/hell/ - internet death cult

>>5434
has become your poison*

>>5413
Sounds like you've fallen for the rage-bait machine. A huge amount of internet content is created with the intent of giving people something to be angry about, because it prompts engagement. Also I think most people enjoy consuming rage-bait because it helps distract them from their own flaws by criticizing the flaws of others.

>>5434
Everything is online now. Its hard to escape the internet. I have to use the word procesor for work so I can't just avoid the internet. Maybe I could get a type writer and use a library?

>>5438
Rage is like porn. There's something innately gratifying about it. We hate it but we seek it out. Its become my default emotion to be angry about everything because everything as a negative side. I find a music scene I like, I see the negative sides of it, I hate it. Stuff just frustrates me.

>>5380
I've been thinking about this reply. I struggle with having conversations largely because I can't put into words the things that I'm passionate about when the time is right. I know this is a different discussion, but could you explain in more detail what you mean by being more mindful about your interests? Did it ever help you with anything else, like expressing yourself?

I struggle to turn thoughts into words. I don’t even bother because none of my interests and hobbies are worth telling anyone about.

i hate amazon web services

I hate subways
I hate stairs
I hate doctors
I hate vans
I hate planes
I hate helicopters
I hate walking

…I HATE MY LIIIIIFE

i hate the baader-meinhof effect! i think it's fake!! i might have seen the term uwaraba like once before this week, but now i actually learn where it comes from and see it again the next day!! its chance!! not cognitive bias!!

i wanna poke that belly.

yes

koruri has escaped containment

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaGGgghHHHHHH

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHRG

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Same, for the twentieth time.

I blocked 90% of the internet, all social medias, reddit, 4chan and porn sited 3d and 2d. Now I can finally feel calm and no more anxiety.
I only post in less well known imageboards and use youtube, peace and tranquility.

>>5317
Mods better spoiler this post. It's uncomfy religious imagery.

EDIT: Sure!

I'm in the process of doing this myself.

Seems reasonable. I think my mental health recovered massively once I stopped being online so much heh. Dunno what's up with that, I think there are just some unhealthy patterns in my head which are mostly connected with other people. Some solitary activities are totally fine.

Many would love to be invaded by certain forces.

So many are tired and only certain spirits will wake them.

>>5421
>People want stuff. There's not enough stuff.
That's where you're wrong janitor-kun

There is a 'Zen' way to affluence. If there's not enough stuff, we should limit our wants and live within our means to enjoy a simple but affluent living. But it seems many politicians are obsessed with ideas like productivity and growth and think that we can meet infinite human needs through increasing industrial productivity which necessitates more extensive exploitation of people and nature. This is futile because finite resources can never meet inexhaustible desires. I've only ever read Sahlins and know very little about economics beside him so I CTRL + V'd his shtick here.

>>5410
I don't think Engels is a good fit here. You can't really understand Marx without understanding who he was having conversations with intellectually. I guess for political economy, you'd need to read Adam Smith, and for his social theories you should look at Hegel's philosophy of history and his political theory as well as Darwin's Origin of the Species. Marx was a huge Darwin fanboy. Even sent him a signed copy of Capital.

>>5421
Since we have a economy thread, can't we have a religious studies and theology thread too? What about an anthropology and archaeology thread? Ethnomusicology?

Infinite verities of economies exist.
An economy is a goal.
Such as the goal of the ever increasing quality of a specific collective..

Quality naturally increases unless a barrier emerges and then an economy problem solves.

Some goals never end and that’s the goal.
Goodness gets ever goodder.

Hmm, I will try to respond without reading much of the replies ITT, perhaps I will repeat something but oh well. Also feel free to skip, it's NOT particularly smart or educated in any way hehe.

>Is economics a bunch of lies?
Not quite. But it IS tied into politics heavily and is based on a bunch of political beliefs. Classical economics is based on beliefs of a certain social group hehe.
Now, I think there are at least two ways of looking at economics and both are employed but at times people think economics is only one of them:
- according to the first, economics is akin to managing a factory: good and services come 'round according to a set of predetermined rules - or perhaps there are no rigid rules but the "economy" concerns itself mostly/only with the "functioning" aspect, i.e. to build a car, one needs a long list of prerequisites to be met, both in personnel qualities and the goods provided - why a car should be made is out of the question tbh (generally it's answered as "we need a device to move something from point A to point B" I guess)
Perhaps I'm bad at explaining this, but the point is we leave human motivations from doing anything out of the picture and just focus on managing goods and services. It is certainly reductionist but it's powerful in a sense if you don't master it, you actually cannot get anything done. So, when people say "let's fix the economy" I think a lot of think think like that, let's restore the functioning of the exchange machine. That "definition" of economics is free from any politics but we cannot make a functioning economy without bringing humans into picture.
(TBH perhaps I'm conflating economics and technology a bit but I am myself not sure if one can easily separate the two)
- so, according to the second, economics is humans doing favors to each other. We realize we cannot fulfill our needs by ourselves, so we use others to do our bidding, quid pro quo. So, economy is the art of making deals and related stuff. Also, economics is the way to control others, control society, economies are complex machines of social nature. Therefore it's heavily political. In fact, "favor for a favor" and "mutual exchange" are definitely not the only principles to run society by. Likewise, humans are vile and do things to distort the "fair" picture by doing clearly "unfair" things.
So with that in mind, economics is inseparable from humans which do not necessarily evePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

The body was too long

Now onto some other points
>It has been said the economists definition of rational behavior as behavior consistent with their own models, with all other behavior dubbed irrational
I think there are other ways to approach economics other than "modelling an ideal society" like classical people did, though I haven't studied them really. But yea, I would agree that whatever they teach at schools outside of heavily specialized ones seems to be kinda horrendous. I would agree that political ideologies should NOT dictate economics.
Further down you describe classical liberal economics would be my guess. Yeahhhh, there have been corrections to that, people mostly do not run "pure" liberal economies these days, but the liberal ideology is an insanely tenacious one and things like neoliberalism exist, too.
>Similarly, Trobriand islanders used to travel great distances to trade seemingly useless and valueless objects Why?
TBH I don't know why but yea, I would agree that humans are generally not rational beings. In fact, rationality is a human invention, I don't think there was any civilization other than the European/Mediterranean one which would be so stuck up at pursuing the truth. I think most civs just follow the hedonistic route, more or less. Trying to answer that question though, maybe it's the journey that matters to them more than the end goal w
>Even the whole inc*l trend was caused by people trying to apply economics to sex and relationships and its created a whole horde of delusional people
To be fair, to me incel stuff doesn't seem to be *that* out of touch with reality. As far as I know, there were certain periods of history during which certain societies all across the globe… basically treated women as livestock aka slaves and a [valuable] commodity - so, women could be traded like goods, deprived of agency and certainly be an object of economies. It is really as simple as that. So, some men want to revive it heh - I know I don't hehe. I assume the "delusion" ascribed to incels is that they can find a loving soul that way - yeaaaa, let's just say they are not necessarily looking for one, they just want a woman to fuck and dominate or something.
>Are there any good economists?
The ones concerning themselves with human nature as opposed to delusional modelling. The ones Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

ive been a neet with no job for over 20 years, i win.