Hell in A Handbasket

[Strike For The South]

My generation is filled with a bunch narcissistic, self involved, add-addled flunkies. I have never seen a group people congratulate themselves on a breadth on knowledge so shallow you would fail to drown an infant in it. It seems a Wikipedia page worth of research and some SAT words that still clang around in your head from time to time are enough to pass off as intelligence these days. There is no depth to anything people say anymore, it's a metaphorical race to spit the most words out and see what sticks.

When a 30 year lawyer who has his own practice, who hires his young guys, WHO JUST GAVE A 12.5 MILLION DOLLAR GIFT TO THE SCHOOL, stands up and speaks, please put away your damn Iphone and shut your damn mouth. Your parents failed to raised anything other than a little center of the universe. Please kill yourself.

These kids and there excuses. Women who get nothing but positive reinforcement simply because they are a solid 6/10. Men whose idea of manhood is some sort of cardboard cutout from a Stallone movie. Petulant children, the lot of them.

I'm going out back to smoke, this better have replies when I come back?

[Kralizec]

I also am going to have a smoke.

In my generation (4-5 years older than you kids) I've noticed a lot of overestimation. For example, many Dutch people exaggerate how well they speak foreign languages. Last year I was in Berlin with a couple of friends and we encountered a plaque or whatever and some of us wondered what it said. One of us said he'd translate it and boasted about it. I knew/know just enough German to read it most of the time and know the most common pitfalls for Dutch speakers. What he was telling us was almost the exact opposite of what the plaque actually said. Since the guy in question is a wiseass in general I remind him of this episode every now and then.

[TinCow]

Fear not, they reap what they sow.

[Kralizec]

Also: last month I went to a birthday party where I saw my old housemate from college days.

Said housemate is one of those people who feels uneasy about organ donation and isn’t registered as a donor, but frankly admits that he’d have no qualms about taking a kidney or a liver from someone else if needed. This is an issue which I feel strongly about so I discussed it with him several times whenever it came up. He never had any good arguments, he is not even religious, but nevertheless continues to feel “uneasy” about it.

A friend of his, which I haven’t seen in years (the following text should explain), did an internship in Indonesia as a student along with my housemate himself. This particular friend accumulated a large student debt (i.e. taxpayer’s money) with the intention of never paying it back. After he got his degree he went back to Indonesia to work there and if he would ever receive a letter demanding repayment he would ignore it, thinking it would be too much of a hassle for the state to go after him. I hope he’s wrong. We’re talking about 10.000 – 20.000 E’s at least.

Another friend of his was at the same party and was a petty thief in puberty. At that party he told us that even as a student and even after he graduated he had no qualms about stealing bicycle’s if he didn’t have one himself and was too lazy to walk. Even now that he had a job with a reasonable salary he didn’t see anything wrong with it; his personal convenience is extremely important to him and besides if you own a bike you’re just asking to have it stolen from you. Personally, I’ve been the victim of bicycle theft multiple times so this seriously pissed me off.

At this point I’ll mention that my old housemate and those two friends attended a type of school called “PABO” over here, and are now all teachers for either elementary school (till the age of 12) or early high school (till the age of 14). All of them are nice guys to drink a beer with, but if I believed in any particular deity I would pray for the future of this country’s children.

[Hax]

I also am going to have a smoke.

In my generation (4-5 years older than you kids) I've noticed a lot of overestimation. For example, many Dutch people exaggerate how well they speak foreign languages. Last year I was in Berlin with a couple of friends and we encountered a plaque or whatever and some of us wondered what it said. One of us said he'd translate it and boasted about it. I knew/know just enough German to read it most of the time and know the most common pitfalls for Dutch speakers. What he was telling us was almost the exact opposite of what the plaque actually said. Since the guy in question is a wiseass in general I remind him of this episode every now and then.

That's actually pretty hilarious, and to be fair, it sound familiar enough. It reminds me of something else though, albeit in a different fashion: last monday, I went to the local "arthouse" movie theatre in Leiden, where they were showing the movie "Habibi", which is about the myth of Layla and Majnun set in modern-day Gaza. The movie itself was pretty okay as it showed how different Palestinians in Gaza dealt with trauma, stress, and alienation. Afterwards, there was an opportunity to ask questions to one of the people involved in the film, as well as to my professor of Persian studies (who had introduced the story). One of the first persons to raise their hand started going off on a tantrum, roughly saying that: "Palestinians are a brainless mob that don't allow for love or independent thinking". I was with six other students of Arabic and we were kind of flabbergasted, not so much at the fact that these people exist, but the fact that this particular man expressed his opinion like that. He didn't even allow for the guests to finish their sentences. It demonstrated a lack of basic decency and respect.

I think that we have to distinguish between 'all humans are equal' and 'all humans are to be treated equally'. Although the difference may seem insignificant, I think it's actually quite big. We appear to have reached a point where we try to treat a self-styled witch doctor and a fully-trained professional doctor equally. This is insane. I'm not saying literate people are better than illiterate people, and that academicians are more useful (or better) than a construction worker. I'm saying that people should be more cautious in screaming their opinions without carefully considering the full impact and implications of what they're actually saying.

I don't know anything about maths. I don't know anything about physics, native American religions or languages, or Bach. I know that I don't know anything about them, and that's fine. Heck, when you literally don't know anything about a subject, it's fine. I think it starts to get messy when people know a little about something, and assume that they know everything about anything.

So it's not so much a lack of knowledge that I find troubling; lack of wisdom and properly contextualising knowledge is far more dangerous.

Yes, I hate people as well, because I am much more mature than the masses. It shall be a pleasure engaging in this elitist thread, with you fine gentlemen and intellectuals.

This is probably the most elitist post in the thread so far.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, I hate people as well, because I am much more mature than the masses. It shall be a pleasure engaging in this elitist thread, with you fine gentlemen and intellectuals.

[Strike For The South]

Yes, I hate people as well, because I am much more mature than the masses. It shall be a pleasure engaging in this elitist thread, with you fine gentlemen and intellectuals.

Exhibit A.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Idk about you guys, but when someone is being rude I tell them to shut up. When someone is obviously out of line, I make an effort to put them back in line. I don't lament the end of society because people are lazy and rude when they feel they can get away with it. I try to establish a presence that says, "I will not tolerate such actions." I make an effort instead of bitching about how smart phones are ruining society.

Guess that makes me an elitist though, gonna have to break the news to my parents.

[Strike For The South]

Idk about you guys, but when someone is being rude I tell them to shut up. When someone is obviously out of line, I make an effort to put them back in line. I don't lament the end of society because people are lazy and rude when they feel they can get away with it. I try to establish a presence that says, "I will not tolerate such actions." I make an effort instead of bitching about how smart phones are ruining society.

Guess that makes me an elitist though, gonna have to break the news to my parents.

The Iphone is not the problem. It's just how the problem has decided to manifest itself.

[Montmorency]

The "problem" isn't new, and neither is your expression of it.

What exactly would you like to discuss in this thread?

[Strike For The South]

The "problem" isn't new, and neither is your expression of it.

What exactly would you like to discuss in this thread?

The degradation of society, spearhead by a narcissistic youth, emboldened by a coddling society.

Must everything have a point with you?

Serious is stressfull, dude

[Montmorency]

emboldened by a coddling society.

The society isn't coddling - it's dispiriting and harsh. If you mean that society is coddling in that the unemployed youth aren't confined to a choice between banditry and beggary, well, is that quite so bad?

If anything, the youth coddle themselves and each other. The expected achievement is lacking.

Edit: Oh, if you mean coddling from early childhood - I see what you're saying.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The Iphone is not the problem. It's just how the problem has decided to manifest itself.

You solve the problem by treating the symptom. Making sure people use technology appropriately in public creates a habit within them, habits become practice.You don't learn to work hard in school by acknowledging that you gotta do something every day, you learn how to work hard by sitting your butt down and doing work everyday until it becomes second nature.Yes, in a perfect world we wouldn't need to carry people through adulthood, but that is the situation we find ourselves in, so we must take the responsibility of enforcing these habits so that we can enjoy a better public life.

[The Lurker Below]

This thread has really lived up to its title! After reading the first two posts I went to make some popcorn while pondering the possibilities that Strike is a lawyer with lots of experience and perhaps Kralizec was responding with a anectodal tale of Strike in his younger days. The thread took a major curve when some posts got exceedingly rationale, but has come back to the hell that Eugene, OR apparently is. Keep it up all! I hope to refresh this popcorn soon.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Actually, my point was that Eugene is the perfect example of the cognitive dissonance that infects our spoiled society. Spoiled rich kids come to our town, go to our college, trash our streets--our cops can't even afford to do anything about it, in fact the jail has been full to the point of not taking anyone new for quite some time--while the average middle-class citizen of Eugene exists solely because of the money these rich kids bring into the town. These same middle-class citizens clamor for laws that allow the police to arrest homeless people for being, quite literally, in the wrong part of town at the wrong time while proclaiming to be beacons of liberal intellectualism as they give their kids some weed money and tell them to go play. And they wonder why they wind up with english degrees or homeless.

Putting English degrees on a par with homelessness is a tad harsh. Mario Cuomo, Michael Eisner, Sally Ride, Giamatti, for example, were all English majors. A degree in one of the humanities does NOT condemn one to a life of poetical pontification.

[Papewaio]

Putting English degrees on a par with homelessness is a tad harsh. Mario Cuomo, Michael Eisner, Sally Ride, Giamatti, for example, were all English majors. A degree in one of the humanities does NOT condemn one to a life of poetical pontification.

It is perfectly apt to point out that a non professional degree will not generate professional income without further education.

Dr Sally Ride had a Ph D in Physics
Governor Mario Coumo had a first in class Law degree
Paul Giamatti is an actor so his degree level isn't as important as his theatrical training. But he also has a Masters in Fine Arts.
Leaving Eisner the only one listed solely with the Mickey Mouse degree.

[Hax]

It depends on the subject matter. I'm doing a major in what I think is part of the "liberal arts" in America (major: Arabic languages & culture, minor: Persian language&culture), which will probably have guys on the harder sciences looking down at me.

That's fine. You can laugh now. At least I'll be able to save my life and my beloved when the Muslims conquer us.

On a serious note, though, and I talked about this with my co-ordinator, and he basically said that if I continue studying Persian and focus on areas that haven't been discussed ad tedium, I'll probably be able to figure something out. The hell, I plan to stay in academia anyway.

[Beskar]

On a serious note, though, and I talked about this with my co-ordinator, and he basically said that if I continue studying Persian and focus on areas that haven't been discussed ad tedium, I'll probably be able to figure something out. The hell, I plan to stay in academia anyway.

Ambassador Hax

[Rhyfelwyr]

My generation is filled with a bunch narcissistic, self involved, add-addled flunkies. I have never seen a group people congratulate themselves on a breadth on knowledge so shallow you would fail to drown an infant in it.

Neither have I. Are you referring to the sense of entitlement that some of today's youth have on account of their education? If so, I think you are confusing a false sense of entitlement with disillusionment at broken promises.

It seems a Wikipedia page worth of research and some SAT words that still clang around in your head from time to time are enough to pass off as intelligence these days. There is no depth to anything people say anymore, it's a metaphorical race to spit the most words out and see what sticks.

Any yet maybe these trends have always been true in the educated classes, and the common folk just didn't know enough to be aware of it. We are infinitely more scrupulous nowadays when it comes to scientific research, political science, historical research etc than at any time in the past. And a lot more self-aware to. What was once a brilliant and revolutionary ideology is now just part of a historical narrative, neither original nor inspired. Seeing the past as a golden era of learning because it had a handful of great theorists is like looking back on how fantastic the 80's were because they produced a few great songs.

These kids and there excuses. Women who get nothing but positive reinforcement simply because they are a solid 6/10.

You sound like you've been on the misc. So you think women today all think they are goddesses because society tells them so. Really?

Men whose idea of manhood is some sort of cardboard cutout from a Stallone movie.

And yet I take just as much issue with your idea of manhood - or at least, the sort of attributes that you feel makes a man command respect. Your idea of the 30 year old lawyer that nobly takes on young recruits, as if it was an act of charity. Look how he contributes to society through his hard work! How dare you interrupt him! No doubt it was some unemployed youngster on that phone!

There are a lot of good people in the world, some of them will be keen businessmen. But what I don't like is when people conflate a person's work situation with morality, or their value as a person. The relationship between labour, material progress, and society are not such that any such link between work and morality should be made. I think that this conflation is in part a hangover from a time when such links existed. When laziness could destroy families, even starve communities. But I think it is more than that. It seems to me to be a way in which the 'better sort' of people attempt to retain the moral highground over the unemployed. Not the working-class - the underclass.

People with high-paying jobs rarely contribute more to society than anybody else. In fact, I see (most of) them as parasites of a magnitude way above that the benefit-scroungers will ever reach. First off, we have reached such a level of material progress that most 'respectable' jobs are concerned not with the production of wealth, but either with it's redistribution, or with non-productive/non-capital-creating services. As such, they do not even aid the material progress of society. Secondly, any wealth that they generate and 'invest' is not even rightfully their own, since they simply manage others' labour, and give a portion of it back to them. And thirdly, they don't create jobs, they monopolise them. That gap in the market was there before they took it over. And this last point is in a way the most relevant today, since it explains how our working conditions decline and our work hours increase at a time when the means of material production have been largely mechanised and human labour made redundant. This is an excellent article, btw.

The thing is, many people, like the OP, are misguided. They think that they glorify work, when what they do is in fact glorify a person's role in a productive system where individual labour is not the means of it's organisation, but a tool to be controlled. But it's not only that, these people abuse labour, so that rather than being a healthy part of a person's life and being, it becomes their defining characteristic - the sole means of determining their role and place in society. Hence when we meet a stranger in any sort of semi-formal setting, name-asking aside, our first question is generally "what do you do?".

It is a very unhealthy situation, and a product of the individualistic and materialistic society that the OP so loves and yet hates the fruits of.

[Montmorency]

But it's not only that, these people abuse labour, so that rather than being a healthy part of a person's life and being, it becomes their defining characteristic - the sole means of determining their role and place in society. Hence when we meet a stranger in any sort of semi-formal setting, name-asking aside, our first question is generally "what do you do?".

This is pretty much always the case in accounts of any period.

Towns organized by ethnicity and occupation - and occupations stereotypically ascribed to ethnicities.

Furthermore, think surnames...

What one does is what one is - always. In fact, it is less true than in the past because of the fluidity of social position and role in the contemporary period.

But what I don't like is when people conflate a person's work situation with morality, or their value as a person.

Sounds like self-aggrandizement.

[Rhyfelwyr]

This is pretty much always the case in accounts of any period.

Towns organized by ethnicity and occupation - and occupations stereotypically ascribed to ethnicities.

Furthermore, think surnames...

What one does is what one is - always. In fact, it is less true than in the past because of the fluidity of social position and role in the contemporary period.

I think that this is partly true but in a different way. To be called "Smith", "Hunter", "Potter" etc indicated your role in a relatively self-sufficient community. Now, your work purely represents your social standing.

Sounds like self-aggrandizement.

I've only been unemployed for three weeks I didn't develop all these ideas in that time, my disillusionment goes back a lot further, lol.

[Montmorency]

I think that this is partly true but in a different way. To be called "Smith", "Hunter", "Potter" etc indicated your role in a relatively self-sufficient community. Now, your work purely represents your social standing.

So this is really just a complaint about globalization of supply chains?

I've only been unemployed for three weeks I didn't develop all these ideas in that time, my disillusionment goes back a lot further, lol.

A safety net, then.

[Montmorency]

I think his complaints are more about the perceptions and motivations of the people involved in the global economy

I got that he perceives an inflated role of managers of labor and financial capital. You think he's against the common aspiration toward material success?

as opposed to the fact that it is indeed a global economy.

Seems inextricable.