You should collect all your essays into a book. Or someone should do it for you. Your writing in the last decade has had a huge impact on my life. The power of inception. In a practical sense you helped me make big steps in the 'competition' and your article encouraging 'completing a project' contributed to some of my biggest life changes. Thank you for your words.
I transitioned into teaching after I left the sales world for 3 years (hated the grind lol) but now I’m a licensed stem and Spanish teacher, all because of the grind. I think one thing your article could add is that finding the correct goal to grind towards is so much more important than how you grind. I teach my kids “ganas” (doing the things you don’t want to do, but know you must do) It takes less ganas to grind when you enjoy what you do!
I totally agree with this. And it is what bugs me a little about the article. It considers we would all want the same things that are in limited supply. It still place the desire of the hypothetical person in a capitalistic ( is that a word? sorry , not born speaking english) mindset, even in a iddylic island. What about finding your place, learning to value peeling potatoes and the other 90% of the women, ( and learning to value them for something other than their beauty or the social status they confer) , and teaching young one to do so... Of doing thing because you like them and then becoming good at it out of passion. Or, in
a less utopic way: Of finding the equilibrium: enough competition to build your little non competitive place in the world ( I write from a country with a lot of social aids available, so it's doable). It would be so so interesting to link all this to : sex wars, matriarcal society and the way they don't enhance competition, nor sexual exclusivity^^. Because let's face it, and M. Wong/Pargin wrote also about it: this competion, is a lot more about getting the girl and bragging about it, than about writing poetry. I agree that competition is something to be aware of, and to indulge in when needed. I don't agree it is the only way possible. And interestingly enough: yes matriacal societies seems to fail when in presence of a more competitive culture, since they don't seem to understand it and are less technologicaly evolved ( always a problem in case of wars). But they also seem to be more equalitarian and environment friendly. I say "seem" because I failed to find a lot of studies about it.
At work I took a promotion that would be a harder role but the main benefit, besides a small pay bump, is increased visibility to leadership. Sometimes I think it's weird that I think in terms of social gerymandering but it certainly has been helpful. I did play sports, and a lot of board games. I think it helps, especially as a woman in the corporate world to think that every interaction is a move in a game.
Yes, it's interesting you say " as a woman". Because the view on competition seems to depends a lot on gender. You talk about leadership instead of being at the top. And somehow the article may not fully translate between genders. I , for one, never felt the need to grind to have the 10% best man. The movies didn't teach us we will win one at the end if we are competitive enough; It teached us to do our hair and make up and be in a difficult position awaiting a savior. ( erk..)
The CEOs attention is a resource that you compete for in a work setting. I think most men are taught some version of this and women are not quite clued in. If your competent then you will pick up on it pretty fast but there is a difference in do a good job to get noticed, and make sure your getting noticed doing a good job. It's a bit cynical, but like the article mentions it's how you get ahead. There for sure is a difference too if your not actually doing a good job and just pretending too. Guys get away with that more often I have noticed but women do it too.
It might be very strange but the movie that I think effected me the most in my romantic life is Red Sonja? I was born in the 90s so I have less princess tropes to deal with but the idea that you don't get with anyone who is not as good as you or better really stuck with me as a teen. Though, that can get you stuck in the idea that no one is better then you but that's a separate problem lol.
The oppositional defiance I experienced whilst reading this article, whilst unable to come up with any relevant counterpoints, is probably testament to the fact that the author has a pretty good point. Damn him. But also: thank you very much for a lesson I never previously learned, but will be ruminating about for a while...
This is a great essay. I was a nerdy non-sports guy, but I didn't avoid competition. I just focused on competitions that I could win, and, if I couldn't win, at least show up for some prize money. That ruled out anything that involved throwing or catching a ball or hitting someone real hard, though I somehow acquired a reputation for knocking out a local tough guy. I knew had brains and leadership ability, so I competed in those areas. There were lots of payoffs and lots of ways to win.
My father used to rag me because I wasn't into "competition", but I was. It was just that the competitions I chose and how I competed weren't about winning the one big score. I've known people who got into those competitions, and I've even been in a few of them myself though usually for strategic reasons. I never wanted to focus that narrowly or work quite that hard. I retired decades ago in my 40s, so I'll never own a private jet, but I can afford to charter a prop plane now and then.
I don't think the big problem is that people avoid competition because of distaste for competition. It's that so many people figure out that the games that pay well are rigged, so they avoid playing the game too hard. Why live one's life feeling cheated all the time? That job with 5,000 competitors was probably set up with one person and a handful of backups in mind if he, and I mean "he" as the masculine pronoun, doesn't apply.
Worse, there's not just individual competition. There are lots of team sports and not just in athletics. Your advice about voting is good, but that big team sport gives the home team with all the money a big advantage. That home team is big on wanting people to compete with each other as individuals and with other groups as long as no one is competing with them. One has to compete to get a decent billet, but one also needs political awareness to compete to get everyone better billets.
I used to play football (soccer) for a living, and it was always amazing how pathologically competitive everyone was the higher you went. At one point me and another kid were trialling for the same position, but I was clearly better than him and we both knew it. During practice one day, he lunged off the ground, studs first, aiming for my knee. Afterwards a mini brawl ensued, and he got sent away. A day later I got the position, meaning he had to move on.
We happened to meet each other some years later, and ended up speaking about the incident. He told me how badly he wanted that position, and that because he knew I was better, he thought his best shot was to break my leg. At first I was shocked, but then, like Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, I saw the genius of it. In fact, I was envious that I never had his will to succeed.
Note to incels: social skills count way more than looks. Competence counts more than looks. Money counts more than looks. All these are within grasp if you choose to cultivate the skills. Sometimes competition is between you and the person you could become.
Good article, really enjoyed how clearly it put some important points.
The framing around incels caught my attention though
"When I look around, I see Incels who rage that their lack of dates is due to something broken about the world, rather than the fact that they only desire the most attractive 10% of women..."
Even if it's hyperbolic, the point about incels only desiring 10% of women doesn't comport with my view of reality, but I often see this framing tossed around. The incels I see on reddit and anywhere else seem like they'd be pretty happy with any genuine female desire - let's say from the top 80-90% at minimum, let alone the top 50%, top 25%, or top 10%.
The takeaway still applies, but just curious why I see people framing incels in this way as very choosy choosing beggars rather than decently self aware beggars.
Am I wrong? Is this just a more paletable / convenient / politically correct framing that people adopt and spread? Am I misunderstanding something?
I've been reading your stuff since 2010 when I was 16. I appreciate your sensibilities and could listen / read anything you put out. Thank you so much. And thank you for your other blog post detailing current locations of the Cracked diaspora, Robert Evans was one I hadn't seen mentioned until that post.
I think a lot on the Left need a reality check on this issue of being more grounded in the reality of competition but I also think you don't really understand the historical Anti-capitalist critique of the issue either. Kropotkin lays out a case for cooperation in his book "mutual aid a factor of evolution" quite well. Kropotkin argument is not that cooperation is a means by which species compete. Cooperation and competition are just two sides of the same coin.
Okay fine, you got me with this one, I will read the book. But I must say: If I like it I will badger you about a translation so I would be able to share it with friends.
This article’s topic and style reminds me of Mark Manson from ten years back. I didn’t think he’d make it but now he’s a bestselling author, so I think you’ve got a solid shot.
You should collect all your essays into a book. Or someone should do it for you. Your writing in the last decade has had a huge impact on my life. The power of inception. In a practical sense you helped me make big steps in the 'competition' and your article encouraging 'completing a project' contributed to some of my biggest life changes. Thank you for your words.
Which article was the one encouraging you to complete a project? Couldn't find it searching using that term.
I transitioned into teaching after I left the sales world for 3 years (hated the grind lol) but now I’m a licensed stem and Spanish teacher, all because of the grind. I think one thing your article could add is that finding the correct goal to grind towards is so much more important than how you grind. I teach my kids “ganas” (doing the things you don’t want to do, but know you must do) It takes less ganas to grind when you enjoy what you do!
I totally agree with this. And it is what bugs me a little about the article. It considers we would all want the same things that are in limited supply. It still place the desire of the hypothetical person in a capitalistic ( is that a word? sorry , not born speaking english) mindset, even in a iddylic island. What about finding your place, learning to value peeling potatoes and the other 90% of the women, ( and learning to value them for something other than their beauty or the social status they confer) , and teaching young one to do so... Of doing thing because you like them and then becoming good at it out of passion. Or, in
a less utopic way: Of finding the equilibrium: enough competition to build your little non competitive place in the world ( I write from a country with a lot of social aids available, so it's doable). It would be so so interesting to link all this to : sex wars, matriarcal society and the way they don't enhance competition, nor sexual exclusivity^^. Because let's face it, and M. Wong/Pargin wrote also about it: this competion, is a lot more about getting the girl and bragging about it, than about writing poetry. I agree that competition is something to be aware of, and to indulge in when needed. I don't agree it is the only way possible. And interestingly enough: yes matriacal societies seems to fail when in presence of a more competitive culture, since they don't seem to understand it and are less technologicaly evolved ( always a problem in case of wars). But they also seem to be more equalitarian and environment friendly. I say "seem" because I failed to find a lot of studies about it.
I read the article more as trying to be persuasive to the person he was, even though he thinks the view is ridiculous now.
At work I took a promotion that would be a harder role but the main benefit, besides a small pay bump, is increased visibility to leadership. Sometimes I think it's weird that I think in terms of social gerymandering but it certainly has been helpful. I did play sports, and a lot of board games. I think it helps, especially as a woman in the corporate world to think that every interaction is a move in a game.
Yes, it's interesting you say " as a woman". Because the view on competition seems to depends a lot on gender. You talk about leadership instead of being at the top. And somehow the article may not fully translate between genders. I , for one, never felt the need to grind to have the 10% best man. The movies didn't teach us we will win one at the end if we are competitive enough; It teached us to do our hair and make up and be in a difficult position awaiting a savior. ( erk..)
The CEOs attention is a resource that you compete for in a work setting. I think most men are taught some version of this and women are not quite clued in. If your competent then you will pick up on it pretty fast but there is a difference in do a good job to get noticed, and make sure your getting noticed doing a good job. It's a bit cynical, but like the article mentions it's how you get ahead. There for sure is a difference too if your not actually doing a good job and just pretending too. Guys get away with that more often I have noticed but women do it too.
It might be very strange but the movie that I think effected me the most in my romantic life is Red Sonja? I was born in the 90s so I have less princess tropes to deal with but the idea that you don't get with anyone who is not as good as you or better really stuck with me as a teen. Though, that can get you stuck in the idea that no one is better then you but that's a separate problem lol.
The oppositional defiance I experienced whilst reading this article, whilst unable to come up with any relevant counterpoints, is probably testament to the fact that the author has a pretty good point. Damn him. But also: thank you very much for a lesson I never previously learned, but will be ruminating about for a while...
Where do I get that end table?
This is a great essay. I was a nerdy non-sports guy, but I didn't avoid competition. I just focused on competitions that I could win, and, if I couldn't win, at least show up for some prize money. That ruled out anything that involved throwing or catching a ball or hitting someone real hard, though I somehow acquired a reputation for knocking out a local tough guy. I knew had brains and leadership ability, so I competed in those areas. There were lots of payoffs and lots of ways to win.
My father used to rag me because I wasn't into "competition", but I was. It was just that the competitions I chose and how I competed weren't about winning the one big score. I've known people who got into those competitions, and I've even been in a few of them myself though usually for strategic reasons. I never wanted to focus that narrowly or work quite that hard. I retired decades ago in my 40s, so I'll never own a private jet, but I can afford to charter a prop plane now and then.
I don't think the big problem is that people avoid competition because of distaste for competition. It's that so many people figure out that the games that pay well are rigged, so they avoid playing the game too hard. Why live one's life feeling cheated all the time? That job with 5,000 competitors was probably set up with one person and a handful of backups in mind if he, and I mean "he" as the masculine pronoun, doesn't apply.
Worse, there's not just individual competition. There are lots of team sports and not just in athletics. Your advice about voting is good, but that big team sport gives the home team with all the money a big advantage. That home team is big on wanting people to compete with each other as individuals and with other groups as long as no one is competing with them. One has to compete to get a decent billet, but one also needs political awareness to compete to get everyone better billets.
I used to play football (soccer) for a living, and it was always amazing how pathologically competitive everyone was the higher you went. At one point me and another kid were trialling for the same position, but I was clearly better than him and we both knew it. During practice one day, he lunged off the ground, studs first, aiming for my knee. Afterwards a mini brawl ensued, and he got sent away. A day later I got the position, meaning he had to move on.
We happened to meet each other some years later, and ended up speaking about the incident. He told me how badly he wanted that position, and that because he knew I was better, he thought his best shot was to break my leg. At first I was shocked, but then, like Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, I saw the genius of it. In fact, I was envious that I never had his will to succeed.
Note to incels: social skills count way more than looks. Competence counts more than looks. Money counts more than looks. All these are within grasp if you choose to cultivate the skills. Sometimes competition is between you and the person you could become.
Good article, really enjoyed how clearly it put some important points.
The framing around incels caught my attention though
"When I look around, I see Incels who rage that their lack of dates is due to something broken about the world, rather than the fact that they only desire the most attractive 10% of women..."
Even if it's hyperbolic, the point about incels only desiring 10% of women doesn't comport with my view of reality, but I often see this framing tossed around. The incels I see on reddit and anywhere else seem like they'd be pretty happy with any genuine female desire - let's say from the top 80-90% at minimum, let alone the top 50%, top 25%, or top 10%.
The takeaway still applies, but just curious why I see people framing incels in this way as very choosy choosing beggars rather than decently self aware beggars.
Am I wrong? Is this just a more paletable / convenient / politically correct framing that people adopt and spread? Am I misunderstanding something?
I've been reading your stuff since 2010 when I was 16. I appreciate your sensibilities and could listen / read anything you put out. Thank you so much. And thank you for your other blog post detailing current locations of the Cracked diaspora, Robert Evans was one I hadn't seen mentioned until that post.
I think a lot on the Left need a reality check on this issue of being more grounded in the reality of competition but I also think you don't really understand the historical Anti-capitalist critique of the issue either. Kropotkin lays out a case for cooperation in his book "mutual aid a factor of evolution" quite well. Kropotkin argument is not that cooperation is a means by which species compete. Cooperation and competition are just two sides of the same coin.
Is there a link to buy that dick table? Asking for a friend.
Thank you.
Okay fine, you got me with this one, I will read the book. But I must say: If I like it I will badger you about a translation so I would be able to share it with friends.
https://www.amazon.com/Tyranny-Merit-Whats-Become-Common/dp/0374289980/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3ICDUC21F5LNO&dchild=1&keywords=the+tyranny+of+merit&qid=1628139672&s=books&sprefix=The+Tyrann%2Caps%2C173&sr=1-2
This article’s topic and style reminds me of Mark Manson from ten years back. I didn’t think he’d make it but now he’s a bestselling author, so I think you’ve got a solid shot.