Saturday, February 8, 2014

slap shot over the glass and into the crowd

Mandos,

actually, what we see in village economies, is that status wants destroy happiness and do it fast.

Jesus hockey puckin' Christ.

This fucktard thinks that what his paranoid, progressive "imagination" envisions = the true reality that inescapably arises.

1) "Status wants" have nothing to do with the size of a community or its so-called "economy."

2) Whether "status wants" have the ability to destroy happiness is an open question and isn't conclusively answered regardless of this fucktard's bizarre imaginations to the contrary. Whether they can destroy an entire community's happiness is far from certain. 

3) Whose particular "status wants" are under examination here?  What about the "status wants" of people who become vicarious victims to take a bogus Voice of the Oppressed stance in a political debate or argument?  What about the pseudo-intellectual drooling dipshittery of people such as the person quoted above?  That's certainly a "status want" -- though I'd wager 144 Krispy Kremes that what Quoted Author sees as "status wants" would exclude the poseurdom and pretense of his own little schtick and would aim toward "wants" that he would not seek himself. 

I-me-mine.

Pseudo-intellectuals are notable for their sure statements of great authoritative conclusion, when they have zip-fuck zilch factual grounding for those certainties.

Being "popular" on Daily Kos and firedoglake blogs doesn't mean you're an expert in anything but milking the cow of popularity.

1 comment:

Harold Caidagh said...

The introduction of status symbols into villages where everyone had about the same (visibly) causes a collapse in happiness. This fact is germane.

Broad-spectrum increases in inequality, especially visible inequality, decrease happiness. This is robust, and well proved, it is one of the strongest correlations in social science. As much as people have wants, if there is little actual inequality, it does not decrease happiness nearly as much, it becomes markers of sub-group identity.

Dress like a Goth, it doesn’t decrease other people’s happiness. Wear a rolex, and it does.


What bothers Ian Welsh is not what bothers everyone.

What fascinates Ian Welsh is not what fascinates everyone.

**********

Satire is best left to people who know how to satirize. Welsh can't do satire, can't do hyperbole, can't do anything funny. Too concerned with popularity to be funny; too wrapped up in trying to seem like A Modern Public Intellectual to have a comic slant.

The failure of The Funny isn't the worst part.

The failure of "I'm a Public Intellectual" is.