Read on Twitter
all "cultural" "political problems" of our times are the direct product of people simply not raising their children since the 1930's, and 100% of the time when you get annoyed online by someone having wrong opinions it's a literal child trying their best to understand the world https://twitter.com/vers_laLune/status/1349099386710724610
two muddles together points there. one, getting mad at people online is stupid because you're getting angry with literal children.
two, while the children may be particularly cruel and stupid, they are still children, and ultimately the responsibility lies with the collective decision made a hundred years ago to just stop parenting and hoping for the best
specifically daughters are fucked. spiritually speaking all women alive today are fatherless
people talk about "why don't they teach you actually useful stuff in school like doing your taxes", but children are so divorced from their own history, roots & family that even something as basic as socially relating to other people, has to be re-invented from the ground up
the autism is coming from inside the building
the basic gestalt is, people used to have children as an obvious certainty, it was simply something you did, unconscious and unarticulated, to live. you had ten kids, some of them lived, life goes on. key point is, unarticulated, self-evident. https://twitter.com/LionBots/status/1349103260536344584?s=20
in industrial middle class consumer society, children are now actively "chosen". to have children is a luxury good and a consumer product and a personal statement of identity-marking. it is a conscious choice on part of the parents. this makes children less than human
it's all a part of the whole alienation shakedown, it's just the sort of thing that gets worse over time, as we now have generations of generations of generations raised this way, accumulating the "distance" from "tradition" for lack of a better term
by this I mean unarticulated, self-evident, cultural expectations and rules, which are learned by monkey-see-monkey-do mechanics. such as, how to go steady with a boy or be engaged
parents actively participating in their children's education, because they are dependant on each other to survive, and will need them to take care of them when they grow old, to put it vulgarly and overly directly. but that's just to illustrate, the mentality is more indirect
that's a very mercantile way of thinking about it, "something for something" "I do x, to recieve y". I don't believe this is how the actual agents would think about it, this is only to explain it to us, who live in an entirely mercantile worldview from birth (consumer society)
for me, the key point is a mental state in which it is simply not considered, not given a single thought - self-evident. you just do it because that's what you do
people say children are "pampered" and "recieve participation trophies" and stuff. this is misdirection, and misdiagnostication. while some certainly are, this is by far not the biggest problem, and nothing close to being the core problem
the problem isn't that by "choosing" the children actively as consumer goods, they value them HIGHER and therefore pamper them and don't give them a real talking to stern discipline manly man etc. other way around.
they give them participation trophies because they don't care enough and feel bad for not caring enough. the participation trophy meme is not about gratification of the children, it's parents trying to prove something to themselves about who they are, a way to soothe a conscience
which tells them they aren't *enjoying* being parents enough. because the imperative in consumer society, the big Demand from "society" isn't "you must do x y and z" - it doesnt matter what you DO, it matters that you ENJOY
it's a way of buying indulgences, in the eyes of the central cultural imperative, against whom you have sinned
the problem from the childrens pov is that there is no direct link to the parent; you are a fashion accessory to them, & not a human being. you are divorced from your environment and you are never initiated into it. so you have to reinvent society from the ground up, from nothing
and this is what goes on in schools unless it's being noticed and then cracked down on as "antisocial behavior" and bullying and what have you, which then postpones the development until they're out of school in their early twenties
and well the long and short of it is then society collapses
in biblical terms, children slay their parents and brother goes against brother. in more modern terms, children report their parents to the fbi/kgb
and basically the only possible chance we have at avoiding generations of death until we reinvent a stable social structure again, is to somehow reinvent the social technology that is the core of Christian doctrine which is forgiving your parents and breaking the cycle of neglect
because, you know, when they grow old & you grow into adulthood you are in a position to take revenge and humiliate them, and you WILL feel the drive to do so, to punish them for the way they treated you, and the way they treated their own parents, or whatever the specifics may b
and for about 2k years there we had a thing going where we'd developed a social technology which circumvented this instinctual cruel animal behaviour, for the good of the extended family/tribe/your own kids, so they don't do the same to you
but this last bit is all about technology, because "god being dead" is about this "social technology" no longer working, in our (indutrial) technological environment. which is why it must be somehow reinvented, reforged, reshaped, to fit as a tool into this different environment
there's more moving parts to the whole thing and it has a lot to do with how consciousness is shaped how thoughts and stories work
"everything worth saying has been said but because no one was listening we have to go back and say it all over again" ->
-> a reinterpretation of [forgiveness] is necessary and unavoidable because the social technology [church] is insufficient to solve for the practical problem in the currently manifested worldview (by way of our tools/technological environment, at-handedness, heidegger)
to put in a pointed way, the narrative of the resurrection of jesus christ functioned because in that at-handedness, the overcoming of death was the WILDEST SHIT YOU'D EVER FUCKING HEARD ABOUT HOLY SHIT. HE FUCKING ROSE FROM THE DEAD ARE YOU KIDDING ME FUCK HOLY SHIT
where today this has less impact on most people, because they don't even believe themselves to be alive in the first place
futhermore the doctrine of forgiveness of sins just doesn't match with the central incentives of consumer society (to enjoy) - "shame" is not something to be "solved", "absolution" isn't meaningful, in a worldview where "shame" is inherently "pathological".
you're healthy/good if you ENJOY. You're sick/bad, if you are ashamed, being ashamed is "irrational". the technology doesn't fit the problem
to receive absolution from your "shame", would mean giving up, emotionally, metaphorically, internally, the entire worldview you've been raised in. it would be a kind of "death". it would mean losing your entire personality and frame of reference. it would be a kind of death
and people don't believe in a life after death.
I think, and this is a minor thing probably, that they are especially objectionable to "giving up" that world, because being as we all are, fatherless and neglected, that world is the closest we've ever felt to our [parents][history][world]
and because we hunger for it, it's harder to give up, when you don't know what you're gonna get in return. we cling on to it, as a fetish for the thing we truly desire, a stand-in, because it's the closest we've ever known
and so what is required is a
leap of faith
if you will
wink wink
leap of faith
if you will
wink wink
