first things first, in order for anything to be popular it has to appeal to a wide range of people, making it a clearcut case for "A jack of all trades is a master of none", But oftentimes this feels kind of anachronistic and to be fair kind of tired. A case could be made for most people being what the internet would call "normies" therefore being liked by mostly normies makes you a normie, meaning you are common place, which doesnt nececerily mean you are "bad". So in my mind i cannot make a case for popula being "bad", its just common and or easily digestable.

"by the people, for the people, of the people... but the people are retarded"

Popular things aren't bad because of any of their innate qualities. They're bad because your expectations and desires will be inherited from (or will have 2 reconcile themselves with) overly familiar and downstream perspectives. Popularity eases and illuminates the process of each thing so that not only you but everyone else also understands its exact scope and significance. And it places each thing in boring situations (like supermarkets) and before embarrassing perspectives (like noobs or co-workers). They can still be cool though if a person's desires and scope can survive contact with popularity or combine in2 a cool new form.

Cease trying to explain yourself. I just deep down intuitively reject these things. Is that not enough?

Excerpt from n0thankyou's latest blogpost: "Intentional inaccessibility is a social signal. It can be used to delineate social alliances through shared reference points and signifiers. A work produced for a small group who "get it" can be more fulfilling on all sides, compared to a work produced for mass accessibility, since it exists in a realm of tangible social relations rather than abstract matters of appeal to an audience one never sees".

>>4
dont get me wrong it is i just need to explain things to myself so i dont feel retarded sometimes

The more connected you are to the masses, the greater the psychic attack on your autonomy. Normals simply chose to merge with the collective on a spiritual level, probably because it's the path of least resistance. Is tang bad? I'm not sure but it does seem to breed some of the dumbest mother fuckers I've ever seen. In some sci-fi the hivemind races are actually smart and it's definitely not the case here right now. I think we owe it to being gifted with intelligence as humans to actually use that gift, and it seems like the best way to do so is retaining your individuality and minimizing outside interference.

with how retarded some people are i truly don’t believe that autonomy is as good as you think it is. There has to be a superior idea that dominates the dumb ideas. however each of us can contribute to the hive mind, whether its retarded right now or not is a different conversation altogether. for the record i agree that the hive mind rn is pretty much useless, but the idea that disfunction is part of reality is also dumb

The greats operate on their own wavelengths, only employing mindless drones to do their bidding based on their schematics (if applicable). We are either the greats or feeding someone else's vision, nothing in between. Why contribute if you're just enriching somebody else in whatever currency they are farming with that specific venture? Even if you are a drone for an idea you think is good, remember that not only did it not arise from within you, but that its progenitor is a mere human. Above the content matter of the cause no matter what it is, the main driving force is reptilian, seeking to dominate everything in its path as the number one priority, conscious or unconscious.

If everyone is playing out their little power games with no end in sight, the only viable option is to play your own and require nothing from anyone else in the world.

i might be a narcissist