3 ms·

First off: thanks for sharing how you experience your protective instincts. I can feel your love for your kid With that said -- Wha... your and my reads are s

by patcon 1y ago

First off: thanks for sharing how you experience your protective instincts. I can feel your love for your kid With that said -- Wha... your and my reads are so different... I hear that as: One lived in the real world that most normal unchosen people experience, and the other had means to avoid said world? "Abuse" feels strong, bc putting the select (usually wealthy) kids in the safest place and not choosing responsibility/stake in remediating the larger shared experience, that feels like the larger "condemnation to abuse" to me. I'm a pretty hardcore collectivist though, and I understand that's not everyone's value system *shrug*

testaccount28 1y ago
yes. one should raise one's kids in only the toughest most unrelenting environment. arctic tundra, perhaps, or federal prison. anything else is unfair and abusive to others.
- patcon 1y ago
  You've strawmanned me. I'm saying that choosing the "best" places and not stewarding the shared spaces is a form of neglect of shared public goods, public goods that otherwise lead to a strong society that a kid might someday inherit. Some ppl don't just choose the best school, because they think it's best for their individual family unit. Neglect is multi-scalar -- something can be neglect at one level, and care at another. Different families value different scales of concern in their family life North Americans (esp Americans) tend to not see it that way. Collectivist cultures kinda assume it's a no-brainer, in my experience. Your attempt at painting this as "obvious" and worthy of satirising, that feels kinda misdirected
  - testaccount28 1y ago
    fair point. the true society self-organizes at each level to cooperate with itself. they avoid tragic outcomes by noticing the coordination traps that lead to them, and then not doing that. i disagree that one must be subject to the rotten institutions in order to care about or fix them. but this is a disagreement of method, not of result. i agree that seeking only the "best" can be a status-treadmill coordination trap. i turn away from this as well. i have a strong distaste when "cooperation" is imposed from without. it is unstable. (does your collectivism rely on shared goals and reflective understanding? or is it enforced by artificially raising the cost of defection?) agreed that i responded not quite to your comment as written. apologies.

by patcon 1y ago

testaccount28 1y ago

yes. one should raise one's kids in only the toughest most unrelenting environment. arctic tundra, perhaps, or federal prison. anything else is unfair and abusive to others.

patcon 1y ago
You've strawmanned me. I'm saying that choosing the "best" places and not stewarding the shared spaces is a form of neglect of shared public goods, public goods that otherwise lead to a strong society that a kid might someday inherit. Some ppl don't just choose the best school, because they think it's best for their individual family unit. Neglect is multi-scalar -- something can be neglect at one level, and care at another. Different families value different scales of concern in their family life North Americans (esp Americans) tend to not see it that way. Collectivist cultures kinda assume it's a no-brainer, in my experience. Your attempt at painting this as "obvious" and worthy of satirising, that feels kinda misdirected
- testaccount28 1y ago
  fair point. the true society self-organizes at each level to cooperate with itself. they avoid tragic outcomes by noticing the coordination traps that lead to them, and then not doing that. i disagree that one must be subject to the rotten institutions in order to care about or fix them. but this is a disagreement of method, not of result. i agree that seeking only the "best" can be a status-treadmill coordination trap. i turn away from this as well. i have a strong distaste when "cooperation" is imposed from without. it is unstable. (does your collectivism rely on shared goals and reflective understanding? or is it enforced by artificially raising the cost of defection?) agreed that i responded not quite to your comment as written. apologies.