It might not be for you, but it got me at a young age and you do get used to it. There really is a “flow state” to Tetris, where it can feel like you’re just noticing the pieces and they’re almost moving on their own.
When you’re a kid this is that one aunt who gives you their undivided attention, and asks you follow-up questions that show they’re really listening, and you feel validated for the first time ever.
It just means we have to do a bit of extra labour to make sure our movements are not infiltrated by shitbirds. I was just at a protest this weekend, and was pleased by the handful of signs I saw specifically denouncing anti-semitism.
Yes, it sucks that we have to throw in what feels like a parenthetical, while people are bleeding out under tonnes of rubble, but y’know, I guess that’s just where we’re at as a species right now.
I don’t think we’re disagreeing, but I’m thinking of like a somewhat friendly rivalry between, like, two teams of tool makers to outdo each other in design or production efficiencies. Like the kind of stuff that people get up to at work or play, naturally.
I’m no economist, but that doesn’t sound like market competition to me. At least there is no driving force behind it, other than human nature, or maybe like an ad hoc competition for kudos or esteem.
I think we might be mixing up our micros and macros. Seems like some people will enjoy competition and outdoing each other no matter the extrinsic (or lack thereof) rewards. That’s how it is now, anyway.
I feel like if we could get everyone’s basic needs met, then human ambition would fill in the gaps. Not for everyone of course, but that’s the case right now - needing money doesn’t necessarily make you more ambitious.
I wonder if we would have gone in that direction without a profit motive, or if I dimmer bulb would have been “good enough” if it meant we’d have to spend less resources on bulbs (and making them) overall.
Agreed. Rereading it, I now see how my statement about “using capitalism” sounds like I’m advocating maintaining it in some capacity. Poor phrasing on my part.
I meant simply that it’s uncontroversial to recognise that we’re living under capitalism presently, but that’s just our starting position. That even if you think socialism or communism “needs capitalism” (debatable, academic), well that’s step #1 out of the way already, because we’ve got it, so now what?
Now it’s my bad. I didn’t mean to imply anything about your intent. Your goodwill is pretty clear from everything else you wrote. Just wanted to add a little asterisk there, for other readers.
That is legitimately one school of thought, as I’ve heard it, yes. I’m not so sure about it myself, but we’ve definitely got capitalism – no one’s going to argue that – so we may as well use it to the advantage of human flourishing.