February 22, 2018

Why are the kids hell-bent on killing each other?

Filed under: Uncategorized — Benjamin Vulpes @ 7:36 a.m.

...being an interesting question, unlike "how do we reduce firearm-related fatalities?". The political issue of gun control, much like the political issue of abortion is one of those interesting fnords where what the Lippmans have gotten you thinking about has approximately zero to do with the events, and anyone who's so damned foolish as to self-importantly advocate in any direction on the topic of gun control in the aftermath of, say, a school shooting, is simply playing into the hands of a political machine built on cagily partitioning the voting moocows into two numerically nearly equal groups, and is doomed to never grok the inconsequentiality of their bleating. The root problem that nobody's ever going to bring up is that there is too much flabby man-meat sitting around being useless and everyone knows it in their gut, but can't articulate it because That Would Be Wrong. I immodestly propose that more war and explicit hierarchical structurings of society is a far better solution than "gun control".

Look, America is a colossally fucked-up place, with national narratives fabricated wholesale from the lottery that is pop culture. Our kids want to kill each other; that's the interesting thing. Ease of access to firearms is maaaaaybe possibly relevant in some way, but you gotta realize that's an untestable claim, that you'd have to unravel the fabric of American political reality just to run the experiment, and far more likely to turn around and show that we've hosed our kids so badly they're happy to build bombs in their basements absent ready access to firearms in any event.

No, the reason why US kids are shoosting up their own schools and cohort mates is because they live in an utterly impossible nonsensical and self-contradictory world, and some fraction of them see right through the lies we feed them, can't cope with the contradiction and instead of killing themselves, try to take out as many of the unthinking dreamers as they can. "Education is your ticket out of the ghetto!", we tell them, while caging them in statal daycares that even the brightest cannot emerge from capable of performing undergraduate work on par with the college-going segment of our parents' generation, and then lefties have the utter absence of self-awareness to be horrified that the kids drop out in favor of sports and mass entertainment; without ever realizing that as desperate as the odds of draft picks, college recruitment, and pop culture are, they still beat the everloving shit out of failing out of college with thirty thousand dollars in debt. "Men and women are equal!", we tell them, and then the girls we trained to "lean in" take a step back in their thirties and realize that they can't find a mate much less actually afford to raise the children outside the nightmare daycares. "The world is getting better and less racist every day! Look, we had a black president! And soon we'll have a female president!" Har. I hope it's Oprah; we need some more magical thinking in the White House.

It's 2018, and lest I trigger the "oh my god do we really still have to do this" immune reaction, I'm supposed to toe the party line that men and women have absolutely no differences that aren't acculturated into them and so don't actually matter. "If you can't see how the patriarchy makes us this way and not any sort of evolutionary pressure, YOU'RE A PART OF THE PROBLEM!!!1", but maybe evolution itself is a patriarchical shitlord, just spitballing over here. Nevertheless, boys are violent and girls aren't. "Girls are violent too, but they're socialized to be emotionally violent, and mostly to each other." Doesn't seem like a particularly clean bijective mapping, to me. Also, that seems like the sort of dynamic that would arise from one sex having hundreds of times the reproductive capacity of the other sex; that the plentiful (and therefore cheap) sex would be more prone to being spent by the meta-forces of culture and nation and ethnicity and what have you to preserve themselves, and the more dear sex (the one whose reproductive throughput is, how you say, the limiting reactant for outcompeting other groups in the long run) less prone to engaging in extremely risky behavior. Is it really such a baffling thing that most armies were mostly male? Dudes are useless, and isn't Twitter feminism constantly telling us that anyways? "White men are traaaaaash", they fry. How is it that y'all fail to connect the dots here? Yes, we're violent trash. The next question that occurs to me and I suppose nobody else in this godforsaken country is "well how are we going to harness and dispose of all the excess floppy man meat?" and very definitely not "how do we turn these turds into diamonds?"

Upstack, in the frame of "just why are they so intent on killing each other", perhaps it's not so much that they're intent on killing each other as it is that the trends Putnam called out in Bowling Alone had eroded what little cultural imperative to not rampage about with an automatic at school America had left by 2007 when the handset/social media industrial complex was just getting into swing. Surely you've felt that sense of alienation while driving in rush hour, or negotiating the subway; I certainly did before I did away with the commute entirely. Folks on the road behave miserably to one another because (in a dilute form of John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory): license plates are entirely unmemorable, you'll never see the same people twice during your commute, and extracting trivial gains has ridiculously outsize psychological import to a significant fraction of the idiots stuck in traffic on the regular. Rush-hour-grade aggression is uncommon on even rush-hour trains but you're still going to encounter folks clipping their nails and blasting the latest recycled pap. Add a pocket-sized internet terminal, America's best and brightest dedicated to the production of ever swoopier Skinner boxes substituting pictures of friends for fornication with friends or even just making eye contact with them while they talk, a liberal dash of the old suburban alienation, shake for eight years and I gotta ask why is this kind of violence even surprising? I'm getting Black Lives Matter deja-vu all over again; "you idiots never actually listened to rap music, did you, you just heard one of your trigger words and then your brain shut off before you heard the odes to how shitty life is for black Americans". I struggle to believe that kids even concieve of other people as real in 2018. I'd ask where the calls for "portable touchscreen control" are, but I went to my neighborhood cafe where they know my whole family yesterday, this couple sat at a table together swiping on their phones for the ENTIRE duration of my visit so nevermind, nobody's giving up their iPhones, not even to save the world much less their own lives.

So boys are violent, and the Jobs/Zuck machine has eroded what little human connection the poor kids had, and now they have zero compunction about plugging each other for kicks. Greaaat. Since I'm on the topic of boys and violence, how fucking pathetic is it that we've engaged in a 2-decade foreign entanglement and we have gotten no gold out of the arrangement, and our technology is so damn hot that we also haven't burnt off any of our excess man meat? Are you familiar with the trope of sending the kids outside to run around the block a few times to burn off steam? Well I hazard that the lack of such at the national level is the crux of everything that's fucked about this country. It turns out that we don't actually need that much guyflesh around to ensure the propagation of whatever groupings, and moreover while there are always trash people with whom nobody wants to mate, the fraction is on the order of 70% for guys and 30% for women (variance being higher in the male sex). You get out and talk to women, right? You ask them about their boyfriends, or their dating habits and whether they're pleased with that which is on offer? Obviously you don't, but assuming you did you'd learn what I've learned which is that most American girls are utterly starved for quality males, and it's because American guys are trash. Most of us have never taken any risks (no, $80,000 in college debt doesn't count as a risk, you got fleeced, chucklefuck), had any adventures, have any interesting stories to relate or interesting things to show a girl. No, the fancy restaurant that just opened up that cooks shit from the high-end Sysco brand doesn't count either! She's seen something almost exactly like it five times already this month and already hates you just hearing where you're taking her.

The correct organizing principle is for men to be cheap to society and valuable to women; and for women to be dear to society and cheap to men. The corololzy is that because they're going to crap out a lot more boys than y'all need, it's utterly imperative to winnow. So, war now?

I did dream up an alternative the other night, and by "modern progressive standards" it is a B+ would-relive-again nightmare. Post megastate-collapse society restructures around individuals who build power bases around capital equipment, control of important territory, or any of the classic loci; the scale of these organizations range from ~fifteen bruisers and a tactician all the way up to veritable lords of the land with a castle or three and a small standing army constantly whacking itself with itself. Everyone has sex with whomever they wish within the constraints of the situation (clearly there's slavery, there's also chattel labor, perhaps some of the bruisers are posessive of their stable, the world probably supports a exciting cornucopia of different arrangements after lifting the statal boot grinding us all into an undifferentiated paste of monogamybeerandsports), perhaps Bitcoin mining truly runs on abaci and optical relay networks and so we can still have some good things without condoms, but this shouldn't be a problem for the well-capitalized (by which I mean "can afford to plan on twenty year horizons"), as another set of hands can always be put to work washing sheets, milking cows, banging on steel things, training with the squads, or laboring in the vehiclesalvagewerks. Children grow up barely cognizant of their parents (if they even know each other), and get put to work by whichever adult grabs their ears that day if the kid in question want to eat until they find a home in the barracks, kitchen or wherever. They break their necks in combat training or drop an engine block on themselves, and that's life. It's cheap. Hopefully the org doesn't waste too many potential breeders this way, but it shouldn't matter because you're cranking new ones out all the time anyways. Population overgrowth might be a thing, but that's what war is for!

Hey, that you think that I'm horrifically sexist for sharing this dream is only indicative of your internal state, not mine. It's entirely statistically possible for babes to make good in the bruiser squads, or to operate trade delegations, work the motorcycles, or to perform the accounting. It'd be downright foolish to let any teachable intelligence go to waste in such a world! Or to burden it with diaper-changing...

It's a delightful solution to all of the American systematics. Education is reserved for those whom it'd benefit, as chosen by their elders instead of being a daycare, so we've solved the school shootings problem, and also the absurd costs of putting the entire population through what is called "education" but clearly is not. Excess manflesh (okay you got me, the assault squads were mostly male in this dream) has productive outlet for its violent tendencies through regular beatings of each other and the odd murderous caper. The girls get guys they actually want instead of the stagnant doom of monogamy-for-all, diversity in the gene pool blooms and we regularly cull the dead weight.

Poor odds that I'll live to see it, though.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL


« The CIA's flickr account --- "Hey kid, want to buy some VERBOTEN HATE SPEECH?" »