“What these competition-worshipping mammonites don’t understand about Rogerism…”
Whoa, dude. You just created a new meme. Rogerism. Are you a Rogerist? Awesome. Imma gonna use that in some comments on conservative boards and see if’n I can trolley the beJesus out of some cucks.
Oh yeah? Well my 10 year old is in my refrigerator.
Oh yeah? Well my 10 year old is in my 10 year old refrigerator.
Etc.
My god, they’re just a gaggle of yahoos.
To paraphrase Boy George: They obviously need a good Rogering.
As we also see sometimes in this BBS, there are some people that are not interested in cooperating, they just want to win, be in society, in the economy, or in an argument. It’s not only that they don’t understand people like Mr. Rogers, it’s that they see them as a threat to their deeply ingrained and selfish belief system. But they are the ones that threaten the well being of society as a whole.
… and let them see the error of their ways.
(I’m not holding my breath, but hope springs eternal.)
Oddly enough, that is exactly what the reigning clique in the GDR tried to do after they had built the Berlin Wall. Sort of freeze it in an eternal state of late 1950ies.
Seriously, if you’re ever in Berlin, go and see Erich Mielke’s office at the Stasi HQ; it’s part of a museum now. You see it, and a lot of pieces suddenly just fall into place.
possibly band name for descedents of the skilletlickers
Today’s Martin Luther? Really? It’s not like Mr. Rogers called for Jews to be locked inside their synagogues and burnt to death. Martin Luther did. (see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies)
Y’know, boss, I knew I liked you for a reason.
Maybe. Animated gore warning.
To paraphrase Alistair Campbell: “If you offend Fox News (the original was the Daily Mail in the UK) then you’re doing something right!”.
There’s a story behind that. It was part of a song he was singing to some kids, that went through all the different fingers. He wasn’t trying to flip anyone the bird.
In case anyone missed it the last time, it’s some version of this fingerplay (piggyback tune is Frere Jacques)
Where is thumbkin, where is thumbkin?
Here I am! Here I am!
How are you today, sir? Very well I thank you.
Run away. Run away.
Where is pointer? …
Where is tall man? …
As we also see sometimes in this BBS, there are some people that are not interested in cooperating, they just want to win, be in society, in the economy, or in an argument. It’s not only that they don’t understand people like Mr. Rogers, it’s that they see them as a threat to their deeply ingrained and selfish belief system. But they are the ones that threaten the well being of society as a whole.
Had to have a version of this talk with my third graders just a few months ago because (up until that point) some of them couldn’t make it through a specific Beatles song without falling out of their chairs in nervous giggle-fits.
There are people of all ages for whom even just hearing the word “love” in a non-ironic, non-romantic, non-sexualized context is super threatening. What does this word actually mean?
Poets and philosophers (and more recently, psychologists) have asked that question time and again. I myself think that the act of contemplation itself is a good thing.
I don’t think those things are in conflict. People who are high on their own importance but who don’t display any behaviours that align with that importance are performing high self-esteem as a way of avoiding feeling shame or fear. Narcissists aren’t happy self-actualized people.
A person who genuinely has high self-esteem will work hard to achieve things, will appreciate their success and will take failure as an opportunity to do better next time.
I think there’s this weird idea that if a person was genuinely happy with themselves they might rest on that. I think it’s an idea held by people who aren’t happy and who don’t know what happiness is really like. Happy people do things.
Mr. Rogers! You evil Somma bitch!
What you are saying is mostly true, “but”.
I consider myself one of those happy people. And yes, I do things. But I do most of those things because I feel like doing stuff, not because I want to achieve something else. If I ever do stuff that I don’t want to do, my goal is to maximize happiness and not career achievements. So I’m not only writing the software that my employer pays me for, I also write software that I find fun to write on the side, I learn languages that I will never need professionally, I play the piano and I volunteer for the scouts (not the Boy Scouts of America, rest assured). I could instead focus on rising through company ranks or maybe join a promising startup. But I like it the way it is.
I do know people who have half the talent I have at my profession, but who are at the same level or even ahead of me career-wise, because they actually care about stuff like careers and bring sacrifices for it. In my experience, they are not happier than I am. But they might end up with more money.
I happen to be privileged in that I have marketable talents; I never needed to spend effort studying it, but just by playing around with things that interested me, I became a sufficiently good software engineer so that I don’t need to worry about getting a sufficiently well-paying job.
But that’s just luck - does everyone have the privilege of not really worrying about their career? Or are there also people whose long-term happiness would actually benefit from having moderate amounts of that conservative “the world owes you nothing - you need to prove yourself” ethic instilled in them?
…I have some disappointing news about the “Futility Closet” podcast…
