Didn't you have some similar takes, but less direct, the other day? The "luxury beliefs" bit seems similar to some stuff said, I think by you, but could have been someone else.
He said what most everyone thinks out loud. I [uck fay]ing hate Chamath, but he accidentally told the truth and most people jumping on him are too scared to admit they don't really care either.
Really? You think people don't care, or that people are just unable to do anything about it? Or is this one of those things I'm being too literal about, and "not caring" is the same "as unable to do anything."
Tweeting support makes people feel good for those 15 seconds before they never think about the topic again. Most people support is analogous to the drive by "thoughts and prayers" remark on a school shooting. It's below most everyone's line because it doesn't directly affect them. His mistake was saying it, and the truth not being pretty. Better to virtue signal than admit his stance isn't any different from their own. Now you want to get into some of the other ranting and raving about not knowing if it actually happens have at it, but it the world cared it would stop.
That's pessimistic, to me, because it means every single problem is a result of the world not caring, and only immediate needs are actual cares. It basically invalidates all research, because, after all, if the world cared, things would just... be. It's a very interesting view. Pragmatic, but... not, caring. Oddly enough.
I haven't given a single thought (until now) that my kid would be involved in a school shooting today, but... I feel like I care. He wasn't. But I still feel like, had he been, that I'd have cared and always did, despite it being below my Tuesday line.
I remember making a point at some point in the conversation the other day that it would have been immensely unpopular and politically impossible for the United States to convince its population-still reeling from the Great Depression with the memory fresh of 50k+ Americans dying overseas in the 1st World War just 20 years prior-to immediately ship off the next generation of Americans in the late 1930s at the dawn of the 2nd World War in an attempt to police and combat the political strife rampaging throughout Asia and Europe before this country was directly attacked and given no other choice but to fight. Not sure if that's what you mean by "luxury beliefs" of when and when not to directly interject ourselves into the affairs of others in the name of human rights globally.
No, it was something like "We only care about these things because other problems have been solved. We've got it too easy." Something like that, but not that. Might not have been you.
Mavlo's hierarchy of needs is relevant here. People will almost always care about things closer to them than otherwise even if in a vacuum they are not equal. It's not good or bad, but don't take it out on a POS like Chamath just because you don't like reality.
I care about it. I mean it is pure evil what they are doing to that group of people. I think we, and the rest of the world, should care about a genocidal ethnic cleansing within a population of a country trying to assert its dominance throughout the world. Especially when they turn around and propagandize awful events like George Floyd as a means to convince their population and the rest of the world that the United States are a far greater evil when it comes to human rights abuses. Now do I have any solutions to the atrocities of the CCP or do I think we should start a hot war with a nuclear superpower like China over it? No. But I at least "care".
I don't like it. But to me, caring means I'm willing to take action on it. If I just sit on the side lines thinking that sucks, but don't do anything I don't care, even if I don't like it.
So when it comes to things, like, say your parents dying, since you're not doing anything about it... you don't care? I don't think that's true, man. I don't think that belief holds up to scrutiny.
If I don't do anything for them I can't see how I cared. I can't stop them from dying but I can still be there for them.
Correct, looks I affirmed his post by stating that we are spoiled. Don't wanna speak for JG, but my sentiment there was more opining in the larger context of how good we have it compared to the challenges and injustices generations proceeding us endured. I empathize how one without adequate healthcare swamped with 75k/100k in student loans who has no prospect of being able to afford a down payment on a home anytime soon would object to that sentiment. It is not obvious to me how those posts relate in anyway to Charmath arguing it is a "luxury belief" that we cannot-and should not- even attempt to sustain and police human rights on a global scale when our own house isn't perfectly in order
Only because of circumstance and technology. If they're in a car accident, and hospitalized, and you're unreachable, due to travel or what have you, and they die... you weren't there for them. Hell being "there for them" is already arbitrary as hell. What constitutes "being there for" someone? Is money it? Is love it? How much of each?
