u/Boniface222

So, I'm going to prove that socialism is a memetic cognitohazard. I will prove it through a series of 8 axioms.

Axiom 1. Socialism is a meme.

To put simply, a meme is an idea. Typically an idea with the ability to spread. If an idea only exists in one brain you could say it's not a meme. But socialism exists in many brains so it is a meme.

Axiom 2. An idea being a meme doesn't mean it's good or healthy or helpful.

One might argue that since many people believe in socialism, it must be good. But we often see bad ideas spread like wildfire. For instance, during the pandemic many covid conspiracy theories were spreading very quickly and very broadly. Just because an idea spreads does not mean it's correct or good to have.

Axiom 3. An idea speading doesn't mean it's true.

One might argue that socialism spread beause it's true. But again, we have bad memes that spread without being true. Take sovereign citizen ideology for example. It's believers claim they have special methods and wordings that help them avoid legal troubles but its not true and it fails every time they try it. The idea spead without being true or usable.

Axiom 4. An idea can spread for bad reasons.

Taking Sov Cit again as an example, the ideology has a completely ineffectual track record in actual practice. But it does spread quite readily. If the holders of the idea don't get a gain in practice, what gain do they get? The gain in believing Sov Cit ideology is a thrill of thinking you know better than others. Thinking you have special knowledge and special powers. That you're part of a special in group. These can lead to terrible outcomes but they don't stop the idea from spreading.

An idea can spread for the sick perverse thrill the host gets. With no consideration for if the idea works or is helpful to the next host.

Axiom 5. Socialism as an idea is not effective.

While there's always the plausible deniability that "next time it will work!", historical analysis strongly suggests that socialism doesn't work when it's tried. Similarly to how sov cits will keep trying their tactic in court and fail every time. They will claim it will work but historically it doesn't.

Axiom 6. Hatred as a side effect

While the main arguments of socialism are utopian, when a socialist feels comfortable enough they will quickly start spewing hatred. It can be hatred for specific characteristics, or just general hatred of anyone different. When someone believes in socialism, hatred is never too deep under the surface.

Axiom 7. Socialism harms the host's health

Let's be honest, we've all seen the shift. The spontaneous body-modding impulses, the vacant stare, the self-diagnoses. You can actually see the before and after change from conventionally healthy individuals before exposure to socialism to a broken mess after socialism. Socialism is unhealthy for your mind and body.

Axiom 8. Socialism exibits host-seeking behavior

Socialists do love to spread socialism. But when it comes to applying socialism, it's like the thought never even occurred to them. The point of the meme is to spread. The meme doesn't need to be true, functional, good, or even healthy. It just needs to spread from host to host.

Conclusion:

Socialism is a meme - It's an idea that spreads. And like viruses, memes mutate to prioritise spread from host to host.

An idea being a meme doesn't mean it's good or healthy or helpful - Socialism spreading doesn't mean it's good.

An idea speading doesn't mean it's true - Socialism spreading doesn't mean it's true.

An idea can spread for bad reasons - Socialism can spread for self-serving or malicious reasons.

Socialism as an idea is not effective - The preponderence of evidence is that socialism is innefectual as an idea.

Hatred as a side effect - Socialism spreads hate around the world.

Socialism harms the host's health - Socialism is a public health risk.

Socialism exibits host-seeking behavior - The people who hold the meme don't even believe in it. So why should you?

Socialists are 100% convinced that more people should believe in socialism. But act like 5% convinced it would work. Why is there a compulsion to spread the idea but no similar compultion to practice the idea? Because it's a memetic cognitohzard.

What can be done about it? From time to time, take a mental inventory of the ideas you believe in. Do your ideas make you sick? If your ideas make you sick, consider not spreading them. Do your ideas make you hateful? Consider dropping those ideas.

If you're unhealthy, unhappy, hateful, and look like a goblin, maybe you have acquired memetic cognitohazards that are making you unhealthy. It might be a good time to reconsider those rabbit holes.

P.S. This could be disproven by socialists putting socialism into practice. But they won't.

Hi all. I've been ruminating on this idea from time to time. I'm curious if any of you have noticed it or where you feel you land on this topic. Both capitalists and socialists.

In political discussions, ideas of individualism vs collectivism, or authoritarianism vs libertarianism often come up. But I think there is an underrated axis of institutional trust.

Take election security for example. Some will say we need transparency, accountability, and to structurally make it harder to cheat an election. While others trust that if the system says the election is alright then there's nothing to worry about.

Sometimes I'd talk politics with my socialist friend and the problem of corruption comes up and he will straight up say something like "we'll have an anti-corruption department" like just the department existing fixes the problem.

I think some people fundamentally have a high amount of trust in institutions. If the ministry of truth says something it must be true because it's in the name.

Conversely, if poverty exists it's clearly an injustice because the government could just set up a department to fight poverty and it would go away.

And criminals don't really need to be held accountable because the system failed them so its actually not a big deal if a criminal decapitates someone.

I feel like leftists tend to be more trusting of institutions. Or at least they think putting more trust in specific institutions would make the world a better place.

But maybe I'm wrong and it's not split on left/right lines.

What about capitalist vs socialist lines?

As a capitalist, I want institutions to be small and able to die. I think bad institutions should go out of business and go away. I don't like the idea of a bad institution kept alive through taxation. Many businesses are too big for my taste but big government is even better and less mortal.

I don't think institutions are automatically bad but I don't think they automatically solve a problem either. I don't think it's reasonable to just say "we'll set up a department for that!" Departments only work in specific conditions. You can't just set one up and assume it will work perfectly forever. The ministry of truth doesn't have to say the truth just because it's in the name.

You even see this with big pharma. During the pandemic it seemed like socialists were paradoxically very trusting of big pharmaceutical companies while capitalists were conversely less trusting.

In this case, it seemed like instutional trust played a bigger role than left/right or socialist/capitalist. It seems like in some cases, trust in institutions is a bigger predictor of behavior than economic or political preference.

And there's also the issue of censorship. Where some people just fully trust that censors are obviously trustworthy and if something was censored it clearly must have been for a good reason or else it wouldn't have gotten censored.

Where do you fall on the institutional trust axis?

Hear me out.

I've noticed a pattern when discussing with socialists.

They will present an idea like "We just need to have a dictatorship that will redistribute all the wealth!"
And the rebuttal will be like "But whenever this has been tried it ends very poorly."
And the socialist responds like "But we say it will be amazing!"

Does it matter what socialist say? Does it matter what anyone says? Why not prioritise facts in instead of sayings?

Why shouldn't we look at history to see how poorly the promises of socialists ended up?

Socialists love to live in capitalist countries. Drinking their soy lates and avocado toasts. Meanwhlie socialists don't want to live in socialist countries. How can we trust you? Seriously.

This is a bit of a tangent, but if I really believed in socialism I would go live in a socialist country.

I don't find it believable that socialists really believe what they say because they don't practice what they preach. So why should any of us care about what socialists say?

EDIT:
I should specify. I do think it's totally valid to care about what socialists do. Socialists cause a lot of problems. So I think it can be fruitful to engage with socialists on that end. But if socialists do X and say Y I care about X and not Y.

If you take the red pill 🔴, your priority is to have a society where you can provide for your family and your loved ones. And others can provide for their family and their loved ones.

If you take the blue pill 🔵, you don't have theory of mind. You don't understand that other people can have different values and perspectives. If someone disagrees with you, you assume they are manipulating you because there's no way they could be genuinely different. You are completely convinced that the world would be a better place if you ruled it with an iron fist. And you call it anarchy. You think it's totally cool if to silence and kill your enemies because obviously the world revolves around you. You were born with a chip on your shoulder because your father has more money than you and the fact that an adult having more money than a baby is normal flew way over your head. A little voice inside your head says maybe you shouldn't be such a selfish a-hole but you don't actually put in the work to be a good person. You just assume you being in charge will create a utopia so your way of being a good person is trying to grab as much unearned power as possible. You think the world owes you everything, yet you call children parasites. You call your boss greedy, while you see spending money on your own kids as a waste. You live to consume and don't understand the value of human life aside from funding your life style. You're an empty shell. Sometimes you wish people who are different than you would just die. As you're reading this, part of it is sinking in. A seed. A suggestion that maybe you are the a-hole and need to change. But the seed slides off your perfectly smooth brain and you immediately forget everything I said.

Which one do you pick?

When I was a kid, my mother would read me some comics with anthropomorphic animals going on small adventures. All light hearted stuff. The book was in french. I'm not 100% sure it was originally french. I wouldn't have known the difference at the time.

I don't remember what type of animals but I think it was mostly forest type creatures and mostly european setting. (no jungle or sci fi or anything like that) But I think there were no human characters.

I think the animals were kids and their parents would often give them big stacks of pancakes at the end of the adventure. I think pancakes with jam on top? I remember vividly plates with like 20 pancakes in a stack with jam or syrup on top as a recurring motif.

I remember one story about of one the characters building a wooden house.

The art style was simple and colorful. It felt more european than american.

I unfortunately don't remember much more than that.

Does this ring any bells at all? Any hints where I should look?

Never mind, I just found it. Searching crepe confiture BD. One image had a young bear holding a plate with 20 pancakes and a jar of jam on top. lol

It's Petzi!

I'm new to Quake 1. I just got it on GOG and loved it. Finished Quake 1 and the expansions on hard and nightmare.

I figured I'd try some map packs and stumbled upon Arcane Dimensions.

I'm not saying it's bad, but to me it doesn't scratch the Quake 1 itch.

From Quake 1 I like the "bite sized" maps where I can finish a map if I have just a bit of time before work, and the maps within an episode kind of build on a theme. And I feel like the focus is on sort of "puzzle" like gameplay with relatively open flowing yet tight maps.

I haven't tried all the AD maps but so far it seems like the main themes are huge lengthy unrelated maps where most of the appeal is the visuals and highly scripted encounters.

AD is definitely well made but to me it feels more like Elden Ring than Quake 1.

Any recommendations for map packs that have more of a Quake 1 design philosophy? Something with bite sized maps (50-80 enemies average?) focused on tight yet flowing gameplay, preferably with episodes.

I quite liked Scourge of Armagon. Hated Dimension of the Machine.

If you had to pick a favorite book (That's not in the Tanach) what would it be?