Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Doomblade187]

And, since access to social media is voluntary, people can... y'know, leave. It's not like it's our literal habitation, after all- there are other means of communication.

I still get affected by Tinder fostering dating cultures even if I never download it in the first place.

And we still are affected by the increase in expectations to unrealistic levels from facebook and instagram.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Which, unlike the archetypal behavioral sink, is not a forced living condition. So by no means is it an "unstoppable social wind."

If people feel constantly compelled en mass to do something they hate and know only hurts their ability to relate to others, is that really better than if they only did those things because someone else forced them to? That suggests to me an incentive on the fundamental level of our society, such that people can't resist it regardless of choice or force.

We cannot escape our economic conditions for any period of time, and the consequences are universal.

[Dunamisdeos]

Calhoun's work seems to be in regards to effect that overcrowding via overpopulation has on society. Apologies for my misunderstanding here, but what else are you using this to refer to? We have reams of physical space left in the US. Are you saying that the millennial decrease in sex is because of.... overpopulation? Lack of living space? Lack of.... what, diverse socialization options? The conditions of his experiment are not even close to being replicated IRL.

You understand that the problem you guys are positing just needs you to leave the fucking internet regularly and go out to experience reality, right? If Calhoun had put a little door in the habitat that let the animals leave and experience practically unlimited room to grow and experience it would have removed the impetus for social decline.

I'm sorry if this comes off as harsh.

[RedKing]

mhuh mhuh MSH you're just a scaremonger, everything is fine and can be reformed to be perfect, hey what's that coming over the hill

Yet another thing you damn millenials are killing.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have my polyamorous harem to keep satisfied. It's a hard job, but somebody's got to do it.

[Doomblade187]

Freedom page ftw 1776.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Calhoun's exact experiment should not be transposed onto this. The issue is not population density any more than it is birth rate, it's social connection. Collapse the social web and everything else goes with it. It's bad for mice, so it can only be apocalyptic for humans, given the socializing in our species relative to theirs.

It's not the internet. The internet as socialization is an anemic adaptation to the life-consumption of capitalism, which renders any more organic or meatspace-oriented socializing a massive resource expenditure. You cannot get away, you cannot choose not to play. The rent is due, fuck you pay me.

And if there's no escape, then everybody gets pulled down by behavioral sink. Destruction follows.

[Maximum Spin]

It's not capitalism and it's not the mouse utopia, it's the same generational cycle of vice and reaction that has been going on for all of recorded history, just now the older generation have ever more data and news articles about how weird the kids these days are with their christian rock and promise rings.

[Trekkin]

Also I can't help but think that the "it's all capitalism's fault" that isn't helping your case.

The vague and italicized implications of doom don't really help either. Absent a specific problem, yes, it sounds like scaremongering.

I mean, buggy whip-related injuries are down too. So's scurvy. There are possibilities.

[MrRoboto75]

I am of the belief that there is a problem here.  Will society blindly crumple as it swipes right?  Probably not.

But I forsee a lot of losers.  Some winners, yes, but a lot of losers.  Chances are they will lose for no real reason of their own power.  Wrong place, wrong time.

[Trekkin]

I am of the belief that there is a problem here.  Will society blindly crumple as it swipes right?  Probably not.

But I forsee a lot of losers.  Some winners, yes, but a lot of losers.  Chances are they will lose for no real reason of their own power.  Wrong place, wrong time.

We have a lot of losers now, though. The future losers will do what bitter losers have always done: retreat from humanity and invent elaborate reasons why the rest of us don't deserve to be graced with their presence. Sure, the Internet means we can hear more from them, but other than that I see no reason to foresee any change.

[Karnewarrior]

Disregarding those losers who venture from their caves to vote for people who are tough on "weirdoes" who brain-cuck the losers by having bigger dicks in porn, or just being percieved as breeders in general.

Remember that Incels and your typical basement garbage-nazi are both that sort of people, but they're having larger and larger effects on our society as they entrap witless individuals inside their bubble. Hell, those that do come out of their holes can get power, and there's nothing worse than a garbage-nazi with power because he knows he's not the ubermensch but he can never admit it, so he drags as many people as he can into his death spiral. We need apparatus in place to prevent these sorts of bubbles from forming, without infringing on free speech and allowing a dictatorship of the state.

Not to mention their counterparts on the left: Your Tumblrinas and Feminazis. Everything above applies to them, in exactly the same way, like some kind of fucked up social version of Newton's Law. "For every Crazy there is an equal but opposite Crazy across the isle."

[misko27]

Everything above applies to them, in exactly the same way, like some kind of fucked up social version of Newton's Law. "For every Crazy there is an equal but opposite Crazy across the isle."

What do the Brits have to do with this?

Damn it Karne, we just had page 1776, you can't bring the brits back. There was a whole declaration and everything. Something about "No shitposting without representation" or something.

I am of the belief that there is a problem here.  Will society blindly crumple as it swipes right?  Probably not.

But I forsee a lot of losers.  Some winners, yes, but a lot of losers.  Chances are they will lose for no real reason of their own power.  Wrong place, wrong time.

We have a lot of losers now, though. The future losers will do what bitter losers have always done: retreat from humanity and invent elaborate reasons why the rest of us don't deserve to be graced with their presence. Sure, the Internet means we can hear more from them, but other than that I see no reason to foresee any change.

A: Saying things in the future will be more like they are now is probably the most alarming statement you could possibly make in Ameripol. B: The sheer degree to which social networks have dissolved in the years since the 60s and 70s is unprecedented, not only with regards to our recent history, but with regards to American history period. The average American today has fewer local resources in the form of clubs and community since any time since de Tocqueville called us a nation of "joiners" way back when. On almost every metric of involvement that you care to look at, the trend is down. People are still doing things, but as the example which gives the book Bowling Alone its name: there are more people who bowl than ever, but far fewer bowling leagues. Political participation is down... but the metrics which are down least are things like writing to newspapers, which don't require other people.

If you doubt it, answer me this: how many organizations are you apart of, where your participation is something you actually do? That is to say, where you actually participate in the sense of volunteer and show up to meetings, rather than sending a check? This isn't to pick on you or even this forum; it's down across every demographic. Political organizations have almost all become professional, but this is at least in part a necessary change to compensate for the loss of volunteers' time. Fewer Americans then ever say that they have anyone close to them that they can talk to about important things.

My point is simply that it's a broad phenomenon, and regardless of whether or not it's "normal" or "expected", it will have consequences. Actually, that's a good reminder to the thread in general; just because something is normal doesn't mean it isn't real or a problem. Economic boom and bust cycles can be quite regular, but they're still awful for most involved.

[Trekkin]

A: Saying things in the future will be more like they are now is probably the most alarming statement you could possibly make in Ameripol. B: The sheer degree to which social networks have dissolved in the years since the 60s and 70s is unprecedented, not only with regards to our recent history, but with regards to American history period.

Oh, the broader loss of community is definitely a worrying trend, but my point was that it's not a problem only or even primarily because there are people very vocally resigning from society because that particular thing is far from new and won't change any time soon. People have this tendancy to act like incels and feminazis are new, and they're just newly named and organized along different lines. More to the point, they've existed before without doing worse than quietly stewing in their caves and compounds, at least in terms of their propensity for violence or politics. If we're worried about them now, we might be better served asking how to silence them rather than eliminate them.

As it happens, I think we can in fact do that through a combination of officially ignoring them and unofficially trolling them until their cynicism becomes all-consuming and their cowardice once again overrides their tender misanthropy to the point where they can't organize anymore, but that's another matter.

Regardless, yes, we're going to continue to see reductions in voluntary associations and so forth. The consequences of everyone being alone together -- and I'm not contesting that there will be, although I do see an upside to more ephemeral and specific social networks -- will not, I think, spring from the people who have already taken it to its logical conclusion. I think the rest of us are going to bottom out somewhere above inceldom, really.

[Max™]

I missed like a lot of pages but I am on the side that fights against Pigdog Scum. That sounds like pork I can't eat and I am unilaterally against that.

Welcome, brother! Take up arms against our oppressors and their questionable genetic engineering!



In other news

1. Laura Ingraham is losing her shit that there are four young, progressive, non-white new Congresswomen, dubbing them the "four horsewomen of the Apocalypse". (C'mon Laura...the correct term is "horseperson").

Uh, horseperson carries the implicit assumption of personhood, the correct term is rocket equine.

[scriver]

I also see this resolving in time. As we get better access to mental health services, and nonconsensual relationships are increasingly pushed down, so long as quality of life continues to improve.

Scandinavia, and Sweden in particular, would beg to differ.