striker
11mo ago
Democrats lose because they are lame.
This – perceived lameness – is pervasive across the west. The sad thing (for democrats in the US, or progressives or liberals or lefties or whatever they’re called elsewhere) is that in general they are compassionate people, with empathy towards others, especially those who have fallen through the cracks, and they’re interested more in civic society than in individual gain, but online media has no proven way of effectively showing the OTHERS whom they have compassion for. Which makes them look lame. Whether they are or not is largely irrelevant because perception creates reality.
In contrast, online media does a great job of showcasing and promoting individual gain, thereby attracting all those who are primarily driven by it.
But even more importantly, because all humans are a jigsaw of mismatching parts, and nobody is either 100% compassionate or 100% individualistic, this means you get the strange phenomenon that even people who are 25% individualistic, say, are exposed to a lot more content (and a lot more compelling content) that is individualist in nature, and so the prevailing wind is that those people gravitate slowly from “left” (compassionate) to “right” (individualistic) by dint of the air they’re breathing in online settings much more than carefully thought out worldviews and philosophies.
TLDR - liberals look lame online, therefore they are lame, therefore most people gravitate towards conservatives over time.
striker
11mo ago
Also Mach3 (or whatever other identical 3-blade I can find). I always use cream. I vary between cheap-as-chips shaving foam and more expensive lather with brush etc. I don’t think either gives me a better shave, but I feel better after the brush and lather exercise. It just takes a bit longer, so I don’t do it all the time. I rarely, if ever, cut. Can’t remember the last time I had one of any significance.
A few comments, general and specific. Let me start with the general: It strikes me that the economic problems created by fertility problems (fewer children > fewer adults > less productivity > less value created and monetized > smaller treasure chests to pay the pensions, healthcare and other requirements of older generations) are contingent on two completely unsustainable norms: (1) convincing a significant section of the population that it’s a legitimate expectation that they should be able to “retire” for perhaps 30-40 years after (often) 25-30 years (and sometimes even less) of work that in many cases was a public service, or sideways related to public service, and therefore not actually productive of much value/monetary return in the first place and (2) expansion of lifespan without much expansion of healthspan, and sometimes even significant diminishing of healthspan, creating another unsustainable reality that older people are draining resources for years or decades, and sometimes medication and the “health system” keeps them alive in much reduced quality of life circumstances in a way that a cold skeptic might describe as profiteering on the pain of the populace.
Without these two unsustainables, and given continued expected technological progress (I appreciate there is irony here) underpopulation or declining fertility rates are much less of a problem.
I do concede that more should be done to make families and child-bearing popular again, but not for broader economic reasons. Rather, places that are full of older people are not pleasant places to be.
On the specifics:
1
Can you say more on this? Were they bad reports, or reports you disagreed with?
2
I was in Italy recently, and at one train station on a Saturday afternoon the train was overwhelmed by approximately 100 young people (~12-16 years old) who were all north or central African either by birth or origin. They were noisy but not unpleasant and it looked like none had a ticket, because a ticket inspector appeared on the train and they all disappeared in the opposite direction, presumably getting out at the next stop.
I looked up Italian immigration numbers and found that Italian national statistics office reports that said immigration levels are almost exactly replacing the declining population rate, and that Italian women are now having the lowest number of children in history (from memory I think it was 1.2 or perhaps 1.4 on average). I thought that was interesting at the time, and that it wouldn’t take too many years of that reality to completely change what Italian society looked like.
More options
Context Copy link