How Life Changes as Human Settlements Grow

Volunteering dies out as community grows from small town into big city, just like baby teeth fall of as a person grows

Take a village or a small town (5k people something), there are hardly enough people to for a town this small to function as a community so everyone there is valuable. Towns only doctor, mechanic and grocer are self-explanatory, but in a town this small even a local village idiot who only does stupid shit is valuable as a source of entertainment as without him there will be none.

In a town like this every person lost is a significant material loss. Regardless weather person died or moved to real city, the function they used to fulfil is no longer fulfilled and everyone loses as a result.

That is why in small towns people volunteer to help each other out. That keeps people happy and prevents them from leaving for a better place. Just as much as you help out others, one day you yourself will need help and they in turn will be there to help you out. You both benefit from this arrangement. That is just how life in small towns is.

In big city is polar opposite. There are plenty of people to do all sorts of work or fulfil any role community could possibly need or want. If a city doctor dies the city will not go without healthcare as there are plenty of other doctors to fill the void. If anything, other doctors will be happy that there is no competition, and they will make more money. Village idiots are handled by police as there is real entertainment and we do not want any disruptions of our peace.

In big city everyone is replaceable and no one will miss you if you are gone (moved out or dead). Sure, we mourn dead in cities, but it's more of a social obligation then a real tragedy. What is valuable is not a person but their possessions. That is why inheritance battles are so fierce.

City is not short on people but short on space, assets and such. A nice home and a piece of land in a good location is an asset so valuable people will literarily kill each other over it. In a small town no one will care if you just build your home on some empty spot next to someone, they will even help you build. However, in cities every piece of land is already owned by someone and used in certain way. If you want any you have to pay.

People in cities do not help each other precisely because other people are not an asset that makes community, but competitors for that limited space and resources that are still available. The bigger the city is, the more nuisance other people are. That is why people call NYC rotten apple or a saying that Moscow does not believe in tears. It's a concrete jungle.

Many other things, including political views and even birth rates do stem from this basic reality of life in the country or city. Country people have more kids precisely because they have both spaces to populate and community to build, thus every new member is an asset rather than liability. On the other hand, city dwellers who struggle to afford housing do not breed. If they themselves have no place to call their own, where their kids will go. It's not a psyop or Zionist Masonic Illuminati conspiracy to displace White people, just a simple socio-economic reality.

This development is unidirectional. Country will always want more services and better community and that means more people. Because of that they will always breed and attract immigration. Their towns will grow into cities. As they grow, they will undergo changes in the way people function and see themselves and society around them. That is why once town reaches certain size, volunteering gradually disappears as new reality makes it unnecessary.

In the same way people who grew up in country can move into city but people who grew up in city cannot move into country. They can move into smaller city, but not that much smaller than where they originally from. City provides certain level of support for every inhabitant and people cannot reasonably function without it. Pol Pot experiments in Cambodia clearly show us that.

Since people's minds are reflexive, they tend to keep the same thinking pattern they established in their youth. Such conservatism is suitable in stable community, whose size remains the same, but if the town of 100k grew into 2m city as you grew older, then it's far too outdated. We have so many disagreements between different generations precisely because life changed a lot compared to 60 or 40 years ago. Old ways no longer work, yet old people still push them onto young people. That will not end well.

Humans breeding or not comes not from wealth, education, tech development, and such but from a simple fact of availability of space. When space to populate is available humans instinctively breed more, when it's all full no space left, humans do not breed. People who spam twitter with population decline tweets should instead figure us out Planet Two because without it birth rates will not go up.

How and Why Christian Right Have Created Woke Left and Cancel Culture

 

Modern political discourse is often defined as a conflict between Christian Right and Liberal Woke Left. Woke left often proposes some radical "progressive" idea and Christian Right immediately refute it. 

As Christian Right refute another woke idea, Christian Nationalists never fail to present themselves as voice of reason against dangerous radicals that seek to destroy West and White Civilization. At first glance it sounds alright. Most Woke politicians and ideas are indeed insane and destructive. One can hardly see Woke as anything other than a clown show. If that is what Woke really believes. it is only reasonable to oppose Woke. 

However, does opposing Woke make Christian Right your friend and natural ally? At first glance it does. Our political system often works with two parties, so we get used to the idea of choosing one option out of two available. In this case if one opposed to Woke, one should side with its enemies, right?

However Christian Right is full of their own bullshit. The more you look at them, the more you think that they are their own clown show, only marginally less insane than Woke they so oppose. One would even question if supporting them is really choosing the lesser of two evils.

However, if you think outside of the box, you can question the whole premise of lesser of two evils. There are plenty of 3rd party politicians with actually sane agenda, like Andrew Yang. Why not support them instead of choosing whether you prefer a clown show on the left of the right? 

However, why there are clowns on both sides of pollical divide? If you think about it even further, then you will notice that Christian Right and Woke have a lot more similarities that initially apparent. Sure, they theoretically stand for opposing points of view, but arguments they both made are surprisingly similar. Both slap their opponents with weird and insulting labels, call them stupid and more. Both misquote sources they hardly even read, much less understand. Both scaremonger audience with impending social collapse and such. Far too many similarities between two bitter rivals.

Could it be that Christian Right and Woke are really one and the same?

The answer is Yes and here I will explain why?

Christian Right is of course the original ideology. Their Christian ideology is outdated and sound ridiculous to a modern person. No one in their sane mind will ever support something like this.

If all Christians were as stupid as their ideology, it would have long died out or existed solely on the margins of society with no more than 0.1% support.

However not all Christians are stupid, or if they really are, they have found themselves a really smart allies in form of the rich who want lower taxes and regulations. If Christians themselves could not understand it, the rich clearly understood that no one will support Christian clown show for the face value of their ideas.

However, that does not mean nothing could be done about it. If they could device an ideology that is more insane, contrarian, and absurd than Christian Nationalism, then they can present Christian Nationalism as a lesser of two evils. With ideology like this they could convince public to, if not support Christian Nationalism for what it stands, at least support it because it's better than the alternative. 

Having figured out that much, Christian Nationalists went on to create Woke and Cancel culture as a straw man opponent for themselves. Ever since we see the clown shit storm show, where one clows oppose other for being more insane than they are, and even taking sides in this circus battle.

Woke claims to be lefty, socialist, progressive, liberal and many more things. In reality its none of these things. Woke is merely a strawman psy op for Christian Right. They are no ally for actual liberals or leftists. Woke ideology is deliberately engineered to be so toxic that it will destroy anyone who will associate with it. Thus, any liberals or leftists are making terrible mistake by associating or accepting Woke as part of their ideologies, movements and parties.

Instead, true liberals and even socialists should clearly refute Woke as having nothing to do with them or their ideology, social movement and parties. Failure to do so will result in losing voters and supporters to ideologies that oppose Woke, such as radical right.

We have already seen it happening twice. Donald Trump won against both Hillary Clinton and Camalla Harris because both were too Woke and that repealed voters. In contrast non-Woke Biden could beat Trump simply because he is not Woke.

It is pretty clear that Woke repeal voters and make people support those who oppose it. Because of that every genuine liberal, social democratic and leftist movement should make a decisive effort to disassociate themselves from Woke and refute them as fake leftists who secretly work for Christian Right. Failure to do so will see liberals continue to lose votes to the insane radicals on the right.