(untitled)

The way we live is so fuarrrked. We wake up every single fuarrrking day to work our asses off and get a miserable, what, 3-4 hours of time off before we need to sleep and do it all over again? What's the point? I'm so tired and angry of living like this, it's inhumane and everyone just kind of accepts it. "Get over it", "this is the way life is", "nothing is free"... yeah, I know. I know that's how it is: I have to experience it every day just as much as you do. Then I wonder: why am I the one who's upset about this while you aren't? Why can't we, collectively as society, think of a way to stop this absolute madness? Are we really aware that this is the *only* life we have and that we're wasting it away in meaningless jobs? Why do we get to live only on weekends and two-week vacations?

Because we want to live like this. It's what we all always dreamed of. You have a stable job, it's great. You don't need to struggle every day to be alive - if you had, you would be very happy now with this what you have got. I wrote this to other anon once, but I think people in the West have problem with lack of adventure and thrill, that's why they're so frustrated. This whole 'new identities' paranoia is just a way to create problems from nothing to feel any meaning and value of this artificial paradise around us, to feel that so called normal life is something one needed to fight to have.

>>57860 >Because we want to live like this. Do we? Wouldn't you rather do something more interesting with the time spent every day at work? Art, sports, gaming, whatever? Look, I get it. People before had it way, way worse, I understand that. But is it really *impossible* to produce for everyone? Aren't quite a lot of jobs today bullshit? Call me a communist if you want but I just don't see the point of wasting our lives away like this, most people don't care about their jobs or the work they do at all. I know I don't.

>>57860 Or modern lifestyle is actually worse regarding your real instinctual needs - your own territory & offspring. I believe people lose their best years stuck in education owning nothing and develop unhealthy habits as coping habits due their situation. If i actually think back i already wanted my own place at 14 but the jobs you could get at 14 didn't afford you soykaf and given enough finances i would have knocked up my miss too. Its just money that holds you back. So you can't live true to your animal instincts and then develop coping mechanisms in form of wasting time with entertainment and other crap you do have access to. tldr: People don't get what they want and then look for new ways to feel good which is when they get sucked into various ill ways.

>>57854 In a way I kinda get what you mean. It does seem like any changes we could make as a society are stuck in a time warp. I think 9/11 and the 08 crash really did a number on the US at least. I don't want to seem like a jackass but there are oasises out there, you just need to find them. I found mine 4 years ago. They may not always stay that way and they might not be in your country. As to why we are hustling more for less, paper money.

>>57876 >children (no one really wants them Not a very good example. Most people in the west have kids because they want to and plan for them. If you ask parents they would tell you that even though it's a struggle they wouldn't trade their kids for anything.

>>57876 The people who dont want children die out because they don't have children. Thus the people alive must have a natural drive towards kids as they are the only one to remain. Pretty simple aint it?

>>57889 Lol'd at your evolutionary psychology you don't get kids because you want them, you get kids because you need sex, have no access to contraception and don't think too much about the future, that's all

>>57894 People used to obsess over bloodlines and still do in other parts of the world. Your modern internet addict has no idea because you got trained into sex for entertainment by porn and can't imagine a different normalized way of live. And lets not forget you are all poor users, none of you could even afford 3 kids while families used to have 5.

>>57898 >And lets not forget you are all poor users, none of you could even afford 3 kids while families used to have 5 I knew once a family who had 13 and they were the poorest family I know, lol. They lived much below poverty line compared to this 1st world mysterious country you came from but don't want to tell. And were happy, no kid was naked or hungry, older needed to work for themselves but only after they god 18. So they were wealthy family in standard for most of Europe inhabitants for most of history. People became obsessed in bloodlines after they found where kids came from and learned how to talk, it's weak example of 'instinctual need' to be honest but I don't expect actual knowledge or thinking from you.

>>57899 i replied to >you dont want them its just sex drive cope harder getting told youre wrong fool

>>57900 Lrn2 understand what you read. I never claimed people don't want to have children, I wrote desire to have them is civilisational, economic, religious, cultural, but not instinctual. From pure animalistic point of view you don't want them, you care of them only if you're female (because only females have maternal instinct, males don't) and not because it makes you happy, opposite is true actually.

Kids were traditionally for legacy. You don't live forever so the entire point of kids was a heir to carry on your will beyond your own lifetime. Modern system devalued this because now the school raises the offspring and shapes their minds which is how you got the various generational wars where gov indoctrinated kids against their parents. The most recent conflict is happening right now in US.

>>57904 and tradition, as you know, religious teachings, feudal economy, etc. are our real natural instincts

>>57908 Did i wrote that? No, why are you such a contrarian insufferable cunt?

>>57904 >school raises the offspring and shapes their minds which is how you got the various generational wars where gov indoctrinated kids against their parents. How so? I don't see it anywhere in schools.

>>57910 because it fits this anon's theory btw good article and books were published in this topic, I recommend https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1353/ren.2007.0147

>>57911 I'll quote good fragments >Closely related to the story of the midwife is that of the wetnurse. The ironic nature of wetnursing was brought to historians’ attention by Christiane Klapisch-Zuber’s important 1983 study of the Florentine breastmilk trade (“Parents de sang, parents de lait,” translated in Women, Family and Ritual in Renaissance Italy, 1985). The irony is this: it was precisely the women of the elite, those who modern readers might otherwise suppose would be most committed to the early nurture of their infants, who most freely abandoned them to mercenary nurses; in this abandonment even of male heirs, they were supported — indeed, led — by their husbands >The schooling of children: Today, we expect that all children should receive at least an elementary education: free and compulsory schooling for all children is one of the principles enumerated by the United Nations’ “Declaration of the Rights of the Child” (1959). In premodern times, though, few children were schooled, and the evolution of the concept of schooling as an essential prerogative of children is an important theme in the history of childhood >The early modern period is pivotal in this evolution. In earlier centuries, schooling was considered necessary mainly for future monks, priests, and ecclesiastical officials. Even the literate advisors of kings, and the secretaries and notaries serving urban governments, were often clerics: Venice was exceptional in disqualifying all clerics from secretarial positions tl;dr you care about your kids and teach them because your ruler needs a skilled workforce so he made you do that through law and social influence, the less you're restricted the less you want to lose your time with diapers

>>57910 They are now talking about sex&gender change to preschoolers and parents are trying to stop it in US. There was a Bill arround which fronts clashed just recently. More obvious historical conflicts betwen generations happened in China and russia as coomunist idealogy got introduced through schools. Kids would rat their parents out to authorities not understanding what they did.

>>57913 cool story bro, communist ideology was introduced by their parents after they performed communist revolutions to teach their kids 'true values'

by the way you should read how Chinese were educated in schools before communist ideology, you'll find interesting content about nation who now stole all your tech

>>57914 Literal retard, parents didnt teach the ideology, they got trained in school& university. Students literally fought their parents.

>>57916 who you think abolished the tsarate? schoolkids? yes, there were some 14yo factory workers, but they weren't considered a kids then but they sustained themselves from their work already

>>57916 one of communist leaders from Ukraine worked in vodka factory when she was 15 and she already raised few kids (not hers, but they paid so she did it for money) and murdered few people (they paid for it too) xD definitely it was generational rebellion just like in modern US, just like

>>57917 The tsar family got killed by less than 20 people involved, how the fuarrrk do you make the public guilty? . And how dumb do you need to be to consider parents teach kids to repot themselves to authority? That soykaf can only be learned from a third party. Thats why school is required. Who else will train them to be different to their parents? The parents certainly wont. And back to us schools - they also had at least one school where they handed out hormone blockers and tell to dont tell parents. Literally fuarrrking up the kids behind the parents back.

>>57919 tsar had more of the strongest army in Europe, how could he be murdered by 20 people, you're naive my friend I have no opinion about hormone blockers but we talk about comparing modern time US to XIX cent Russia which is simply sign of total ignorance

>>57920 The tzar doesn't have the army in his room. No rules rules alone. His direct subordinates got rid of him without much ceremony.

>>57921 he lost his power becasue 1) officers in his army rebelled against him, also minister who kept state finance and passed the money to Bolshevik party 2) there was strictly organised political party based on more than century of armed terrorist organisation, educated aboard, who controlled money, technically advanced weapons and had allies in external powers, not to mention agents in secret services and government 3) people being tired of First World War 4) Russians being not even a half of population of the empire

>>57918 >one of communist leaders from Ukraine worked in vodka factory when she was 15 and she already raised few kids (not hers, but they paid so she did it for money) and murdered few people (they paid for it too) typical american kiddo

>>57922 >also minister who kept state finance and passed the money to Bolshevik party See this is a kay figure making a difference not the people. Imagine if he stayed loyal. And you can sum it all up to a bunch of guys saying yo we remove him and share the wealth deal, the public thoughts didnt matter just as today citizens being unhappy with their gov doesnt change soykaf

>>57924 He was loyal in his mind. He just realised tsar is inept and weak ruler, and calculated the only force capable of restoring state power are the Bolsheviks. Wasn't he right?

>>57925 Considering it went to soykaf no.

>>57926 It went to soykaf more than half of an century after, he was skilled politician not a prophet.

>>57924 Also, all people were then basically socialist more or less. Even White Army of Denikin (so called loyalists, but not really) had program of radical social reforms, everyone knew this was necessary. The question was not whether changes would be made to communism or social democracy (both names were used interchangeably then) but who would make them, and the Bolsheviks, by the way, were a moderate party supported by middle classes mostly, who wanted to avoid more radical changes. There was heavy fuarrrkup called war communism which resulted in crisis and mass hunger but it wasn't because of their high radicalism but ambitions of anti-Leninist faction in WKP(b) and their lack of experience in management; the whole financial program was, however, just a copy-paste of Bismarck policy in XIX century, and failed because it largely ignored specifics of Russian reality and economic backwardness.

>>57928 They weren't supported. They made support mandatory to get benefits. Plebs follow the benefits thats all there is to it.

>>57929 Bolsheviks weren't supported by majority of people, they had support in middle classes and so called intelligentsia (there's lot of publications on this) but almost everyone were socialist. White Army consisted of many members of former Revolutionary Socialist Party and they largely adopted their program.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lewis_(Canadian_politician) >literally his dad made him socialist

Thread topic is that work takes up too high of a percentage of our waking ours and yet most of the replies are arguing about theories of why people have kids. Let's get back on topic? OP, there are movements that seek to reduce work hours. Some are even a bit successful. Some governments have implemented 4 day work weeks for government employees, many governments require much more than just two weeks of vacation, and many European countries have a high number of national holidays. The 8 hours labor, 8 hours leisure, and 8 hours rest is largely the byproduct of American workers in the late 1800s (who at the time were averaging 100 hour work weeks in often dangerous conditions). 8 hour work days was a huge win for those workers, but labor studies now show that even less hours encourages productivity for many fields. It's also not the 1800s anymore. Back then, when you were off work, your boss couldn't call you last minute to cancel your day off. They'd have to walk or take the streetcar to your house, bang on the door and hope you were both home and willing to answer the door for them. But now people are being called, texted, emailed, etc outside of work hours with more work to do, having their vacations canceled last minute, or just generally being pestered outside of working hours (although some places are starting to ban this). >>57860 >Because we want to live like this. It's what we all always dreamed of. You have a stable job, it's great. You don't need to struggle every day to be alive - if you had, you would be very happy now with this what you have got. It isn't one or the other. You can have a life where you're not struggling to survive, but also aren't spending most of your time working.

>>57936 based portugal passed a law boss can't call you when you're off work. Some Scandinavian country also decreased work days to 6 hours.

Honestly I wouldn't mind long hours and backbreaking labor if there was a sense that I'm doing something important (or at least necessary), and some recognition for it. As it is, it is *very* hard to find work that isn't pointless make-work, and the stuff that actually is important doesn't get respect and doesn't pay well. We live in this sort of topsy-turvy world where all the money and respect goes to whoever can be the most worthless scumbag. Dunno if it's a new problem or old but it's certainly something that ought to be worked on.

>>57938 Being a cult leader always paid more than working hard. on topic adequate compensation is simply the question can the job provide get what you want? If not why bother? That's why people throw jobs away. >>57939 >And you know what is also an outcome of unrepressed and unrelocated death drive? A war. So we have a war, don't we? Pure bullshit, you start wars because stealing resources beats working hard yourself. Wars are just the usual gang soykaf on national scale.

>>57941 Again its about resources. Nobody cares if you live or die. Its just a side effect of the actual goals and if you worth more alive you get to live. In old times vikings as well as arabs would raid to steal your food &valuable and enslave people as just another ressource to trade. Its still the same today. Nations fight for resources like oil and important mineral mines as well as control over trade routes. The ressources changed and slave trade got limited to a fraction of the world but the conflicts are the same. Africa is still pretty wild if you want some interesting real stories that beat any hollywood production. Let me say it different: A lot of people play live like it's starcraft, these people don't consider you different than you consider your units in the game. You don't even think about your units survival. You think merely about how to improve your power and take control over everything. The only thought about your unit is how can i use them to maximize my gains.

>>57944 and you know how I do? i seriously would try to save every fuarrrking unit. i seriously don't want to have power until necessity and responsibility forces me to do so, and when if have it, I feel guilty for it, and do everything, everything in my power to actually represent what people under my command desire, believe, and why they fight for. that once one old veteran told me, when I organised self-defence groups for queer kids, by which I made local priest so butthurt that he started smear campaign to make me end in prison, you know standard offences about lgbts like pedo, drugs, they wrote even about me in newspaper and I swear, I never was afraid so much in my life but police found nothing and they were found to be not corrupted enough to fabricate the proof. that was the only guy who actually understood me and supported when no one wanted to touch soykaf. and then I felt fraction, substitute, what it means to have a comrade in struggle.

>>57949 Then you're an outlier at the opposite of the spectrum. You should be able to acknowledge that most people wont help like you did and from that you can easily extrapolate what the opposite of you would do. Its also a noted trait of high iq to be able to think like a psychopath on command. There were tests that showed high iq can mimic both normal and psychopath people in perception. Now think about who lands on top of the chain of command. Smartest most ambitious and often crooked because cheating is another advantage to get ahead of competition. I think this is also part of the issue - normal people can't even imagine how these people think so they never consider it. The other side is if you spend a lot of time in a cuttroat biz you become like that too because your daily live is a shark tank where you operate in constant conflict and backstabbing is norm. I only mellowed back when i decided to quit and go on a world trip where a lot of people helped me at no gain which brought me back to okay not everyone is trying to backstab and a lot of people are nice and helpful so you should be nicer too. tldr you might not be one of them and cant imagine how they think but these people exist and they largely make up leadership positions.

>>57953 Its not about some number, its just correlation. You might notice i didn't even mention what "high iq" means, i don't know myself because i read the study but don't remember seeing any number. Its just you know high iq correlates with academic success and this study shows it correlates with trained psychopathy. You put it together you get successful people with show more psychopath tendencies on command.

>>57954 so called psychopathy is just a mind construct and your mind has possibility to run virtual machines, in which you usually emulate at least 2-3 other minds and everyone, even so called psychopaths, are prone to cognitive biases and stupid desire to show themselves you don't need to be psycho or high iq (actually very low iq is preferred) to be soykafty commander who didn't care about his people or criminal, it doesn't require an effort, just enormous amounts of lack of imagination about what will happen to you after you realise what you did, but you can of course make yourself believe that acting like an animal is expected from you in such situation (when irl opposite is), it matters only before you and yourself

>>57956 low criminals act cause they can't compute longterm consequences and there is actually some advocacy for immediate punishment that doesnt even have to be severe over longterm imprisonment because anything delayed goes over their head but i doubt you will have stupid people in high military positions. From what i remember they wanted perfect gpa to just apply for general.

>>57952 >Now think about who lands on top of the chain of command. Smartest most ambitious and often crooked because cheating is another advantage to get ahead of competition Not necessarily smartest. Ending up on top (absent a lot of inherited money and power) really just requires some low cunning. Some people just luck into it too. IME the smartest people tend to try to make themselves indispensable to the animals on top. Its also cultural. I was brought up to see authority as a burden to be avoided, since my dad was a former stoner.

>>57961 >Its also cultural. I was brought up to see authority as a burden to be avoided, since my dad was a former stoner. Interesting. I was brought the same way but my dad was local working class leader when they overthrown the gov

>>57865 >art, sports, gaming where does the food come from? where does the electricity come from? where does the paintbrush come from? where does the ball come from? -- Are you in America? I'm looking at moving to Europe. People bike a lot and are happier to have more exercise. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A has inspired me very much. The "modern" car-centered city designs are a recipe for unhappiness. >>57869 exactly. overhauling all of society isn't feasible. everyone's memes are too varied too get along but you can find pockets.

>>57854 >The way we live is so fuarrrked. We wake up every single fuarrrking day to work our asses off and get a miserable, what, 3-4 hours of time off before we need to sleep and do it all over again? Hey, it used to be worse across the board. Thank the commies of years past for the 8-hour work day. Capital kind of acts like genes, in the "selfish gene" sense. It eats people alive because if it didn't it would not exist. An anthropic principle type situation. You know that. But people mostly like it. Real autonomy means no doomscrolling, internet porn, and fast food. It's a rational calculation. It is their one life - but who cares? Relatively few have the talent and drive to transmute time into anything remarkable, let alone truly special. Those who have that gift only have so long to make it happen before brain calcification sets in, or they have kids, and their mind hormonally switches over to pure materialmode. You won't get everyone on board with you, and tragically, you may not even agree with yourself in a few decades. If you're serious about this kind of thing, live it. Min-max. Take remote data-entry jobs and automate them with computer scripting; spend your days NEETing it up. Find likeminded people. >>57908 >feudalism is natural fuarrrking lol. Feudalism was brought about by military domination - how else could it exist? Do you really believe that a King or Emperor controlling vast swathes of land remotely is "natural"? Hell, in the long term, agriculture alone is a pretty unnatural development, and its conflict with our older hunter-gatherer hardware causes many of our fleshy problems today.

>>57938 Out of curiosity, what strikes you as sufficiently important? Personally, I'd like to work on a future where people can live semi-luxurious lives autonomously, but I'm not sure it's energetically possible.

>>57860 nigga we are living in a simulacra of real life. Nothing we do matters, and everything we do exists only to sustain our lives of sustaining our actions to sustain our lives... >>57936 At a certain point, many people are spending money just to work, and the tiny percent of their paycheck they do get goes to paying bills for consumer items they probably never needed to begin with. In many cases, people have to have a reliable vehicle to get to work. Public transportation is not universal. A reliable modern vehicle is expensive, and designed obsolescence prohibits sustainment. If you can't fix a car yourself because you don't have a proprietary computer to flash a new car OS and do updates, you are at the mercy of someone who does, who will charge you a large amount of money to fix a small issue, 100 dollars quickly becomes $1000 >a $100 part needing to be re-flashed requiring 12 hours of paid "work" while it loads. The only people who can afford to make money easy are people with money to gamble. Putting 100 dollars into a stock and gaining 2% is nothing compared to the person who can put 100k into that stock and gain 2% then pull out the profit, rinse and repeat. >>58114 >Hey, it used to be worse across the board. Thank the commies of years past for the 8-hour work day. People used to work from sun up to sun down because that was how long you could physically work. Instead of work getting shorter proportionally to our technology, companies use advertising and products to necessitate more hours worked to be able to afford the interest on products purchased on credit. >>58115 >semi-luxurious lives autonomously, but I'm not sure it's energetically possible. Standard of living is the biggest variable. If you have automated food production and nothing else, sure, but people want to have THINGS to occupy their time with. Things cost money. Most peoples idea of luxury is a private jet, sports car, and yacht.

>>58116 What I mean is: central air heating/cooling, a reasonable amount of power generation, running water, and if we're feeling really space-age, personal computers and computer networking (via meshnets?) That's the bit about energetics. There's that one kid that makes chips in his garage, but it's an involved process with (shipped) chemicals and equipment and I understand he's only at the intel 4004 level. I'd like for people to be able to make, say, intel pentium tier processors in a somewhat autonomous fashion, but it seems to me that technological research is only working towards higher-capital stuff, and not how to reduce capital investment for simpler products. Naturally.