Thomas Sowell in “A Conflict of Visions” pointed at something similar : humans hold two fundamental views of themselves and human nature.
CONSTRAINED & UNCONSTRAINED.
The unconstrained vision assumes people are capable of acting unselfishly and even virtuously, that human nature is malleable enough that the right conditions, education, or ideology can elevate us beyond our basic drives.
The constrained vision kind of accepts that desire, self-interest, and the will to create and accumulate are not flaws to be corrected but baseline features of what we are.
The degrowth ideology seems to be one of unconstrained vision.
It imagines that people can and should transcend their natural appetites, and treats the failure to do so as a moral shortcoming.
Which is why it produces the psychological wreckage you are describing.
When your framework tells you that your desire to live fully, to travel, to build, to earn is a civilizational crime, you do not become a better person. You become a person at war with yourself.
The constrained vision does not ask people to be less than human. It builds around what humans actually are.
The world is too difficult for those who necessitate playing by the rules. Figure out which ones you need to break to live more freely. Risk is yours tbh😂🙏
A tough one, but I feel like the reason so many of us are failing is because we borrowed the need to succeed from others' perception of us, and so, from the very beginning, we travelled the path that would be seen by others, rather than the one on which we might find our peace.
@arctotherium42 The book to read, to understand what really happened that made things the way they are, The burden of bad ideas by Heather, she basically explains it all! Don't know why people don't talk about it, she laid it all out like 26 years ago. This book informs our opinions
@HMDatMI
“We will not solve our problem by electing the right people. We will only solve our problem by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.”
— Milton Friedman
Not advocating for a world where the strong devour the weak. Basic reasoning will tell you that predatory domination is simply a bad strategy. What you gain by crushing others is trivial compared to what you lose: trust, cooperation, the compounding returns of a functioning civilization.
If the will to achieve is the primary force in your life, then anything that taxes, restricts, or redistributes the products of that will feels like theft.
Richard Feynman’s savage takedown of pseudo-science still burns in 2026:
“Social science is an example of a science which is not a science. They follow the forms… but they don’t get any laws. They haven’t found out anything.”
He goes harder:
Experts who “sit at a typewriter and make up” claims — “organic food is better,” “this diet cures everything” — as if it’s settled science, when no rigorous experiments or checks have been done.
Feynman:
“I know what it means to really know something.
How careful you have to be. How easy it is to fool yourself.
I see how they get their information… and I can’t believe that they know.”
The Nobel physicist calls it straight: most of what passes for “expert” opinion is noise dressed up as knowledge.
In an age drowning in TikTok “science,” influencers, and clickbait studies — Feynman’s 1:52 rant feels more relevant than ever.
Who’s the biggest pseudo-expert that grinds your gears right now?
Clip is timeless fire — watch it and feel the clarity.
We cannot assume individuals or groups are never harmful; there is good reason to caution the public about potential harm. However, if we engage only in hating, it becomes painful without seeking ways to fix things.
Deep hatred brought pain; understanding behavior provided practical ways to resolve situations.
When we criticize specific individuals or groups too much, we miss the commonness of human behavioral traits.
Our solutions lie in understanding general behavioral patterns and their triggers, rather than in mockery and disgust.
Excessive condemnation of a race or group for past or present actions often assumes we would have acted superhumanly in their circumstances.
Not to forget: if we were them, we wouldn’t have access to the knowledge we possess now as ourselves.
Assuming the other as EVIL is a privilege of the ignorant
Have we become godless? Not likely! We are maybe just disliking or probably angry at Mr. God! What is to be checked again is whether it is actually his fault….
After-all with all that has been given to us, we are choosing to go purposeless, functionless, hungry and without the myriad of beautiful things we could have created for ourselves and each other, we are choosing to do nothing! It is like if your parents gave you all the possibilities and you decided to become a drug addict-homeless.
What we need to do to love ourselves and the rest of the world is to make use of our abilities and all the raw materials to explore and improve our situation!
Living in hell when we have the ability to create what may be our heaven is what is drawing on us the friction of stopping, holding back has hurt us too much!
Small injuries but enough in number can lead to eventual death or even worse loss of actionability in the face of life, especially when we are physically capable!
(Who cares who this God person is if we actually can feel what we are all referring to every-time we mention him.)
America is not as much as a noun, a flag, a constitution, or a government. It’s the last patch of dirt left on earth where a human can still stand up, spit in the face of overwhelming odds, and say “fuck you, I’ll do it anyway” without instantly being crushed.
Everything else is decoration and excuse.
The only thing that actually matters is that if the determined and the stubborn have room to breathe, fight, and die on their own terms.
Collectivism cannot and should not takeover, never here!
I just realized the death of a civilization isn’t the death of its people but the death of its ambitions and the fading of the story of why those ambitions mattered.