01 December 2019

Antinatalism by Ken Coates - Buddha, Schopenhauer, Zapffe and Benatar

There is a book I have finished about antinatalism called Anti-Natalism: Rejectionist Philosophy from Buddhism to Benatar which I highly recommend people read as the Kindle version is available for purchase for only $4. It provides a very detailed and accessible explanation of what antinatalism is. It also talks about similar philosophies e.g. Buddhism.

Buddhism speaks about how life is suffering and that this can be overcome by going through a process to reach enlightenment. In contrast, Arthur Schopenhaur believes you should "deny the will to live" in order to reach this enlightenment and not suffer. But I am more included to the teachings of Peter Wessel Zapffe. Zapffe talks about how most people just use distraction etc to take their mind off existential dread but this is just delusion.

Ultimately life is suffering and to reduce suffering, we should stop children, as David Benatar suggests.

17 August 2019

In a Propertocracy like Australia, you Should have Some Exposure to Property

Many people think Australia is a country free of corruption. Corruption is something only poor countries have. However, my hypothesis is that corruption is just as deep in developed countries. The only difference is that the corruption in developed countries is formalised into the system. The corruption is woven into the establishment, so the elite of the country own nice buildings, drive nice cars, and live in nice houses, which puts an aura of legitimacy around their dealings. Humans are naturally snobbish. We evolved that way to increase the probability of survival. Those who ally themselves with the powerful are protected from enemies. Because snobbery is a natural part of our DNA, we are more likely to believe the rich and trust their rationalisations for why their corrupt dealings are legitimate.

The attempts by government, banks and regulators to prop up the property market in the past year has exposed this corruption for all to see. We live in a propertocracy. Government depends on property for taxes. Politicians invest in property. Banks rely on property for profit. Regulators will relax standards for property. Unions need a property boom to keep their workers employed and collect funding from industry superannuation funds, with the funds under management into these industry super funds growing higher and higher as union workers continue to be employed mostly in constructiom jobs. Central banks will lower interest rates and print money to prop up property.

The entire establishment is geared towards propping up property. As such, it makes sense to have some exposure to property, but not too much. Also diversify into stocks, bonds and gold. You don't need to stop eating avocado toast or drinking almond lattes to afford an investment property. Just live with your parents or flatmates forever and never have children.

13 March 2019

Flexible Working vs Social Media

Another example of how biased everyone is to natalism can be found in different attitudes to flexible working and social media even though both are similar in that they are electronic means of bringing people together.

Society seems to be against social media and dating apps because it seems impersonal and doesn't bring people together. Usually with dating apps or social media, it creates an abundance of opportunities and so people hold out for something better. It creates higher expectations. It is bad for relationships and so contributes to less serious pair bonding and less breeding. It is against natalism, so people are against it.

However, flexible working enables people to work at home while taking care of the children. It is pro-natalist and so is looked upon favourably even though arguably flexible working pretty much has the same limitations that social media has vs real life interaction.

People are for face-to-face interaction when it comes to personal life, family, children, etc but when it comes to work people are against face-to-face interaction. This is a double standard.

16 February 2019

Romantic Love is Superficial

I actually didn’t even know it was Valentine’s Day until someone mentioned it at work in the morning. I hate the day because it makes me feel lonely. People talk about relationships as being very virtuous and profound, but in reality relationships are very superficial. Attraction is based on superficial things like good looks, slenderness, hip-to-waist ratio, income, wealth, what car you drive, whether you own a big house, etc. When you really think about it, relationships celebrate all that is ugly about humanity e.g. greed, superficiality, and domination. Men seek to signal how dominant they are and women seek to attach themselves to dominant men in order to breed and overpopulate the world thereby destroying the environment and contributing to overpopulation. On one hand, I hate relationships, but I am only human, so I do have a hunger for female intimacy just like I have a hunger for food. The challenge is in satiating my desire for female intimacy in both a low-cost manner as well as an ethical manner. There is also a despair that comes from the realisation that love is nothing more than a delusion built by evolutionary forces that drives procreation. However, hope feels better than despair, which is why we cling to the idea that there is someone out there who is perfect and is meant for us and who will love us for who we are.