Basman

True, but generally you need autonomy to not be subject to conformist pressure. Good luck breaking from religion on your parent's money.

People on this forum are overall going to have a greater bias and need for independence and avoid conformity. It's correct then to be more autonomous.

Can only happen if you have the culture for it. The west is too independent minded to even consider it without interpreting it as a kind of failure.

The average person doesn't agree with mass migration or transitioning kids, propaganda or not.

I'm speaking from a top down kind of perspective. I'm myself a young adult dependent on my parents due to economic circumstances. If something dysfunctional is crystalizing into bad results then we have an opportunity to seriously discuss the solutions. You should become more economically strong personally, but why do you assume that independence should be the end goal of that? Consider that independence isn't inherently a virtue and that there is a lot of social goodies that comes from an intentional multi-generational living situation that provides society a lot of value that can't be provided by simply dumping resources into some institution or organization. The underlying principle that I'm trying to communicate is that the populace should take a greater degree of responsibility for their survival and that being wholly dependent on the government isn't sufficient for survival or for happiness. Greater independence on a societal scale just means that your dependent on the government for social resources to help you survive to a greater degree, like childcare, education, elder care, health care (to a certain degree), social development, etc. Another underlying principle that I base my idea on is that nature tends to be functionally superior to technology and bureaucratic practice. A lab meat factory requires expensive machines, maintain constant sterility and hire a bunch of skilled experts to produce what pigs do effortlessly while eating trash and rolling around in the mud. Artificial processes tend to be more expensive and complicated than natural ones. The idea of intentional multi-generational living is that it reintroduces some human nature, based on the assumption that it works.

I'm not arguing for economic codependency but for cooperation and intentionally building a community. What I am questioning is if the economic and social independence that we have now since the post-war is sustainable or even desirable. If atomization causes social and financial strain, both personally and societally, then greater cooperation could not only help solve that but also prevent future issues.

To clarify one of my arguments, I think too much social atomization is dysfunctional societally and politically. It strains resources and makes people lonelier. It's antithetical to how humans are built.

That's just the economic reality of it currently and a bit besides the point. Being able to afford your own house is a luxury. It's a cultural expectancy based on post-war economics that made it normative to buy your own home. The more time passes, the further we move away from the economic golden age of the boomers. You expect and value independence maximally like it's a given. There's a good chance that's your culture speaking. Just try to consider the benefits for second. A lot of our social problems are due to a lack of social connections.

Walks like cope, swims like cope, and quacks like cope. Probably cope.

Ignore the will of the people at your own peril.

The rise of nazism was in part due to democratic decline. Your missing the point.

The issue with self-diagnosing is that it's difficult to account for differentials. Like for example CPTSD can give similar symptoms to autism relative to socializing. Things can be more complex than a simple check list of symptoms. Checking symptoms is the easy part, so to speak. It's also true for diagnosing others, which I think is mildly unethical as well. The point of a diagnosis is so professionals can better treat you. It is generally better to make statements about certain behaviors being in line with certain symptoms of autism than a blanket statement "X person is autistic". Like, how would you know?

This is an issue of the system itself undermining democracy. Tampering is minor compared to that.

I think it is interesting how in this sorts of discussions nobody really thinks about what the populace wants. People did vote for politicians like Trump because he gives them a sense of agency over a political system that seems obtuse and unmanageable while at the same being angry over policy that didn't get their consent, like immigration. More technocracy isn't going to solve anything without also addressing a fundamental distrust in institutions. Civic consent is an issue that a lot of liberal types tend to gloss over, but it is fundamental to a healthy democracy. A lot of "wokiesm" and culture wars is in part about policy being implemented without civic consent, like immigration or trans stuff.

China is a capitalist country.

Legit CIA-worthy resume shit LOL. That's really cool. I bet you could use those skills working for some kind of agency, if your a little "morally flexible".

29/36 ✌️😎 I think I did that test once before. When you try to "figure it out" instead of just going with the flow your more likely going to get it wrong. Could use less obscure wording though. Who the fuck uses "incredulous" to describe someone? Bro's feeling a little discombobulated.

I saw a video once of an elderly Sonic living in a post-apocalyptic world ruled by Deviant Art OCs. He was being accosted by the diaper gang. They where crawling on walls and shit. I think about that sometimes.

I'm pretty sure Trump is neurodivergent.

How? The reason it didn't catch on unlike AI is because it didn't provide any tangible value besides being an avenue for degenerate speculation. What's the point in introducing scarcity to one of the few mediums where scarcity is inherently absent? The only NFT-like thing that is successful that I can come up with is Counter Strike skins, but that is in large part about gambling and speculation.

Jumping to conclusions the thread.

An addiction psychologically is thinking you'll miss out on something if you don't partake. If you can build a strong emotionally compelling case why your not missing out by not partaking then you remove that underlying psychological foundation for your compulsion.

Invading Greenland would be very unpopular, even among repuplicans. He might risk losing his power if he's seen as going too far. He is currently politically constrained from maximally realizing his imperialist ambition. Also, just because he says that a militarily invasion is off the table doesn't necesarilly mean that a military invasion is actually off the table when you consider he's a populist that doesn't deal in hard facts and truths. All his stated reasons for taking Greenland have been bogus.

I don't take hype seriously because it is largely unsubstantiated speculation and corrupted by a need to garner investments. I'll believe when I see it bruv.

You could try and sell on Etsy. Look if you can plug into an existing market, then you don't have to spend a bunch of time and energy to convert random street goers. High quality stickers can sell up to 15 dollars per piece on Etsy.