Social Atomization and Social Capital

recondite at tuta.io recondite at tuta.io
Mon Jun 8 21:04:35 PDT 2020


Jun 7, 2020, 16:22 by punks at tfwno.gf:

> On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 06:35:40 +0200 (CEST)
> recondite at tuta.io wrote:
>
>
>
>> For example, most of us don’t need to trust a farmer to deliver food that isn’t poisoned because in the US we have the FDA
>>
>
> if you believe that sort of bullshit I have a nice shinny bridge to sell you.
>
>
> >I don’t think this is a bad evolution in society, to the contrary, I think it’s a net benefit for all involved.
>
>
>  then you don't know what you're talking about. 
>
>
> >Therefore, the declining amount of social capital needed in our society for it to function is good for our economic production
>
>
>  no, it's only good for the ruling class. 
>
>  “Working from Home Post-Coronavirus Will Give Bosses Greater Control of Workers’ Lives”
>
>  that's right and that's what the Fascist Flu Farce is all about. 
>
>  last but not least, jargon like 'atomization' and 'social capital' is not useful. I suggest you frame it in the actual terms of political control and government crime. 
>

I know people bitch about your critique but I was hoping to get your opinion, although I don't get the bridge reference, you'll have to baby step me to the shiny bridge theorem. 

I don't know much about the FDA other than their "official goals" which is a shame, I'll be rewriting that.

Adding a subheading about the political control and government crime aspect is now on my list but it's a sociology piece overall and my personal area of focus is on the psychological, that's why I don't think it should be framed in a complete political/governmental focus. 

The jargon I can defend as well. I think we should all practice being as specific as possible in the language we use. Now, I define how I'm using the terms before I get into the substance of the article, which almost declassify the jargon for my readers/listeners. If we made it common practice in conversation and discourse to step back and make sure the terms we're using have the same meaning then everyone could avoid a whole shitload of frustration. I watch it play out all the time socially, I can't tell you how many times I've stopped a group conversation where two friends were using the same words in different contexts and fighting over a concept built off of the two separate definitions. Neither noticed and once they were on the same page the controversy completely ends 9/10 times. My neo-lib-leisure-class ex was the 1/10 10/10 times so maybe some are lost b/c she was moderate on the neo-lib-leisure-class scale; that would be the group to de-jargonize for and get as foundational and governmental/political with since that's the language they speak but not my cup of tea.





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 3479 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20200609/102cc938/attachment.txt>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list