The uncanny parallels between Charles Lindbergh and Elon Musk: pioneering new frontiers, fathering many children despite tragedy, hated by Democrat and journalist warmongers for anti-war stances
It's remarkable how you valorize people whose lives in large part demonstrate contempt for the values you repeatedly state as central to your own life.
Men who are bad fathers are bad men, regardless of anything they may accomplish in the public sphere on behalf of all the rest of humanity.
Men who cannot form stable honest relationships with women are seriously damaged. When you describe these two men as you do, and have previously expressed an almost swooning admiration for Andrew Tate, I wonder how you reconcile the spiritual values you write about so often with the actual behavior of these guys on the human plane of our existence.
There is no separation between the private and the public in any person's life. Someone who tyrannized his family, who left the raising of his children to four different women he spent time with only to impregnate, apparently, who let his wife provide a public image of saintly intellectualism that would be the necessary PR balance for all his own less-than-sterling morality, seen and unseen, was just a poseur at manhood.
Elon is untroubled by commercial partnerships with the worst and most dangerous government on the planet. He's building cars with such dangerous batteries as their fuel source that when they catch fire, few fire departments have the equipment that can quickly put them out.
Smart and creative he is, sure. A great guy overall, he's not.
I was wondering what the opposing view to this story would be, and you did a very good job presenting it SCA.
These historic figures we oft canonize for "particular" accomplishments, have a darker and damaging side...as do we all, in smaller ways.
To paint with a broad "glorification" brush or a smaller "demonizing" details brush, does us no good...in the present. We must consider the entirety of the figure.
Example - Stalin was a great tactician, stalwart leader and he saved his country (through his generals/soldiers), by defeating the nazi's on the Easter front....he's a hero right...we all hated the nazi's and their drive for global dominance...their genocide of the Jews...Stalin and FDR were great heroic leaders.
Of course Stalin willfully and knowingly killed millions via the Holodomor, routinely purged (murdered) those who he was suspicious of and his secret police, made our Gulf War black sites, look like daycare centers.
FDR got us through the war, gave us the "New Deal", but knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen and did nothing to avert, or alleviate it.
All that to say, there's ALWAYS two sides to the coin and to not look at the darker sides, brings us to the world we are living in today.
I will say Yuri, I do recognize the point of the post was to draw parallels, between these two pioneers and their lives, not to do an in-depth expose on every detail of those lives.
However, SCA illustrates a critical elements, that we (collective society) have ignored over centuries...and in doing so, willingly placed ourselves in the hand of these very flawed "genius heroes".
Ask yourselves, "Why are these individuals/groups (WEF, Trilateral Comission, CFR, WHO, BIS, The Fed, Bilderberg's, Gates, Musk, Soros, Bezos, Fauci, etc), who NO ONE voted for/elected...allowed to orchestrate, mandate, influence and direct the paths and realities of OUR lives?????"
So they can decide to release GMO mosquitos, do medical experimentation on Africans, push mass genetic experimentation on a global scale, influence and write plan/policies for how governments will manipulate their populations during planned and created emergencies/crises, plan and develop social engineering (15 min cities), engineer the climate and the list goes on and on...just because they are wealthy?????
Because of that wealth, which buys them power and position, we ALLOW them to dictate our live in these ways?
For those who say, "I resisted, they didn't dictate my life"...ok sure, I didn't get the jab either and I don't wear the mask, but they fundamentally changed the world you and I live in now...so they did affect you and and your children...and more is coming right around the corner.
Really, what we are collectively saying is, "as long as you have enough MONEY...you can decide anyone and their family are filthy useless eaters"...that's what we have told these self appointed "leaders".
When we ALLOW, these types (public figures, who accomplish things and are lauded for it) to go unfettered and unchecked, because we worship their fame, wealth and accomplishments, we bring about our own demise.
SCA you are correct about the dark side of Musk, but people play hero ball often and will ignore that side in order to reap the benefits, the flawed hero is bringing them.
My simple Musk example...People decried the twitter censorship/gov partnership...but in true stupid useless eater fashion, they didn't cancel their account...Hero Elon rides in and and they cheer...the tech savior releases docs and the people cheer again...The hero pulls on a darker cape but no one notices...the tech overlord Musk starts censoring people and the people make excuses and cheer..."well it's better now than it was". We always destroy ourselves, by providing them the opportunity to do so.
We deserve all that we are living through and will live through in the coming decades.
Shakespeare wrote "Madness in great ones must not unwatched go"
You can and should easily replace "Madness" with "Power".
"Men who are bad fathers are bad men, regardless of anything they may accomplish in the public sphere on behalf of all the rest of humanity."
Exactly. This whole "have lots of babies" thing is stupid. Almost as stupid as these people who think they're making a statement by challenging gender roles/norms while living in a completely man-made [synthetic] environment... which is on par with someone jumping into a saltwater pool and acting like a badass because they float.
Having babies with a woman you don't see as a partner that you want to raise kids with is effectively littering [pun intended]... just leaving a mess for someone else to clean up.
Maybe I'm biased because my own father was one of those guys... I just don't think having babies for the sake of having babies is the answer at all — in fact, it kinda seems like a plan to speed up the decay... but maybe that's the plan, to return the plebs to their animal-state now that human labor isn't as necessary as it was in the past.
The modern day equivalents of this phenomena (hero worship, while disregarding their societal littering - great turn of phrase you coined by the way) are major league sports "athletes"...especially the NBA.
They have numerous offspring...as well as cases of rapes, murders, domestic violence, drug/weapons crimes and more...BUT they are "heroes".
In a society where actions have no consequence, spreading your seed as a means of recreation, becomes like playing a video game...when you're done you put the game console away, until the next time you're bored.
The societal consequence for this behavior are many, but one in particular, is the destruction of the nuclear family and all the underpinnings, that build healthy functioning societies.
Maybe over-analysis isn't necessary. Human nature doesn't change, no matter what synthetic toys we have to play with at any point in time. Whatever age we were born in is modernity, the brave new world, the stuff we could do that the ancestors couldn't do before us--and yet all the basics are always immutable--power and resources, who's got 'em, who doles 'em out to the followers one attracts and the workers/laborers/enforcers one controls.
Elon and Lindbergh would be the same personality types if they'd been lording over herds of cattle and breeding better horses with which to traverse their domains, and they'd've been attracting customers for those or people wanting to employ their expertise.
Not everyone's built for commitment, and if you got that restless gene, don't spread your seed so widely. Of course the women had agency too, and if they were swooning over the fake masculinity or wanted to get in on what they saw as a profitmaking venture, one way or another, they too were inflicting this on their children. No shortage of bad mothers either, who put the guys' needs, or their own, over their kids.
I kinda of agree with this, but in a roundabout way via rebuttal to this...
"Men who cannot form stable honest relationships with women are seriously damaged."
This implies that the women aren't involved in making a relationship work. In fact, I would argue that it's likely the "damaged" women who are getting "unexpectedly" knocked-up more often than it is "damaged" men "pumpin' & dumpin'" — evolutionarily, that's kinda their thing, but the gatekeeper still has to let them in.
Which brings me back to the "not built for commitment" part... while, on the surface it seems like a reasonable stance (when applied to *either party involved* in semi-modern context) — look up monogamous animals... most of them aren't mammals. Being in a long-term relationship with shared parental duties isn't really the norm. Do we know that humans haven't been "domesticated" [by other humans] like livestock because it makes them easier to manage in some way... like a corporation working 1000s of divergent people toward a single goal, while none of them actually know what that goal is, or that there even is one?
The concept of "teenager" is relatively new — it's only been about 100 years now that teenagers have even been a thing. Similarly, the idea of a husband-wife "team" [modern "family unit"] is also relatively new, though older. The idea of marrying for "love" is only 200ish years old — before then it was a contract of utility (status/class, rights, etc).
Humans used to live in tribes. As humans started living in more state-level societies (vs tribal), technology advanced, and [the need for] specialists emerged.. and with that the tribe started morphing into the "family" to pass down those specialties and keep them in "working memory" — and most importantly, to keep them benefiting the state.
The modern family is a remnant of that structure. But now that all knowledge is owned and maintained by corporations [the new church — remember: we used to farm on land owned by the church and they took payment from your harvest. Oh, and they "owned" all technology.. sound familiar?], there really isn't a need for that structuring of society. All knowledge is given to you by the state now, not handed down through families, and for the last 70-ish years the "family" has merely been an entity used to maintain balance in a system of exchange that keeps the state machine in motion and expanding to the point of nearly being inescapable today.
Anyway... my point being: men need to understand their role — but just like the proggy tiktoker who doesn't get that their gender nonsense wouldn't be tolerated in a hut, only a "home" — they need to understand their role *in context*. While we haven't gone back to our tribal state yet and have "elders" to look to, and fathers are no longer vector for knowledge of specialties that they once were (replaced by the state), they are still needed in this current societal arrangement not only for financial stability, but to also teach certain life skills... even as those life skills change before our eyes.
PS: I think what we experiencing currently is the point where technology has empowered the state so much that families are actually a hindrance and we're actually on a slow rollback to a neo-tribal social structure, or at the very least, neo-feudal... for the underclass, anyway.
Except even in the oldest written stories from many parts of the world, the concept of a loving couple devoted to each other unto old age and death is a powerful archetype. Many behaviors are recognized as ideal though ordinary people frequently fail badly at them.
It was a really, really bad idea for those grand feminist fighters to see basic male attributes as toxic. Shitty guys are shitty, rotten women are rotten, but millions and millions of decent ordinary people still have their basic instincts functioning despite every modern attempt to stifle them.
Picasso was a rotten father, so was Einstein for that matter. There have been/are good and bad father's/parents in every social class/society.
The problem imo is in our inherent tendency/compulsion
to idealized individuals for a specific achievents without ever balancing it with and acknowledging their shortcomings. Idk why this is so, I have no problem to admire a person for one attribute, without ignoring other parts of their character. But what works on individual level might not be "workable" on national scale hence, we create our heroes. They, btw, more times than not are themselves controlled and manipulated. And iconized (iconified?) We are strange lot, and these days doesn't take much to create them, heroes and celebrities galore
We're wired for hierarchal relationships. We wuz making clay and stone idols from the moment we started to use tools. The intangible frightens too many people. Even religions that technically prohibit worship of idols can't exterminate the need to create worship sites from tombs of formerly living human beings, because the Divine is just too far away for comfort.
There isn't *really* so much difference between a feast day celebrating some crazy person who mortified her flesh in purported adoration of God and some crazy Kardashian having a trazillion followers on Instagram. The nature of the need is the same.
"Except even in the oldest written stories from many parts of the world, the concept of a loving couple devoted to each other unto old age and death is a powerful archetype"
Yeah... written stories are some of the first technologies that enabled the emergent state-level societies I'm talking about.
BTW: I don't think we disagree, I just think we're looking at this with two different aperture settings.
Well, look at the tenderness and longing expressed in Neanderthal gravesites. Look at dogs languishing away for the dead master who's not there to feed them anymore while being unmoved by the kind people who are.
It's a basic norm to care ferociously for one's children yet people murder their children every day. In both primitive and purportedly sophisticated societies, cultural practices can work pretty hard against a healthy survival to adulthood.
You get good wolves, you get bad wolves. Any complex organism, as much can go wrong as goes right. Much more of life is luck than we want to acknowledge.
The home is the first and most effective place to learn the lessons of life: truth, honor, virtue, self control, the value of education, honest work, and the purpose and privilege of life. Nothing can take the place of home in rearing and teaching children, and no worldly success can compensate for failure in the home
It takes two to tango. Christ instructed women to submit to their husbands and husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his Church. Seems like that would be a good formula for a healthy marriage and the best opportunity for children to be raised by a committed mother and father.
Thankfully we can reject that stupid logic because it comes from a religion and those are all cults. It is a good thing Musk attended his own church of self and listened to his own inner voice instead of taking his family to a weekly gathering of cult members, led by a local cult leader, that taught crazy beliefs from a book written and assembled by long dead cult members.
Yes, yes, crazy cultist beliefs should be rejected because realistically no one can know what the Truth really is. Sure, following those cultist beliefs will lead to a happy marriage and well adjusted children but we should reject them because some long dead members of that cult violated the fundamental tenants of their belief system and killed people. Makes perfect sense.
In the spirit of you vilifying great men for their personal failures I would like to take this opportunity to shit on Hedy Lamar. Sure, she invented WiFi, but she also took prescription meth and abused her children. Also, she was married to a Nazi. I hope we can all recognize this and agree that she was maybe talented but not a great woman.
Or maybe Jesus was yet another crazy Middle Eastern guy obsessed with the concept of prophethood, or maybe he was just a nice, decent Middle Eastern guy of the type the Romans couldn't stop themselves from murdering, and whom a couple of other guys in his crowd thought they could make book on, and did. Considering the popularity of Middle Eastern cults in general, 'n all that.
AI is coming wether we want it or not. It will be our tool or our tyrant depending on how we develop it and how we use it. I think most people will allow themselves to be ruled by it, especially if and when an AI delivered blowjob feels like the real thing (or the AI convinces the end users that's what the real thing feels like.)
I would rather have someone like Musk, who recognizes and acknowledges the dangers developing AI than someone who does neither.
Nice to see Woody Harrelson speak some truth on SNL, and to tie it into Comrade Yuri's piece today, Elon promptly point out the accuracy of Woody's satire.
Quite the tide turn. I try not to believe in things like controlled opposition, judicious levers on the dams, etc., but where was all this bravery when the smart set and their intellectual icons wanted all of us put in camps? Almost like they're seeing it's time to ensure no loss to the commercial values of the properties as the heretics aren't in exile any longer and might show up at the smart cocktail parties again.
Ok, I get the correlations of Lindbergh & Musk being notarieties of their times...I get that they both lost their firstborns, which makes me think that they were targeted by the illuminati, and then they both have anti-war and pro-freedom ideologies, semi-environmentalists, and not sure if they really are sincerely humanitarians...or love humanity...the lessons we can learn from their lives, though, is that even with fame and power, influence, and money, you cannot buy happiness nor immortality...substance, faith, becoming one with your partner, or being a stealth contributor on many levels to humanity in service of God's Will, may not get you the rewards here, and it sure does help your sanity, sleep at night, and fulfillment of accomplishment...what we are taught to value is not necessarily what will complete us...I also want to mention that this latest Elon is not acting like the old Elon, and I believe he's been replaced, as there's too many character changes that do not reconcile...carry on brave soldiers!
Did I miss it, or was there no "how to" in this? I mean, beyond: be rich and/or live in a time when you could impregnate anyone and not worry about the repercussions.
Most men I know would be ruined by the child support for just 2 kids... forget 9, to several women. Sure, someone like Elon isn't going to struggle at all, but... that's not reality for the vast majority of the planet. Surely there are better examples to follow.
Honestly, I'm confused about how so many people are absolutely convinced Elon a "good guy".... have you noticed that twitter isn't getting any better? In fact, Instagram and Facebook are now following Twitter's lead and charging for verification. I don't really see how that's an improvement.
Yes, the "twitter files" were neat, but... 1) anyone who's been paying attention knew almost all that already — confirmation was nice, but.. 2) literally nothing happened as a result.... so, big deal!
Being hated by Democrats really doesn't mean anything... it's all show. George Bush Jr and Michelle Obama are buddies now. They're all on the same team. Don't be surprised if you see Trump and Obama hanging out in 5 years.
When Musk carried his sink through the door and people on this platform and others were awash in tribal orgasms, I dutifully pointed out in comments and a post, that Musk is a business guy. His intention was not to climb down from a cross, and save the twitter users from the evil of "the system". Twitter was and is a revenue generating vehicle to him...plain and simple. It is also a tech platform to further develop and launch future REVENUE generating products and ideas.
Musk's PR strategy (everything up to and including his walk through the front doors) was well planned and brilliant. It produced the expected and wanted knee jerk reaction from the masses.
What is missed is, he openly proved that people en masse are indeed, just stupid sheeple. I often wonder if his wry grin, is a sign of that realization.
" Lindbergh became the most famous human on the planet after becoming the first to fly across the Atlantic in 1927." He may have been the first to make the flight that year, but in 1919 "The U.S. Navy achieved the first transatlantic flight eight years before Charles Lindbergh became world famous for crossing the Atlantic nonstop and alone." (https://pioneersofflight.si.edu/content/first-flight-across-atlantic)
I have no idea how many of your other statements are accurate.
It's remarkable how you valorize people whose lives in large part demonstrate contempt for the values you repeatedly state as central to your own life.
Men who are bad fathers are bad men, regardless of anything they may accomplish in the public sphere on behalf of all the rest of humanity.
Men who cannot form stable honest relationships with women are seriously damaged. When you describe these two men as you do, and have previously expressed an almost swooning admiration for Andrew Tate, I wonder how you reconcile the spiritual values you write about so often with the actual behavior of these guys on the human plane of our existence.
There is no separation between the private and the public in any person's life. Someone who tyrannized his family, who left the raising of his children to four different women he spent time with only to impregnate, apparently, who let his wife provide a public image of saintly intellectualism that would be the necessary PR balance for all his own less-than-sterling morality, seen and unseen, was just a poseur at manhood.
Elon is untroubled by commercial partnerships with the worst and most dangerous government on the planet. He's building cars with such dangerous batteries as their fuel source that when they catch fire, few fire departments have the equipment that can quickly put them out.
Smart and creative he is, sure. A great guy overall, he's not.
I was wondering what the opposing view to this story would be, and you did a very good job presenting it SCA.
These historic figures we oft canonize for "particular" accomplishments, have a darker and damaging side...as do we all, in smaller ways.
To paint with a broad "glorification" brush or a smaller "demonizing" details brush, does us no good...in the present. We must consider the entirety of the figure.
Example - Stalin was a great tactician, stalwart leader and he saved his country (through his generals/soldiers), by defeating the nazi's on the Easter front....he's a hero right...we all hated the nazi's and their drive for global dominance...their genocide of the Jews...Stalin and FDR were great heroic leaders.
Of course Stalin willfully and knowingly killed millions via the Holodomor, routinely purged (murdered) those who he was suspicious of and his secret police, made our Gulf War black sites, look like daycare centers.
FDR got us through the war, gave us the "New Deal", but knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen and did nothing to avert, or alleviate it.
All that to say, there's ALWAYS two sides to the coin and to not look at the darker sides, brings us to the world we are living in today.
I will say Yuri, I do recognize the point of the post was to draw parallels, between these two pioneers and their lives, not to do an in-depth expose on every detail of those lives.
However, SCA illustrates a critical elements, that we (collective society) have ignored over centuries...and in doing so, willingly placed ourselves in the hand of these very flawed "genius heroes".
Ask yourselves, "Why are these individuals/groups (WEF, Trilateral Comission, CFR, WHO, BIS, The Fed, Bilderberg's, Gates, Musk, Soros, Bezos, Fauci, etc), who NO ONE voted for/elected...allowed to orchestrate, mandate, influence and direct the paths and realities of OUR lives?????"
So they can decide to release GMO mosquitos, do medical experimentation on Africans, push mass genetic experimentation on a global scale, influence and write plan/policies for how governments will manipulate their populations during planned and created emergencies/crises, plan and develop social engineering (15 min cities), engineer the climate and the list goes on and on...just because they are wealthy?????
Because of that wealth, which buys them power and position, we ALLOW them to dictate our live in these ways?
For those who say, "I resisted, they didn't dictate my life"...ok sure, I didn't get the jab either and I don't wear the mask, but they fundamentally changed the world you and I live in now...so they did affect you and and your children...and more is coming right around the corner.
Really, what we are collectively saying is, "as long as you have enough MONEY...you can decide anyone and their family are filthy useless eaters"...that's what we have told these self appointed "leaders".
When we ALLOW, these types (public figures, who accomplish things and are lauded for it) to go unfettered and unchecked, because we worship their fame, wealth and accomplishments, we bring about our own demise.
SCA you are correct about the dark side of Musk, but people play hero ball often and will ignore that side in order to reap the benefits, the flawed hero is bringing them.
My simple Musk example...People decried the twitter censorship/gov partnership...but in true stupid useless eater fashion, they didn't cancel their account...Hero Elon rides in and and they cheer...the tech savior releases docs and the people cheer again...The hero pulls on a darker cape but no one notices...the tech overlord Musk starts censoring people and the people make excuses and cheer..."well it's better now than it was". We always destroy ourselves, by providing them the opportunity to do so.
We deserve all that we are living through and will live through in the coming decades.
Shakespeare wrote "Madness in great ones must not unwatched go"
You can and should easily replace "Madness" with "Power".
the last two lines. brilliant
Thank you!
"Men who are bad fathers are bad men, regardless of anything they may accomplish in the public sphere on behalf of all the rest of humanity."
Exactly. This whole "have lots of babies" thing is stupid. Almost as stupid as these people who think they're making a statement by challenging gender roles/norms while living in a completely man-made [synthetic] environment... which is on par with someone jumping into a saltwater pool and acting like a badass because they float.
Having babies with a woman you don't see as a partner that you want to raise kids with is effectively littering [pun intended]... just leaving a mess for someone else to clean up.
Maybe I'm biased because my own father was one of those guys... I just don't think having babies for the sake of having babies is the answer at all — in fact, it kinda seems like a plan to speed up the decay... but maybe that's the plan, to return the plebs to their animal-state now that human labor isn't as necessary as it was in the past.
The modern day equivalents of this phenomena (hero worship, while disregarding their societal littering - great turn of phrase you coined by the way) are major league sports "athletes"...especially the NBA.
They have numerous offspring...as well as cases of rapes, murders, domestic violence, drug/weapons crimes and more...BUT they are "heroes".
In a society where actions have no consequence, spreading your seed as a means of recreation, becomes like playing a video game...when you're done you put the game console away, until the next time you're bored.
The societal consequence for this behavior are many, but one in particular, is the destruction of the nuclear family and all the underpinnings, that build healthy functioning societies.
Maybe over-analysis isn't necessary. Human nature doesn't change, no matter what synthetic toys we have to play with at any point in time. Whatever age we were born in is modernity, the brave new world, the stuff we could do that the ancestors couldn't do before us--and yet all the basics are always immutable--power and resources, who's got 'em, who doles 'em out to the followers one attracts and the workers/laborers/enforcers one controls.
Elon and Lindbergh would be the same personality types if they'd been lording over herds of cattle and breeding better horses with which to traverse their domains, and they'd've been attracting customers for those or people wanting to employ their expertise.
Not everyone's built for commitment, and if you got that restless gene, don't spread your seed so widely. Of course the women had agency too, and if they were swooning over the fake masculinity or wanted to get in on what they saw as a profitmaking venture, one way or another, they too were inflicting this on their children. No shortage of bad mothers either, who put the guys' needs, or their own, over their kids.
"Not everyone's built for commitment"
I kinda of agree with this, but in a roundabout way via rebuttal to this...
"Men who cannot form stable honest relationships with women are seriously damaged."
This implies that the women aren't involved in making a relationship work. In fact, I would argue that it's likely the "damaged" women who are getting "unexpectedly" knocked-up more often than it is "damaged" men "pumpin' & dumpin'" — evolutionarily, that's kinda their thing, but the gatekeeper still has to let them in.
Which brings me back to the "not built for commitment" part... while, on the surface it seems like a reasonable stance (when applied to *either party involved* in semi-modern context) — look up monogamous animals... most of them aren't mammals. Being in a long-term relationship with shared parental duties isn't really the norm. Do we know that humans haven't been "domesticated" [by other humans] like livestock because it makes them easier to manage in some way... like a corporation working 1000s of divergent people toward a single goal, while none of them actually know what that goal is, or that there even is one?
The concept of "teenager" is relatively new — it's only been about 100 years now that teenagers have even been a thing. Similarly, the idea of a husband-wife "team" [modern "family unit"] is also relatively new, though older. The idea of marrying for "love" is only 200ish years old — before then it was a contract of utility (status/class, rights, etc).
Humans used to live in tribes. As humans started living in more state-level societies (vs tribal), technology advanced, and [the need for] specialists emerged.. and with that the tribe started morphing into the "family" to pass down those specialties and keep them in "working memory" — and most importantly, to keep them benefiting the state.
The modern family is a remnant of that structure. But now that all knowledge is owned and maintained by corporations [the new church — remember: we used to farm on land owned by the church and they took payment from your harvest. Oh, and they "owned" all technology.. sound familiar?], there really isn't a need for that structuring of society. All knowledge is given to you by the state now, not handed down through families, and for the last 70-ish years the "family" has merely been an entity used to maintain balance in a system of exchange that keeps the state machine in motion and expanding to the point of nearly being inescapable today.
Anyway... my point being: men need to understand their role — but just like the proggy tiktoker who doesn't get that their gender nonsense wouldn't be tolerated in a hut, only a "home" — they need to understand their role *in context*. While we haven't gone back to our tribal state yet and have "elders" to look to, and fathers are no longer vector for knowledge of specialties that they once were (replaced by the state), they are still needed in this current societal arrangement not only for financial stability, but to also teach certain life skills... even as those life skills change before our eyes.
PS: I think what we experiencing currently is the point where technology has empowered the state so much that families are actually a hindrance and we're actually on a slow rollback to a neo-tribal social structure, or at the very least, neo-feudal... for the underclass, anyway.
Except even in the oldest written stories from many parts of the world, the concept of a loving couple devoted to each other unto old age and death is a powerful archetype. Many behaviors are recognized as ideal though ordinary people frequently fail badly at them.
It was a really, really bad idea for those grand feminist fighters to see basic male attributes as toxic. Shitty guys are shitty, rotten women are rotten, but millions and millions of decent ordinary people still have their basic instincts functioning despite every modern attempt to stifle them.
Picasso was a rotten father, so was Einstein for that matter. There have been/are good and bad father's/parents in every social class/society.
The problem imo is in our inherent tendency/compulsion
to idealized individuals for a specific achievents without ever balancing it with and acknowledging their shortcomings. Idk why this is so, I have no problem to admire a person for one attribute, without ignoring other parts of their character. But what works on individual level might not be "workable" on national scale hence, we create our heroes. They, btw, more times than not are themselves controlled and manipulated. And iconized (iconified?) We are strange lot, and these days doesn't take much to create them, heroes and celebrities galore
lol, maybe most people need them?
We're wired for hierarchal relationships. We wuz making clay and stone idols from the moment we started to use tools. The intangible frightens too many people. Even religions that technically prohibit worship of idols can't exterminate the need to create worship sites from tombs of formerly living human beings, because the Divine is just too far away for comfort.
There isn't *really* so much difference between a feast day celebrating some crazy person who mortified her flesh in purported adoration of God and some crazy Kardashian having a trazillion followers on Instagram. The nature of the need is the same.
"Except even in the oldest written stories from many parts of the world, the concept of a loving couple devoted to each other unto old age and death is a powerful archetype"
Yeah... written stories are some of the first technologies that enabled the emergent state-level societies I'm talking about.
BTW: I don't think we disagree, I just think we're looking at this with two different aperture settings.
Well, look at the tenderness and longing expressed in Neanderthal gravesites. Look at dogs languishing away for the dead master who's not there to feed them anymore while being unmoved by the kind people who are.
It's a basic norm to care ferociously for one's children yet people murder their children every day. In both primitive and purportedly sophisticated societies, cultural practices can work pretty hard against a healthy survival to adulthood.
You get good wolves, you get bad wolves. Any complex organism, as much can go wrong as goes right. Much more of life is luck than we want to acknowledge.
I agree with you 100% SCA!
The home is the first and most effective place to learn the lessons of life: truth, honor, virtue, self control, the value of education, honest work, and the purpose and privilege of life. Nothing can take the place of home in rearing and teaching children, and no worldly success can compensate for failure in the home
It takes two to tango. Christ instructed women to submit to their husbands and husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his Church. Seems like that would be a good formula for a healthy marriage and the best opportunity for children to be raised by a committed mother and father.
Thankfully we can reject that stupid logic because it comes from a religion and those are all cults. It is a good thing Musk attended his own church of self and listened to his own inner voice instead of taking his family to a weekly gathering of cult members, led by a local cult leader, that taught crazy beliefs from a book written and assembled by long dead cult members.
Yes, yes, crazy cultist beliefs should be rejected because realistically no one can know what the Truth really is. Sure, following those cultist beliefs will lead to a happy marriage and well adjusted children but we should reject them because some long dead members of that cult violated the fundamental tenants of their belief system and killed people. Makes perfect sense.
In the spirit of you vilifying great men for their personal failures I would like to take this opportunity to shit on Hedy Lamar. Sure, she invented WiFi, but she also took prescription meth and abused her children. Also, she was married to a Nazi. I hope we can all recognize this and agree that she was maybe talented but not a great woman.
Or maybe Jesus was yet another crazy Middle Eastern guy obsessed with the concept of prophethood, or maybe he was just a nice, decent Middle Eastern guy of the type the Romans couldn't stop themselves from murdering, and whom a couple of other guys in his crowd thought they could make book on, and did. Considering the popularity of Middle Eastern cults in general, 'n all that.
Could be. It's odd that following the things he taught leads to a happy life though.
Weird that those guys in his crowd were willing to die for the falsehoods they put in a book.
Guys and gals will die for all sorts of things, won't they?
Anyway I've missed you Danny; always fun to have you around.
Sure, but men generally won't die for things they don't believe in.
I couldn't stay away. It wouldn't be any fun if we all agreed on everything.
Yes of course they believe in the things they're willing to die for. That's not exactly the benchmark of trustworthiness.
Top notch post, Yuri.
How ironic that Lindbergh warned about the dangers of global air travel when he himself did much to promote said travel!
Much like Elon with AI. He says hes afraid of what AI will do, but has sped up its development at least in the use-case of self driving cars
AI is coming wether we want it or not. It will be our tool or our tyrant depending on how we develop it and how we use it. I think most people will allow themselves to be ruled by it, especially if and when an AI delivered blowjob feels like the real thing (or the AI convinces the end users that's what the real thing feels like.)
I would rather have someone like Musk, who recognizes and acknowledges the dangers developing AI than someone who does neither.
I'm hoping for the AI(s) portrayed in Neal Asher's "Polity" stories.
They see humans as their parents and decide to stick around for a while to take care of them --for fairly libertarian values of "take care of".
Wouldn't want to be "taken care of" like in "With Folded Hands" by Jack Williamson...
Another perspective of Lindbergh https://open.substack.com/pub/frederickrsmith/p/the-lindbergh-legacy-21-01-19
Great article filled with interesting facts. Too bad Musk is a piece of shit who likely works for the CIA or similar.
Yep....I'm blunt and spicy 🌶️ 🔥😏
CIA cardboard cutout.
Nice to see Woody Harrelson speak some truth on SNL, and to tie it into Comrade Yuri's piece today, Elon promptly point out the accuracy of Woody's satire.
https://twitchy.com/fuzzychimp-313137/2023/02/26/saturday-night-live-accidentally-made-a-funny-as-woody-harrelson-challenged-covid-canon/
Quite the tide turn. I try not to believe in things like controlled opposition, judicious levers on the dams, etc., but where was all this bravery when the smart set and their intellectual icons wanted all of us put in camps? Almost like they're seeing it's time to ensure no loss to the commercial values of the properties as the heretics aren't in exile any longer and might show up at the smart cocktail parties again.
Ok, I get the correlations of Lindbergh & Musk being notarieties of their times...I get that they both lost their firstborns, which makes me think that they were targeted by the illuminati, and then they both have anti-war and pro-freedom ideologies, semi-environmentalists, and not sure if they really are sincerely humanitarians...or love humanity...the lessons we can learn from their lives, though, is that even with fame and power, influence, and money, you cannot buy happiness nor immortality...substance, faith, becoming one with your partner, or being a stealth contributor on many levels to humanity in service of God's Will, may not get you the rewards here, and it sure does help your sanity, sleep at night, and fulfillment of accomplishment...what we are taught to value is not necessarily what will complete us...I also want to mention that this latest Elon is not acting like the old Elon, and I believe he's been replaced, as there's too many character changes that do not reconcile...carry on brave soldiers!
Great article, but not sure you realize the photo purportedly to be of Lindberg and his family is Joseph and Rose Kennedy and their family.
Did I miss it, or was there no "how to" in this? I mean, beyond: be rich and/or live in a time when you could impregnate anyone and not worry about the repercussions.
Most men I know would be ruined by the child support for just 2 kids... forget 9, to several women. Sure, someone like Elon isn't going to struggle at all, but... that's not reality for the vast majority of the planet. Surely there are better examples to follow.
Honestly, I'm confused about how so many people are absolutely convinced Elon a "good guy".... have you noticed that twitter isn't getting any better? In fact, Instagram and Facebook are now following Twitter's lead and charging for verification. I don't really see how that's an improvement.
Yes, the "twitter files" were neat, but... 1) anyone who's been paying attention knew almost all that already — confirmation was nice, but.. 2) literally nothing happened as a result.... so, big deal!
Being hated by Democrats really doesn't mean anything... it's all show. George Bush Jr and Michelle Obama are buddies now. They're all on the same team. Don't be surprised if you see Trump and Obama hanging out in 5 years.
Great points David.
When Musk carried his sink through the door and people on this platform and others were awash in tribal orgasms, I dutifully pointed out in comments and a post, that Musk is a business guy. His intention was not to climb down from a cross, and save the twitter users from the evil of "the system". Twitter was and is a revenue generating vehicle to him...plain and simple. It is also a tech platform to further develop and launch future REVENUE generating products and ideas.
Musk's PR strategy (everything up to and including his walk through the front doors) was well planned and brilliant. It produced the expected and wanted knee jerk reaction from the masses.
What is missed is, he openly proved that people en masse are indeed, just stupid sheeple. I often wonder if his wry grin, is a sign of that realization.
I like Truth Social much better than Twitter
Isn’t that a photo of the Kennedy family, not Lindbergh?
Lindbergh was known to criticize that group that you're not supposed to criticize.
I wonder if Musk will do the same.
He already did and was forced to go grovel in Israel and Poland for forgiveness.
" Lindbergh became the most famous human on the planet after becoming the first to fly across the Atlantic in 1927." He may have been the first to make the flight that year, but in 1919 "The U.S. Navy achieved the first transatlantic flight eight years before Charles Lindbergh became world famous for crossing the Atlantic nonstop and alone." (https://pioneersofflight.si.edu/content/first-flight-across-atlantic)
I have no idea how many of your other statements are accurate.