Marxists would say that this is a symptom of alienation, that industrial society under capitalism has isolated individuals from their communities, broken up the extended family, and divorced the worker from the fruits of their labor.
I think it has more to do with concrete changes to how people socialize over the past 15 years, namely smartphones and the internet. People seek community through the internet but are functionally isolating themselves, and as irl relationships fade or never happen, they stay online more, which becomes a positive feedback loop. They develop social anxieties only because they have no experience with or are not used to socializing irl
My take : society needs to adapt to the status of women. We went from a society where women could only get a life through marriage to a society where they have to work and don’t need to be married. This changes how men and women interact together, and we need to invent new ways around romance and dating.
But it doesn’t have to be that way. I was a shut in once and started going out. I’m still not good at it, but I’m getting better. I can’t go back to being a shut in. I need my in person socialization on a regular basis.
You saw that you were in plato’s cave. But the majority of people either just haven’t figured out that online socializing is an illusion or they aren’t self aware enough to ever figure it out.
It isn’t necessarily an illusion. I have very real friendships thanks to the internet, but it’s insufficient on its own and lacks key components that your brain needs. It’s like junk food, you may feel like you’re getting everything, and it may be giving you some of what you need, maybe even in over abundance. But it needs to be part instead of most of all.
And yeah I talk about this openly for a reason. For those feeling alienated and isolated, there is hope and it starts by going to things and standing awkwardly in the corner until you either work up the courage to talk to someone or someone talks to you. And you just keep doing it.
Yeah, I believe that capitalism, in fact, encourages the isolation of the individial. After all, isolated individuals don’t make solidarity (i.e. unions).
Community isolation came well after the dawn of capitalism via car-centric infrastructure, which isn’t necessarily a capitalism issue as much as a problem with invention exceeding what’s actually needed of it.
The extended family was destroyed by the church long before there even was a capitalism, the European clan structure family was determined to be “ungodly” because it tended to lead to inbreeding and tyranny of cousins scenarios.
I think you’re litigating something else entirely.
Community isolation came well after the dawn of capitalism via car-centric infrastructure, which isn’t necessarily a capitalism issue as much as a problem with invention exceeding what’s actually needed of it.
The extended family was destroyed by the church long before there even was a capitalism, the European clan structure family was determined to be “ungodly” because it tended to lead to inbreeding and tyranny of cousins scenarios.
Which is it? Before or after Capitalism? Also, car-centric infrastructure is 1000% a byproduct of Capitalism. It certainly wasn’t the communities and the Marxists telling everyone to buy a car and drive an hour each way to work and back.
I was pointing out that you were looking at two separate occurrences that were not as related to one another as Marx and other communists hypothesized. The car and its byproducts are the main culprit of community atomization, with capitalism being to blame the same way that art school is to blame for WWII, the church is to “blame” for the end of the European clan based family separate from the atomization of communities writ large, and it did so for actually pretty legitimate reasons that Marxists tend to not consider when lamenting about how industrialization destroyed the “traditional” family.
Also, maybe Marx himself wasn’t selling cars but the eastern bloc had its own auto-industry and its own period of carification, the difference was that the post war housing rush pushed the Soviet bloc towards housing infrastructure that naturally led people to using cars less often than their western counterparts, those “commieblocks” that catch flack for not having as nice a facade as similar units built with less haste.
The whole world is turning into incels. Its not that there is no one to fuck but that everyone has crippling social anxiety.
Marxists would say that this is a symptom of alienation, that industrial society under capitalism has isolated individuals from their communities, broken up the extended family, and divorced the worker from the fruits of their labor.
I think it has more to do with concrete changes to how people socialize over the past 15 years, namely smartphones and the internet. People seek community through the internet but are functionally isolating themselves, and as irl relationships fade or never happen, they stay online more, which becomes a positive feedback loop. They develop social anxieties only because they have no experience with or are not used to socializing irl
My take : society needs to adapt to the status of women. We went from a society where women could only get a life through marriage to a society where they have to work and don’t need to be married. This changes how men and women interact together, and we need to invent new ways around romance and dating.
But it doesn’t have to be that way. I was a shut in once and started going out. I’m still not good at it, but I’m getting better. I can’t go back to being a shut in. I need my in person socialization on a regular basis.
You saw that you were in plato’s cave. But the majority of people either just haven’t figured out that online socializing is an illusion or they aren’t self aware enough to ever figure it out.
It isn’t necessarily an illusion. I have very real friendships thanks to the internet, but it’s insufficient on its own and lacks key components that your brain needs. It’s like junk food, you may feel like you’re getting everything, and it may be giving you some of what you need, maybe even in over abundance. But it needs to be part instead of most of all.
And yeah I talk about this openly for a reason. For those feeling alienated and isolated, there is hope and it starts by going to things and standing awkwardly in the corner until you either work up the courage to talk to someone or someone talks to you. And you just keep doing it.
I need to do this more.
Yeah you should. Massive benefits. I got friends and a wife out of it
And good on you. I am glad you were able to break out of your depressive spiral.
The internet was able to trick people into thinking they were socializing when they were actually alone in their room all day.
Arch users say this means you should install Arch btw
Yeah, I believe that capitalism, in fact, encourages the isolation of the individial. After all, isolated individuals don’t make solidarity (i.e. unions).
And they’d be missing the mark.
Community isolation came well after the dawn of capitalism via car-centric infrastructure, which isn’t necessarily a capitalism issue as much as a problem with invention exceeding what’s actually needed of it.
The extended family was destroyed by the church long before there even was a capitalism, the European clan structure family was determined to be “ungodly” because it tended to lead to inbreeding and tyranny of cousins scenarios.
I think you’re litigating something else entirely.
Which is it? Before or after Capitalism? Also, car-centric infrastructure is 1000% a byproduct of Capitalism. It certainly wasn’t the communities and the Marxists telling everyone to buy a car and drive an hour each way to work and back.
I was pointing out that you were looking at two separate occurrences that were not as related to one another as Marx and other communists hypothesized. The car and its byproducts are the main culprit of community atomization, with capitalism being to blame the same way that art school is to blame for WWII, the church is to “blame” for the end of the European clan based family separate from the atomization of communities writ large, and it did so for actually pretty legitimate reasons that Marxists tend to not consider when lamenting about how industrialization destroyed the “traditional” family.
Also, maybe Marx himself wasn’t selling cars but the eastern bloc had its own auto-industry and its own period of carification, the difference was that the post war housing rush pushed the Soviet bloc towards housing infrastructure that naturally led people to using cars less often than their western counterparts, those “commieblocks” that catch flack for not having as nice a facade as similar units built with less haste.
deleted by creator