HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I fucking hate how our so...

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:25 PM

I fucking hate how our society is so status and money oriented!!

Last edited Sat Sep 26, 2015, 12:22 AM - Edit history (3)

It disgusts me how status and money oriented our society is. Fuck elitism, and fuck shallowness, and how so many people do things only to "improve their reputation" and to "impress" others. I don't care how "big" or "nice" your houses or cars are. Fuck that horseshit. I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want, as long as they aren't hurting themselves or anyone else. Judging them for petty shit is ridiculous and shallow.

To me, being "successful" in our society doesn't have anything to do with grades, being "smart" academically, getting into top colleges, getting "prestigious jobs" or making tons of money. That's meaningless. Ted Cruz got excellent grades at Princeton and Harvard Law School, and I think he's a dumbass and a dipshit.

Sometimes, making a lot of money might show that you did something worthwhile and were a great leader (if you were an entrepreneur who designed an amazing new product or service, or if you invented something), but a lot of the time, it might not, especially if you inherited a lot of the money (like Donald Trump did). Inheriting money and being born into privilege doesn't show leadership, hard work, ingenuity, creativity, or drive.

People have way, way, way more to offer than their "grades" or "jobs" or "wealth." They have emotions, cool life stories, support, advice, a metaphorical shoulder to lean on, and are vessels to understand the human condition. These have very little if nothing to do with grades, jobs, or money.

I don't befriend people based on their GPA, jobs, wealth, or occupations. I connect with them because of their sense of humor, worldview, interests, ability to empathize with one another, and a wide variety of other attributes that are infinitely more telling of an individual than a subjective, narrowly-contrived paradigm of truth checking.

To me, being "successful" is being comfortable in your own skin, and being happy with yourself. It's about knowing what you want to do in life, which may or may not involve making money. And if you're making $30,000 dollars a year, doing the good fight as a public interest lawyer, when you also had the choice of making hundreds of thousands in BigLaw, I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for you.

Knowing your goals and doing whatever it takes to get there. Different people have their own versions of what they think is a success. Success is about being happy and doing everything you do for the right reasons.

I'm a person of color, a South Asian (I immigrated from India to the U.S. as a very young child), and I grew up around a lot of competitive South Asians and East Asians. I know a lot of successful East Asians and Indians who do think they are superior to other people though. They think that because they worked hard since they were small, always got straight As in tough AP classes in school, got a 2200+ on the SAT or 35+ on the ACT, did tons of prestigious extracurricular activities, got into prestigious universities and majored in tough STEM jobs, and are now working in top companies and making good money, they are "superior" to others who didn't "work as hard." They think they're the shit, and everyone else is a lowly pleb and peasant who is inferior for not doing as well in school, not getting into a prestigious college, or getting a high-paying job.

Look, I'm all for competition and meritocracy, and building an economy that rewards people who work hard, invest in marketable skills, and do well for their families and themselves. I support capitalism on a fundamental level (although I think it needs to be well regulated), and support people competing to get higher paying jobs, homes, cars, larger houses, etc. If you are someone who did work hard, got those As, majored in computer science, and are now working for Google, great for you, you made it, you worked hard, and you deserve what you get. And I value hard work, I certainly don't want people to just laze around and do nothing if they could otherwise be productive (although it's a different issue if your "laziness" is due to depression, or another legitimate reason).

But when people take the extra step, and move from confidence to arrogance, and to a place of superiority, that pisses me off to no end. I just, really, really, really fucking hate elitism. Look, you worked hard, made it, and got money for yourself, great. But that doesn't make you "superior" to others in any deep sense, or make you a "better" person. People have different life stories, different contexts in which they grew up, different passions, different skills, and different life goals, so you shouldn't judge someone for simply being different from you. If you judge others for superficial reasons like that, that just makes you look extremely petty, pathetic, and insecure.

I respect and value everyone who has a passion, works hard, is humble, and follows their dreams, regardless of what they do, as long as they aren't hurting themselves or anyone else. What if someone is an extremely passionate athlete, or musician, or artist, or dancer, or a singer, or an actor, or a writer, or a photographer? If that's their dream? What if they want to do social work, like becoming a K-12 teacher, working at a nonprofit, or becoming a public interest lawyer? Or people who major in STEM, but are most passionate about research? Or they want to be a biology professor? These jobs often don't pay a lot of money, but they have a lot of social value, and the people who do them work very hard. I don't think as humans, those people are less "valuable" or "inferior' because they didn't choose to pursue more lucrative careers, like becoming a doctor, engineer, or lawyer.

And you can't just assume that just because someone didn't "succeed" in class or didn't major in math or science, or isn't working at a top company that they are "inferior" to you, or not as hard working, or lazy. We live in a society with unequal opportunities for education, and with many structural barriers holding people back (poverty, institutional racism, biased standardized testing, school-to-prison pipeline, zero tolerance policies etc., city zoning laws that prevent integration, etc.).

These barriers often can't just be overcome with "hard work," if you grew up in a single-parent home, or in poverty, or didn't grow up speaking English, or had unequal access to healthcare and infrastructure, or you had a learning disability through no fault of your own, or had a physical disability or medical condition that compromised your quality or life, or your teachers' pedagogies did not accommodate people with varied learning styles, or if you aren't good at timed multiple choice tests (and those are all the tests your teacher does for you), or your teacher assumed a lot of background information when you come from a marginalized background (and as a result, couldn't contribute to class discussions as much), or you couldn't study well because you suffer from a mental illness, or you have clinical depression, or you experienced a tragedy in your family and couldn't recover, if you didn't succeed given what you were going through, if you were struggling with your sexual orientation and/or gender identity, if you grew up as an undocumented immigrant, and so forth, that doesn't mean you're a worse person, or aren't "hard working." We can't just lock people out because they faced barriers and struggles beyond their own individual control.

Studies have found that by age four, children in middle and upper class families hear 15 million more words than children in working-class families, and 30 million more words than children in families on welfare. THINK ABOUT THAT. And the U.S. has by far the highest level of childhood poverty in the developed world. The playing field is NOT level or fair. We don't have an equality of opportunity. You can't just expect a marginalized black kid growing up in poverty in downtown Los Angeles to suddenly be able to keep up with a South Asian or East Asian kid in Orange County, California whose parents are engineers from India or China, and who provide a lot of institutional support to the kid as they grow up and move through the education process. You can't expect a poor african-american kid or cambodian kid who grew up in poverty without computers to suddenly have the same level passion for programming and coding that someone else would, and expect that marginalized person to just do as well in a rigorous computer programming class as everyone else.

Educational differentials are high in the U.S. due to property tax financing. Since public K-12 schools are financed by local property taxes, poorer neighborhoods will have lower quality schools, and this traps children is a self-reinforcing cycle of poverty. And for poor black and hispanic kids, our education system completely fails them. They don't grow up thinking that they will go to college, or being an engineer, because they don't have many many people in their communities to look up to who did that. There's a self-perception based on what other people with your characteristics have accomplished. Like, "if I am X, and other Xs have not done much in discipline Y, then i am less motivated or inspired or confident to pursue discipline Y."

Their teachers often don't have faith in them (some of whom are inexperienced members of Teach for America who can't give these kids the high quality education that they need), these students experience negative stereotypes due to racist media portrayals of them, people don't encourage them or give them the resources to climb up the social ladder and fulfill the American Dream. They live around gangs, single-parent homes,may have to start working full-time at a young age to support their families. They often internalize racism, and don't have high self-esteem, or don't think that even going to college is an option for them because they either can't afford it or don't even know anyone who's an engineer or doctor or lawyer. And even when they do succeed, people will think they only got into college because of affirmative action, and they will face a lot of racism in the job market (studies have shown that white people with felony charges are more likely to get hired than people with a clean record who have black-sounding names on resumes). A lot of the times, they give up, not because they were "lazy," but that society was stacked against them, never giving them a full shot to get ahead or realize their full potential. They don't fail our system, our system fails them.

Also, it's really hard to move up the ladder, and experience upward mobility in our society. If you are poor, and also a person of color, you may suffer from housing segregation, discrimination, racism, economic stratification, predatory lending, redlining, gentrification, and stigmatization for receiving government welfare (which is often administered in a demeaning manner). Being in poverty could mess up your credit rating, which can make getting loans in the future very difficult. Also, we have this fucked up practice where employers can screen prospective employees' credit ratings, meaning if you were hit very hard by the 2008 financial crisis, and your credit rating fell due to no fault of your own, you could be locked out of the labor market, preventing upward mobility. It's so messed up. Much of hard-working America, bill-paying America, has damaged credit, and it's wrong to bar them from employment. They should be able to compete for jobs solely on their merits.

And especially when we don't have mandated paid sick leave, family leave, paid vacation, etc., only the high-skilled workers at large firms can really take time off from work, whereas poor people are viewed as more "dispensable" and have to work 24/7. As Robert Reich said, we've now seen the rise of the working poor, but the non-working rich. It's the poor who are extremely hard workers, living paycheck to paycheck, taking on 3 jobs at once to put food on the table. Everyone has a different life story, and while maybe some people in poverty or on welfare may have made "bad decisions," that's not true for a lot of people who became marginalized due to problems beyond their individual control.

Also, I believe in second chances. People aren't all the same. Not everyone is ready to do the same things at the same time. I had friends who didn't do well in high school, either due to personal reasons, or because the high school environment of busy work didn't suit them that well, or because they didn't value education at the time and were lazy. They went to a community college. But they were late bloomers, learned hard work, and are very great, extremely smart people who did very well at UC Berkeley (the college I attended) once they transferred. We can't just say those transfers are inherently "inferior," and not give anyone second chances at making it in life. I also had friends who were extremely smart at Berkeley, the top of their bunch in high school, but burned out due to stress, depression, or other factors. If you're a homeless college student, or someone who lives in your car, or you are a parent with a child..can we really expect that that person will automatically be able to compete with someone whose parents fully pay for their room and board? If they don't get the best grades, that doesn't mean they are inferior or aren't hard working, or aren't worth anything.

People who succeeded, great for you, but once you climb up the ladder of success, don't just throw it out for everyone behind you. Reach out to them, extend the ladder to them, and help them help themselves so they can climb up the ladder, just like you did. People go through different experiences, and we need to have empathy.

Moreover, access to elite universities is often skewed toward those who are privileged. Not everyone can afford SAT classes to help boost your score (and the SAT is a very poor measure of your intelligence or potential). Sure, those people who got As in AP classes, high SAT scores, went to top colleges, etc., probably worked very hard. But I'm sure that a large chunk of them had highly educated parents who supported them and aided their success in one way or another (paying for tutors, getting them ahead in difficult STEM subjects, paying for SAT courses, fostering a home environment that encourages education, having high human capital, providing them with a professional network that can help them succeed, providing guidance and strong moral support, providing them with mentors and good role models, building a community where other kids value academic success and hard work, and so forth). They had a lot of institutional backing, and East Asians and South Asians benefit from the "model minority" characterization which may cause teachers to treat them better than black, hispanic, or native american students.

And the Ivy League has its bullshit legacy admissions, which institutionalizes structural white privilege and class privilege, making the admissions process even more unfair, and exacerbating systemic anti-black racism.

So much of the "success" these people experience isn't due their hard work at all, but due to the fact that they were privileged in many areas and had a much higher starting point than many other people. There's a lot of structural factors in addition to individual factors. So they can't attribute their own success solely (or sometimes, even mostly) to their own, individual "hard work." A lot of it was because they won the "luck of the draw."

Also, the "model minority" stereotype is complete trash, because a lot of Southeast Asians (Vietnamese, Cambodian, etc.) have similar academic performance rates to African-Americans, latino-americans, and native-americans. When we're talking about East Asians and South Asians, we're talking about a very self-selected group, the cream of the crop of people from India, China, Japan, and South Korea, people who are already highly educated and often are high-skilled workers themselves. And as a result, due to their high human capital, they can provide a lot of support to help their kids succeed, something many other poor people of color in America lack.

I'm totally fine with competition, and people gaining more money than other people, but be humble about it. Don't brag, and don't think you're someone super special who is superior to everyone else. Because you're not. That poor kid growing up in gang infiltrated areas in Chicago is just as valuable as some guy who is an engineer for a top tech company. And don't judge other people, or look down on them, or make assumptions without walking a mile in their shoes, and understanding their particular situation and what they're going through. Be thankful for your success, but donít think it makes you superior in any deep sense. Also, as Pope Francis reminded us, each of us have a moral obligation to be kind and generous to the poor and disadvantaged, especially if we have been fortunate.

By the way, relevant to the whole structure vs agency thing I brought up earlier. Here's a great WaPo article called "Poor kids who do everything right donít do better than rich kids who do everything wrong."

And I love this quote by Bernie Sanders: "The pope) is not only talking about poverty, and income and wealth inequality. He is getting to the heart of hyper-capitalism, and he is saying: Why, as a society, are we worshiping money? We're making money the golden idol. Respecting, and admiring people with billion of dollars, at the same time as we are ignoring people who are sleeping out on the streets, people who are going hungry, people who have no health care. And he is saying, that is not the way we should be living our lives. That is a pretty profound critique of modern society."

19 replies, 4874 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply I fucking hate how our society is so status and money oriented!! (Original post)
gobears10 Sep 2015 OP
LWolf Sep 2015 #1
gobears10 Sep 2015 #2
Person 2713 Sep 2015 #3
JanMichael Sep 2015 #4
DirtyHippyBastard Sep 2015 #12
sibelian Sep 2015 #5
Marty McGraw Sep 2015 #6
cap Sep 2015 #7
jtuck004 Sep 2015 #8
daleanime Sep 2015 #9
AZ Progressive Sep 2015 #10
AZ Progressive Sep 2015 #11
eppur_se_muova Sep 2015 #13
Waiting For Everyman Sep 2015 #14
Igel Sep 2015 #15
Hortensis Sep 2015 #16
Oneironaut Sep 2015 #17
gobears10 Sep 2015 #18
Shandris Sep 2015 #19

Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:38 PM

1. This teacher thanks you.

Studies have found that by age four, children in middle and upper class families hear 15 million more words than children in working-class families, and 30 million more words than children in families on welfare. THINK ABOUT THAT. And the U.S. has by far the highest level of childhood poverty in the developed world. The playing field is NOT level or fair. We don't have an equality of opportunity. You can't just expect a marginalized black kid growing up in poverty in downtown Los Angeles to suddenly be able to keep up with a South Asian or East Asian kid in Orange County, California whose parents are engineers from India or China, and who provide a lot of institutional support to the kid as they grow up and move through the education process. You can't expect a poor african-american kid or cambodian kid who grew up in poverty without computers to suddenly have the same level passion for programming and coding that someone else would, and expect that marginalized person to just do as well in a rigorous computer programming class as everyone else.


I've always known that the first step to increased academic "achievement" happens outside the school building, before children ever start school. Narrow the socio-economic gaps, and we narrow the achievement gaps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:53 PM

2. absolutely

it's ridiculous how our childhood poverty rate is so high in America. Even before they get to school, so many kids are at a huge disadvantage

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 09:02 PM

3. I also hate people who judge by these criteria . I think part of it is insecurity

Century of Self and all that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 09:08 PM

4. Avarice is our religion. it is sickening.

We manage to be the wealthiest nation in the world while also being the nastiest to our poorest citizens. It is disgusting and makes me go further to the left daily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JanMichael (Reply #4)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 11:31 PM

12. +1

Whenever I hear that word I always think of this

Pieter Bruegel the Elder- Avarice- 1558

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:01 PM

5. Well said!

You speak to my heart....



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:12 PM

6. And more often than not these days...


It's a particular ADD and Hoarding disorder as well as the ability to cast aside or totally disconnect from the rest of humanity that enables that wealth to exponentially increase way beyond reason. Can the rest of life really afford to give so much power to enable a disorder? Why can't other outside manners garner such treasures. What makes this one so *special*?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:13 PM

7. You are really forced into it...

Since we don't have a safety net or guaranteed pensions, etc....
You are really forced into making money.
There's no choice.


I hate it as much as you do.
Great post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:28 PM

8. Same shit, different century. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:49 PM

9. Bookmarked

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 10:50 PM

10. Horatio alger is used to kick the poor and unfortunate in America. Just because..

one or a few people managed to rise up from poverty or whatever other things prevent them from getting a better life doesn't mean that everyone else can. The elite in America love to ignore the role that luck plays in success. Most successful people had a great mentor or a great someone that gave them moral support. What about if you were not fortunate to get that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 11:01 PM

11. Another thing that they don't tell you about "success" is that it is one thing to attain it, it is..

another to keep it. Even if you attain success, depending on the level of competitiveness and other factors, things threaten to bring you down, and you must fight to maintain success. It can be a continual battle and may also depend on luck to keep success. How about even all the people that managed to get good paying jobs, but then because the company goes out of business or technology is destroying the need for such a job, that these people then lose their good paying job and are unable to get another good paying job in their lifetime?

Look even at the celebrities, look at Jim Carrey, Robin Williams, and many other actors. They were once very successful, and then later in life they were unable to get a movie successful. Look at all the music stars that once had top selling songs, and yes they are able to maintain making money later in life only by singing those same songs that were hits, in concerts to their fanbase, but they never succeeded in getting another chart topping song. Even if people attain success doesn't mean that they are able to keep it.

And look at all the other downsides to America's definition of success: not able to have a family life, being hollow in terms of humanity, having an addiction to materialism, having to prop up an expensive lifestyle, being trapped in great amounts of debt, not being able to have a private life, etc... Success can be punishment. It's no wonder why so many celebrities do drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 11:54 PM

13. "It's worse than I thought" ... seems kind of appropriate here ...

?quality=65&strip=all&w=780

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 03:44 AM

14. Materialism without character is not first-rate.

It's more like sociopathic.

Basically what has happened in the last 3 to 4 decades is, the system has been taken over by cheaters, not achievers. It is rigged to vastly reward those who will violate all principles, and then those unjustly enriched predators were and are in a position to make all of society's decisions as self-serving as possible.

It's a corrupted mess. But no, the I'm-better-than-you arrogance is not the mark of the best, but an immediate giveaway to being anything BUT first-rate. Real first-stringers do not have to put others down, on the contrary, they comprehend the value of lifting all up. They are not threatened by others' advantages, gifts, or successes, but have confidence in their own, and do not need to step on people to get by or get attention.

Most people who have some sense are not into making as much money as possible for its own sake, but rather into making a living (not bare minimum poverty but "enough plus some", and then using their limited time in this life as they see fit.

Those who are "successful" and are therefore in a position to determine the framework of laws by which everyone in society seeks to build their lives, HAVE FAILED because society should work (easily) for almost all people. Instead of creating a decent society, this generation of decision-makers has instead accumulated vaults of wealth at everyone else's expense, which they cannot even take with them out of this world. THAT IS EFFING STUPID, no matter how smart they think they are!

But fortunately, character is also its own reward if need be. And nothing can take it away from the person who has paid the price to have it. You are way ahead of those who claim to be better than you because they don't even have the bandwidth to see what they are lacking, and they are scummy enough to be willing to pat themselves on the back for winning at a cheaters' game (that's what today's society is). Meanwhile most of these "successes" are very ignorant except in a very narrow band of information. That, in my book, is nearly disabled, certainly dysfunctional -- anywhere except on the job.

Let the losers crow about winning, they aren't even playing the right game.

Our culture has devolved into a depraved, grotesque form-over-substance bubble (reflecting the mess that was made of our once-sane laws during the RW corporatist years), consisting at all levels top to bottom of well-programmed vapid posers and frauds, which will probably burst someday and it probably won't be pretty. But eventually, character will come to the fore again. I have no doubt of that whatsoever. Hopefully sooner than later, for everyone's sake.

Last point I want to make though, is the attitude you're describing is not American. My family didn't come here 400 years ago seeking freedom to chase money. That, is most definitely servitude. The revolutionary thing that makes this country worthwhile is: they were seeking the FREEDOM to pursue their OWN IDEA of what is important in life... "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Each of us who are alive should have the freedom from want and the freedom from domination to seek the meaning of life as best we can, as long as that does not interfere with someone else doing the same. That's what this country is about. (And may I say, frankly, foreigners need to stop coming here and trying to make it over into what they have left behind.)

Contrary to popular myth, self-serving types did not build this country. Community and cooperation were what kept people alive here in the early days, and they damn well knew it'! "The commons" was vital to survival here. No one would have lived, and nothing would have been built without it. Do these "me, me, me" types think that barns were built by one guy? It's ludicrous nonsense, promoted by puffed-up nincompoops who need to go and learn some real history instead of the lame propaganda that passes for it today. We can lie to ourselves but we can't cheat reality: the reality is, this country could not have been built the way people think it was, on "me-ism". That is a malevolent fairy tale.

I couldn't agree more with what you wrote in your op, and it was very well said.


I like what these Irish guys had to say about it, they "get it"...




And of course...




And when necessary...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 09:48 AM

15. You don't think money and status should be important.

Then the problems you highlight are all about redistributing money and status.

Take that nice study about how many words (both frequency and quantity) are heard in childhood.

One problem with the study was that those with the most home time with their kids tended to have the least amount of interaction. They'd face the young children away from them in strollers instead of towards them. The adults expected them to be quiet and not interact. Instead of discussing problems and solution, the power structure was very much one of "shut up and just do what I say." The kids would be expected to be outside and play instead of inside interacting with adults. And if the adults were outside, the adults would talk and expect the kids to be off by themselves.

Above and beyond a reduced code on the part of less-educated parents, a smaller vocabulary and simpler syntax, the interactional styles were completely different. This has nothing to do with money. It has nothing to do with status. It has to do with traditional child-rearing practices and attitudes.

Low vocab and diffculty reading in elementary school --> poor high school outcomes --> low education --> low income --> low vocab and difficulty reading in elementary school ... Strip away the 5-15% of economic differences that reliably go back to race in many studies and you're left with the 85-95% of the differences that aren't.

That's not income-based. It's not status based. In fact, one of the most well-spoken little kids I've ever seen was the son of a part-time cook at a restaurant. She was a single mother, well below the poverty line, and educated. Her son was biracial in the early '80s in a town that was 98% white. She was poor, low status, well educated and the kid started school reading well and stayed at the top of his class. But the "prediction" had to be that he started school behind his white peers. The prediction was false. We loves us our confounds when they feeds us our confirmation bias on a silver spoon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 09:59 AM

16. Gobears, FWIW, although the dominant culture is awful,

We the People are actually many societies and many cultures. Many millions of Americans have far more admirable values and live far more admirable lives.

In the midst of so much that is shameful and neglected, remembering that helps me keep some balance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 10:30 AM

17. Status is everything in our culture.

One of the first things people ask you in small talk when trying to get to know you is, "What do you do?" Whether or not this is legitimate concern, or just trying to fill a dreaded potential conversational void, I feel like it's a rude question. I feel like what I say next will cause people to compartmentalize me - if I am a computer programmer, I must be a nerd. If I am a musician, I must be artsy. If I am at a service job, I must be unintelligent, and etc.

I think are our culture lets our jobs and material possessions define who we are more than our actual personalities. It's sad because, at the end of the day, these are all shallow and meaningless. A job's purpose at the core is to provide services in exchange for money. You use that money to get the things necessary to survive. You use the extra money to either save for times when you are not making money, or to buy things that bring you happiness.

On the other hand, if you are buying things to maintain a certain status, then you are a slave to what others think. If this is how you want to define your life, then fine. It is entirely possible, though, that your last thoughts might be of what a fool you were to waste your life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oneironaut (Reply #17)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 06:47 PM

18. mhmm

eom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gobears10 (Original post)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 06:58 PM

19. When you replace one religion with another, you have to replace the rituals too.

 

It's been done, and quite effectively. Status and Virtue Signalling have replaced the Sunday offering and Daily Catechisms. Instead of prayer they offer Likes. They beseech GoFundMe and Patreon instead of the Shriners and the local synagogue. You don't go to the Inquisitor, you get your life crushed by the faceless mob of Twitter. Your dreams of heaven are now dreams of next years' vacation. Same stuff, same delivery, different words.

Unfortunately, no one has discovered a method to force everyone to agree with your ideals AND not impose a religion on them, so they had to pick one or the other (and not forcing everyone to do what they want is anathema to the entire priest...I mean political...class to begin with).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread