Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Added image.
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@apaz-cli
apaz-cli committed Apr 18, 2024
1 parent 292311e commit fb8b903
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 15 changed files with 162 additions and 145 deletions.
131 changes: 68 additions & 63 deletions blog/Grifters-unstyled.html
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,61 +8,65 @@
</head>
<body>
<h1 id="grifters">Grifters</h1>
<p>Forgive me, but today we will talk about politics. I will be speaking
in hyperbole. Note that for every broad generalization that I make there
is bound to be a counterexample, and for every simplification an
elaboration. But this is, for the most part, what I believe.</p>
<p>America was founded by and run by the Puritans. Religious freedom was
very very important to them, because they were exiled to and branded as
heretics by multiple different countries before they were essentially
<p><br></p>
<p><img src="images/Thailand%20Countryside%20Pixel%203.png" /></p>
<hr>
<p>    Forgive me, but today we will be talking about politics. I will
be speaking in hyperbole. Note that for every broad generalization that
I make there is bound to be a counterexample, and for every
simplification an elaboration. But this is, for the most part, what I
believe.</p>
<p>    America was founded by and run by the Puritans. Religious freedom
was very very important to them, because they were exiled to and branded
as heretics by multiple different countries before they were essentially
kicked off the continent. They, rightfully, believed that nobody should
have to experience that. That religious freedom should be a fundamental
right.</p>
<p>But once they got to America, at some point things changed. Once they
established their own society, suddenly there were religious in groups
and out groups again. They enforced their way of life, and at one point
even hunted their own as witches. Is religious freedom really what they
wanted? Or did they just want freedom for themselves?</p>
<p>There are innumerable examples of this. Maybe it's the nature of
<p>    But once they got to America, at some point things changed. Once
they established their own society, suddenly there were religious in
groups and out groups again. They enforced their way of life, and at one
point even hunted their own as witches. Is religious freedom really what
they wanted? Or did they just want freedom for themselves?</p>
<p>    There are innumerable examples of this. Maybe it's the nature of
societies. Maybe it's the nature of individuals. Perhaps new generations
are in general worse at acting upon the ideals of the previous, even if
they are adept at enforcing the inherited cultural norms and policies. I
don't know. Whatever the case, it seems like we never learn this
lesson.</p>
<p>It seems that, as they gain control of the cultural narrative, the
previously downtrodden don't want to reform the system so that nobody
gets stepped on. They just don't want to be stepped on anymore. If
possible, they may even like to wear the boot one day. Nothing changes
structurally, and so the stepping continues.</p>
<p>From time to time, I've been astonished at the foresight of the
<p>    It seems that, as they gain control of the cultural narrative,
the previously downtrodden don't want to reform the system so that
nobody gets stepped on. They just don't want to be stepped on anymore.
If possible, they may even like to wear the boot one day. Nothing
changes structurally, and so the stepping continues.</p>
<p>    From time to time, I've been astonished at the foresight of the
founding fathers. Other times less astonished. A lot of them owned
slaves, after all. The deepest hypocrisy imaginable. But perhaps the
Declaration of Independence says it best. Life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness. The duty of government is to maximize things, for all
citizens. Failure to optimize for these things is, in my mind, a failure
to commit to the American cultural ideals. There should be no boot.</p>
<p>All that I've said so far is, I feel, fairly incontrovertible by our
cultural standards. Now let's get controversial. I think that these
<p>    All that I've said so far is, I feel, fairly incontrovertible by
our cultural standards. Now let's get controversial. I think that these
three objectives, life, liberty, and the right to pursue happiness, are
a philosophical razor which cut to the core of many social issues
today.</p>
<p>Gender is perhaps the most obvious application of the new (old)
<p>    Gender is perhaps the most obvious application of the new (old)
razor. People need the liberty to figure out (or save) their life and
pursue their happiness. The degree to which the existence of queer
people affects the lives of people who may have a problem with their
queerness is relatively minuscule. Therefore to maximize the life,
liberty, and ability to pursue happiness of all citizens, we should be
supportive.</p>
<p>On the other side of the political spectrum, I think it's naive to
dismiss the fact that an entire culture has grown up around the idea of
gun ownership. These people want to maximize their happiness too, and
<p>    On the other side of the political spectrum, I think it's naive
to dismiss the fact that an entire culture has grown up around the idea
of gun ownership. These people want to maximize their happiness too, and
fear the destruction of their micro-culture. Then again, the government
does have the right to maximize the life of its citizens. I don't have
strong opinions on gun control, but I feel that we're approaching the
problem from entirely the wrong angle. We are talking past each other.
We should be trying to understand the culture and motivations of our
counterparty.</p>
<p>Housing is another application of the razor. Zoning rules and red
<p>    Housing is another application of the razor. Zoning rules and red
tape make it difficult and expensive to build new housing units,
especially the sort of low cost high density ones which could bring down
the cost of living in the areas where they're needed most. This pushes
Expand All @@ -71,25 +75,25 @@ <h1 id="grifters">Grifters</h1>
are not being maximized here. Therefore, these laws are bad. It's a
shame that nobody in a position to actually change things wants to bring
down the cost of living. I'm left wondering why we put up with this.</p>
<p>Nowadays, it feels like everyone is conspiring to juice each other
for dollars. Capitalism has to pick winners and losers, and nobody wants
to lose. It's no wonder why even the ones who have money want to accrue
more of it, there's always another vying for their position. While there
are plenty of ideologues who would take issue with there being winners
and losers. I've accepted it. But I wish that it wasn't such a zero sum
game.</p>
<p>It's not supposed to be. In "The Wealth of Nations," Adam Smith said
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society
more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Basically,
that greed does societal good, more so than trying to help society
directly. Growing the business is supposed to grow the economy, which
raises the standard of living. A story we've all heard before. This
probably used to be the case, but looking around, it's getting harder
and harder to believe Adam Smith in the modern day. It turns out that
creating real lasting value is hard. It's much easier to grift, or to
skim off the top, or to squeeze a monopoly. And capitalism rewards
<p>    Nowadays, it feels like everyone is conspiring to juice each
other for dollars. Capitalism has to pick winners and losers, and nobody
wants to lose. It's no wonder why even the ones who have money want to
accrue more of it, there's always another vying for their position.
While there are plenty of ideologues who would take issue with there
being winners and losers. I've accepted it. But I wish that it wasn't
such a zero sum game.</p>
<p>    It's not supposed to be. In "The Wealth of Nations," Adam Smith
said "By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the
society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it."
Basically, that greed does societal good, more so than trying to help
society directly. Growing the business is supposed to grow the economy,
which raises the standard of living. A story we've all heard before.
This probably used to be the case, but looking around, it's getting
harder and harder to believe Adam Smith in the modern day. It turns out
that creating real lasting value is hard. It's much easier to grift, or
to skim off the top, or to squeeze a monopoly. And capitalism rewards
efficiency.</p>
<p>Many fortunes have been made over the past twenty years in real
<p>    Many fortunes have been made over the past twenty years in real
estate. "Investors" (speculators) buy houses, prices go up, and now the
houses are worth more. Often they rent them out, then take out loans
against the value of these houses, and rinse and repeat until they have
Expand All @@ -103,41 +107,42 @@ <h1 id="grifters">Grifters</h1>
investors" and houses instead of NFT profile pictures on Twitter and
digital coins with dogs on them. That is to say, the speculators are
playing with people's lives and livelihoods.</p>
<p>More sophisticated investment vehicles do not do the world any
<p>    More sophisticated investment vehicles do not do the world any
modicum of good either. I'm not referring to just mortgage-backed
securities. Finance makes up 8% of the US economy. Why? Surely finance
has a place, but this is ridiculous. It doesn't produce anything. How
many talented students have left promising fields to toil in this
bottomless pit? Even Warren Buffet has commented that this is a
gargantuan waste of talent, and society would be better served if their
talents were directed elsewhere.</p>
<p>How many advancements have we given up on for the privilege of
<p>    How many advancements have we given up on for the privilege of
shuffling money around? How many cures? Why does it matter who exactly
holds onto the pile of money if nothing ever changes structurally? How
many people have had to say goodbye to their family members early
because of innovation that didn't happen? Don't even get me started on
the perverse incentives in healthcare. I don't need to elaborate, you
already know what the problem is. More grifters. And they're killing
people, and we can't seem to do a thing about it.</p>
<p>I feel like, if we Americans still believed in our founding ideals,
we would not stand for this zero sum thinking. We would recognize what's
happening, awaken whatever's left of our political consciousness, oust
the grifters, and maximize the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness
for all Americans, and ideally all people in general. The current system
deprives us of these rights, or at least doesn't enable us to pursue
them to the extent that it could. It seems that we're no better than the
Puritans. And sadly, grifting for campaign money is a prerequisite for
getting into office. We're so fucked.</p>
<p>I hope that we all make it. I got out from under the boot, and I hope
you do too. But once you do, don't put on the boot. Don't hate, don't
grift, and don't try to regulate your competition. That would make you a
truly detestable and pathetic human being. If you're complicit in this
grifting behavior, and you have the choice not to be, then don't be. Go
do something that actually produces value of some sort, any sort. Even
if you make less money. If it meant that the world would be a
<p>    I feel like, if we Americans still believed in our founding
ideals, we would not stand for this zero sum thinking. We would
recognize what's happening, awaken whatever's left of our political
consciousness, oust the grifters, and maximize the life, liberty, and
pursuit of happiness for all Americans, and ideally all people in
general. The current system deprives us of these rights, or at least
doesn't enable us to pursue them to the extent that it could. It seems
that we're no better than the Puritans. And sadly, grifting for campaign
money is a prerequisite for getting into office. We're so fucked.</p>
<p>    I hope that we all make it. I got out from under the boot, and I
hope you do too. But once you do, don't put on the boot. Don't hate,
don't grift, and don't try to regulate your competition. That would make
you a truly detestable and pathetic human being. If you're complicit in
this grifting behavior, and you have the choice not to be, then don't
be. Go do something that actually produces value of some sort, any sort.
Even if you make less money. If it meant that the world would be a
structurally better place, I would live under a bridge. Actually though,
it works the opposite way. To change the world, I first need to obtain
power.</p>
<p>What's the easiest way to gain power? Ah yeah, to grift. Fuck.</p>
<p>    What's the easiest way to gain power? Ah yeah, to grift.
Fuck.</p>
</body>
</html>
Loading

0 comments on commit fb8b903

Please sign in to comment.