hashMap
1yr ago
It seems like the UK and much of the rest of the west is run by the type of people who lived at Versailles. For them, politics is the debate, not the reality. A war with Russia isn't about tanks and bombs, it is about positioning oneself within the debate and what makes sense within the internal palace politics. Energy politics isn't about watts and power, it is about what works on twitter and what image is projected. The electrical grid is failing not because of Russia but because energy policies have been run by people who know more about PR than energy. They aren't really looking at inflation as an economic issue, they are looking at it as a PR issue.
The background of the people running a lot of the west isn't exactly hope inspiring, they come from media, think tanks and universities with little connection to reality. Politics lacks people who have served in the military, run a company, done engineering or worked in a hospital.
What is the most efficient way to get a date if tinder doesn't work?
I am in my early thirties, and I have recently sold my startup and moved to a new city to work in finance as a developer. I am above average height, I am below average body fat and I can do ten strict chin-ups and I have a graduate degree from a good university. There is nothing particular about my looks in either direction, I am not stunningly beautiful, but there is nothing particularly bad about it either. In a crowd, I wouldn't stick out. I am realizing this is my biggest issue, it doesn't matter that I have had an interesting life when I am being judged for a fraction of a second on tinder.
This is starting to weigh me down a lot recently. I am not rejected by women, of the two dates I have gotten in the past year both women wanted to continue dating. The problem is that I am too bland to get a date out of a crowd of a thousand matches. Just looking average, having a good job and having my life together isn't cutting it on a hyper elitist platform dominated by men. Literally every employee at the company I work for is a man, and there is no way I am going to meet someone through my work friends. I play chess, ride motorcycles and serve in an army reserve unit. These hobbies are good for friends, but not places to meet women.
I know online dating is largely a scam and that I shouldn't be undateable. On the other hand, I am not getting dates. If I keep going down the same path, I will continue to be single. Not basing my self-worth on tinder doesn't really make sense when that is the market on which my future is determined. What is a concrete plan that I can start following here and now that can realistically land me a long term relationship with a sensible partner? My plan has been focused on self-improvement, but I am realizing that much of this improvement has zero impact on my dating as no woman ever sees it.
hashMap
1yr ago
In times of extreme pressure, fairly normal people are relatively likely to commit crimes. If you are starving, theft is much more justifiable and likely than if you are doing fairly well. In the 1800s a fairly normal person could end up destitute in a way that is unlikely to happen to that person today. There were probably more orphans in 1850 who stole things but could be straightened out. The person who in modern day Sweden has to steal in order to not starve has made a series of poor choices and could find another source of food than theft. Most criminals in the modern west aren't even destitute. The gangster driving around in a car blasting music isn't turning to crime in order to survive, but because of an outlier personality. As the pressures to commit crime are reduced it is expected that criminals will become harder to rehabilitate as there will be more neurological causes to their crimes. A Soviet soldier who raped a woman in Berlin in 1945 could have had a normal psychology. The man in Berlin in 2022 who drags a random woman into the bushes in a park last night is probably severely deranged.
Therefore, long sentences become an increasingly good idea as society gets richer, as it stops people who are dysfunctional from interacting with society and stops them from reproducing.
hashMap
1yr ago
I would say it is an age old battle between two fundamental desires. On the one hand we want to belong to a strong group and therefore want to act in a way that benefits the group, on the other hand we want to get ahead ourselves even if it hurts the group. Religion and tradition is a way to push people towards group oriented behaviours, aka have children, don't sleep around instead marry young, don't divorce your wife even if she is less hot at age 50 and your secretary wants to bang, what counts is how good you are for the afterlife and not how well you have it currently.
The ideologies that have sprung up in the last centuries have largely been individualist from capitalism claiming that there is no bond between elite and the rest apart from purely contractual agreements, to genderstudies that want to abolish virtues for women while arguing that women should get special privledges. In WWI lots of Barons, millionaires and other high status people died in the trenches, today the individualist elites would flee and would focus on their personal survival. China is building twice as many warships as NATO since the elite in the west tossed their workers under a buss and moved ship production to China, so they could mistreat workers, thereby providing China with the world's premier shipbuilding industry while the west has to build ships by hand as prototypes.
As we have more and more fossil fuels and cheap natural resources harsh group oriented values have been replaced by individualism. For example instead of family first because if you get sick you need your family to provide for you we get genderstudies that promotes personal interests over family with the argument that if you get sick the state or an insurance company will care for you.
The issue is that a society that is entirely individually oriented will be highly corrupt and increasingly dysfunctional, thereby recreating the need for group oriented values.
hashMap
1yr ago
People like people like themselves, it is natural and normal. Most animals have difficulty being around members of the same species who are further than second cousins or a partner. Getting people to cooperate, work together, understand each other and creating a sense of community is hard. Go to a restaurant and look at the people who join a table, you will do a much better than random job at guessing which table people belong to. It isn't just race, two white people don't have much in common. People want to be friends with someone the same age, income bracket, level of education, personality type, political orientation, family situation etc. Friends even look the same.
When I have hired people, I have absolutely looked for people who are more similar to me. I don't just need someone who can preform tasks, I want to build a team, build friendships, have good communication and have someone who has similar experiences and worldview. When I have looked for people to join a team, I imagine the team doing something on a Friday night and I try to picture the candidate in that group of friends. The degree to which the candidate would naturally be a part of the team is imho an important recruiting criteria.
Most jobs are more of a team effort than individuals making extraordinary individual efforts. A PhD candidate that builds a great relationship with the research team and the lab in which people know each other's grandmother's names is going to preform better than rockstar individuals.
I don't see why defending bland, generic car based urban sprawl at all makes sense for conservatives. They are soulless, placeless expanses originally envisioned by liberals. The traditional city is walkable, has a strong sense of community, is unique and has a sense of belonging. There needs to be places for people to meet, small businesses and room for local culture. A stroad with endless generic housing with some big box stores selling the same products that can be found on the other side of the planet is essentially the anti thesis to the traditional city. The urbanist walkable city with cafes and restaurants at least has the aesthetic of a real city. My main critic of liberal urbanism is that it focuses purely on the aesthetic and not the function. There is no focus on having a common culture, a sense of belonging, an architectural style unique to the town and its geography etc. It is a disney-world version of a city. I would still much rather have that then the completely atomized suburban sprawl that has been built since WWII. Suburbia has isolated people from their communities, made people fat, ruined the environment and created a boring society. Instead of a public square which is a public space there is a mall which is nothing but a commercial space controlled by someone who has no connection to the town.
Cars are a massive waste of space, force kids to sit in their houses while their mom has to drive them to their friends, and replaces the bakery with bland factory bread. The best thing that could happen to conservatism is 150 dollar per barrel oil.
More options
Context Copy link