust community, where everyone adheres to that norm. But in a culture where you barely know most of the people you encounter outside of the domain in which you encounter them, and where some people take a narcissistic delight in getting over on folks by taking advantage of morals and community norms, that mindset gets you burned out and bitter until you learn to keep people at arms length until you've vetted them, which is difficult to do when many encounters are one-off. It's something I have not been particularly good at navigating: maintaining boundaries without sometimes probably coming off as a selfish prick, while also being open to helping those that really need it in situations where my assistance will do some real good. Still working on that. And it definitely makes me value real relationships with good people.
That's absolutely correct, and a large part of the reason why urbanites are more standoffish, less open and gregarious, than the rural folk I grew up with. For myself, I certainly don't just help whoever. I test people before letting them in.
Yes, and I wonder if that's fundamentally why societies eventually must collapse: city-dwelling is unnatural and not conducive of the social cohesion required to maintain society. Especially once the traditional (generally religious) norms go by the wayside, there's really not much left to hold things together besides the carrot of economic opportunity and the stick of state-sanctioned violence, which are not stable long-term, since those wielding the carrot and stick are always tempted to misuse them for their own selfish ends.
You're probably correct.. This likely plays a big role in the Spenglerian cycle. Spengler himself considered the late civilization stage of urban concentration to be an ossification indicating civilizational winter. The golden age, by contrast, corresponds to the bulk of the population living in rural villages, with the cities being relatively small cultural centers.
If reversing the aging process is possible, reversing the flow from rural to urban is key. Same if it isn't possible: the only other option is seeding in that case, i.e. establishing the conditions for the emergence of a successor culture.
Westmen like me evolved in more homogenous, high-trust cultures that we generated. Reading the Orea Linda Codex is showing me that we were repulsed by the moral of poisons of slavery and lying, immediately, upon first encountering them in the larger world more than four thousand years ago. Our ancestors knew we best not let slavers or liars live among us.
That is a critically important work you're doing. God bless you, sir.
Very well said!
Great insight. That is one of many parts of masculinity that is taught wrong these days.