In this podcast clip, Heather Heying gives a stern opinion on the degradation of American political consciousness, saying it's every person's personal responsibility to deal with their anxiety about the future.
I quite agree with her, and even though I respect both Heather and Bret a ton, and look to them for relevant information, I still hate the way the conversation their having labors into - "well you didn't think that guy was bad? but clearly that guy was so bad, and you have to compare him to our guy, so it cancels out and you should stop being neurotic". It's like you aaalmost had an excellent point but then it went parallel to children's playground arguments.
Still I think the clip is worth watching. And I'm just being critical because I can't seem to find anyone giving a satisfactory, outside-the-matrix take on anything happening right now. But maybe, at the same time, I don't want to find it because I don't care.
I resonate pretty deeply with her frustration at the capture of culture dialogue taken by neurotic, unregulated people, and demanding them to take responsibility for themselves.
It is beginning to feel like another moment where I have to draw a line about politics, and I hesitate to. It's been weighing on my mind.
So it was comforting hearing Heather say this. Because on the rare occasion I go and login into Instagram where my female friends are, instantly this evidence slaps me in the face and I can't even be mad because I knew it would be there.
This reminds me of the last scene from No Country
I want to hear more about your political line drawing. What’s going on in normieville?
there's some ever so slight (and maybe more internal) pressure to offer regret for the way I voted ? The conflict is nudged by the violence on display by immigration officers ... I'm just trying to digest a bit of it, but not too much, and make meaning of it.
Which really means I'm fishing for a narrative to affix to my perception, and I want namely bret and heather to give it to me.
'normies' are still going to protests and calling senators
Just my perspective:
What ICE is doing is terrible and there’s no reason to pretend it isn’t or to obfuscate by talking about illegal immigration in the abstract.
There’s also no particular reason why you have to feel like this is worse than the authoritarian hellscape Kamala was representing. Her administration locked down and forcibly “medicated” hundreds of millions of people while gaslighting everyone constantly.
It’s not at all obvious that Trump has more carnage on his hands than the heads of the Covid regime.
Fair, I think that comparison is useful.
another reason I appreciated this episode was the accounting done, taking in the hopeful reasons two years ago to vote, and what has played out since then. The summary I would agree with: we hoped the administration would move apolitically but instead the power gravitated toward political gain
The state is always ugly and violent. There’s nothing wrong with trying to point it away from yourself.
The focus on "the state" is mindless as the state is just the label du jour for human organization. If you do not like human organization that's fine, but organization is, and if you are human than the only thing worse than participation is abdication.
Abdication is to be acquiescent, it is a lazy, dishonest, most cowardly form of consent. Textbook slacktivism.
The same people do the same things throughout history no matter what it's called. We had a very weak federal government, no "gestapo", and the scenes were no different.
No state pictured here. Just a labor union mob fighting a private agency (Pinkerton). Funny how many anarchists would cry about Pinkerton just as they cry about the State despite it fitting squarely into the sovereign property rights framework. The same people bemoaning the state today would have created it mere generations ago for exactly the same reasons.
The distinction is around whether the organization uses market means or political (violent) means. You may not care about the distinction but that doesn't make it mindless.
Some people have a strong preference for peaceful relations.
How did the Kerensky preferences work out?
Preferences are nice, but don't mean anything when the choices are bad and worse.
What do you think about not voting at all, to not participate in a system you think is fundamentally flawed?
Is that something that’s also judged in America? Like, is the media framing non-voters as enemies, too?
Abstaining from voting is definitely frowned upon socially. I think it's obvious that people shouldn't vote and often tell them so.
This ^^
Its one thing to deny the state is violent and pointing it at people will result in death. It's quite another to only seem to care when it's under the control by people you don't align with.
I have a problem with the state killing people. I also have a problem when people that desire a massive increase in state power to make things right in the world complaining about it when they aren't in charge.
Covid was not that long ago and I am sure many appalled by ICE were begging government agents to punish those not willing to get stuck with a drug or daring to gather with others voluntarily.
Also, this whole mess is why people talk about states rights. Let each state regulate itself and keep the feds out. But most lefties want the feds forcing states to do things they like.
We can't have it both ways. I'm tired of pointing this out. Objectively looking at conflicts seems too boring for most people.
Maybe I'm just not very in-touch with my feelings, but I do not resonate with those who are constantly expressing their distress on social media. I resonate with it so little, that it makes me wonder whether those people really feel that deeply distressed, or whether they are simply performing.
I don't mean to say that they don't genuinely feel what they feel. I only wonder if the incentives on social media contribute to their desire to express it publicly, and in a particular way, whether consciously or subconsciously.
I think you’re pointing to the vehicle of the neurosis - social media. A huge contribution of hysteria comes from plugging into the hysteria
I too like to indulge in meta-hysteria. I'm not sure it's better but I like hanging with meta-hysterians more.
so…what?
so nothing you fool
What would your idea of an "outside The matrix" type of commentary be?
why the mysogynistic [clickbait?] post title? your text doesn't seem to have anything about women being inherently neurotic, beyond your impression of your Instagram friends...
I think you missed the clip
correct, I have a difficult time listening to podcasts, and was hoping to understand the relevance of the title from the text.
Stereotypes always unnerve me a bit, because they often have some basis, then they get blown out of proportion, and sometimes they become self-fulfilling prophecies. As far as understanding women goes, I definitely am an example of the stereotypical man who frequently gets confounded by their behavior.... however I make an effort to consider people's behaviors as resulting from their individual situation and personality, rather than automatically writing them off as due to some stereotype.
Indeed. When IG isn't giving me fit dudes and semi-naked girls, yeah that's all there is
If you live in a society where the public conversation is led by the loudest and least self-reflective voices then the result will be predictable frustration and declining trust. The real task is not to wait for a perfect take or a flawless commentator because that is a mirage. The task is to sort through the noise and decide for yourself how much of your attention you are willing to invest. You do not need consensus to feel anchored and you certainly do not need to sit in the crossfire of factional comparisons that reduce issues to team sport rhetoric. What matters is cultivating that inner discipline to engage selectively and to know when to walk out of the room. Most people do not lack access to good thinking they lack the will to separate it from the din.