Whenever someone says that today sucks and they were born in the wrong time, how there people used to have values and whatnot, then someone usually replies with 'times changed, people didn't. It was just as shitty to live in the 50's as it is now!'
Is this true? I think I disagree. Well I'm sure it was never exactly easy to live at any point in history, but now its mega shitty with all this technology and PC bullshit.
Back in the day, you had no choice but to make something of yourself. Even the nerds had a skill of some sort. No internet, no vidya or TV to turn you into a useless piece of shit.
To get a girlfriend you had to work for one. No tinder for them to pick the top 5%, they probably still dated chads, but it wasn't frowned upon to be chivalrous, and a beta who stuck it to Chad would probably be admirable to a woman back then.
And was chad such a bad guy in 60's era high school? He probably beat up some nerds but that was all coming of age shit, learning to stand up for yourself. The worst chad would say to you would probably be something like, 'look at him guys! He's nothing but a 4-eyes nerd!'. He probably wouldn't verbally torment anyone to suicide like the Chads of today.
Point is, you had to be a lame or a retard to be truly worthless to society back before we had all this hand-holding. Everyone for the most part went out and made something of themself. How many baby boomers became NEETS for life or forever alones? Every one of them I've ever seen had grandkids by now pretty much.
Things have only gotten better and most likely will only get better.
>>28467141
In America it was definitely better in the 50's and 60's. In the rest of the world its better now. Its mostly nostalgia goggles if you live in America and ignorance of the suffering if you live elsewhere.
In Britain for instance we were destitute after the war and still rebuilding.
>>28467160
This.
>>28467160
Better living conditions, sure. But today's society is the worst it's ever been for basic human development.
I won't speak for all of history, but at least in recent history, this is the worst era.
>No internet, no vidya or TV to turn you into a useless piece of shit.
it's still your choice if you rot in front of a screen and wallow in self-misery or do something with your life, it's not the fault of media
>>28467191
>basic human development
In what regard?
We have the lowest infant mortality rates, highest literacy rates in ages, highest life expectancy rates, lowest crime rates (when compared to past years), etc.
Only things that got worse is that office jobs, TV, and Internet has turned our lifestyle into sedentary ones which is bad for you health.
Also, people don't socialize as often which leads to a whole sort of mental issues.
>>28467141
World goes from best(golden age, paradise) to worst- iron age, kali-yuga. You can feel it too
>>28467393
The lack of social developement will only get worse as time goes on.
Who cares about crime and death rates if we all suffer mentally because of our socially fucked up world.
Wana know the worst part? Rich or poor, it can affect you. In fact, its worse for the well off since they're expected to be happy and succesful.
>>28467141
My ancestors all met in church and where married for life by 25 max and all seemed to have had steady work until their retirement in their sixties.
Life that easily would be reserved for a tiny percentage today but here I am chilling on the Internet in my back garden sunbathing with the sum of mans knowledge and any entertainment I want a few taps away so it's a trade off. I'd probably prefer this easy, fun life with little chances of success over the easily successful but boring lives of old.
>>28467160
This so much.
You can always, of course, ignore the objective fact that everything that's bad now was 100x worse in the past, imagine that we know nothing of past and think that grass was greener in a different time.
>>28467533
>My ancestors all met in church and where married for life by 25 max and all seemed to have had steady work until their retirement in their sixties.
And you can't get married by 25 or even go to church if you want? And weren't there a fuckton of people who did not get happily married? Were these marriages even successful? Weren't at least some of these people pressured into marriage by society and was it really what they wanted themselves?
>Life that easily would be reserved for a tiny percentage today but here I am chilling on the Internet in my back garden sunbathing with the sum of mans knowledge and any entertainment I want a few taps away so it's a trade off. I'd probably prefer this easy, fun life with little chances of success over the easily successful but boring lives of old.
If everybody had it, then why was it called "success"? Why don't you like easy and fun? What the hell do you even want?
It's never the anon, it's the wrong times he's been born in now.
>>28467341
True, but there was much less tolerance for the kinds of things we take for granted like sleeping until noon and wasting aeay
>>28467476
>its worse for the well off since they're expected to be happy and succesful.
What a fucking bootlicker. Do you expect Mr.Shekelsburg to give you a treat after making that comment?
