I feel like a lot of people will disagree with me on this but the 00s were more scripted/manufactured than the 10s and 20s
>>84481128There were no real alternatives to corpoproducts, I agree. But I wonder what you mean specifically.
>>84481148Drinking. Zoomers collectively decided to shun drinking. They have other drug habits but consider drinking culture in the 00s. Songs like Tipsy or quirky beer commercials or movies like Superbad basically gave the greenlight for teenagers to drink and party wantonly. Parents condoned it at the time too, as long as their kids were 'safe'. Now that's one thing, but I say it's scripted because the intention behind all of this was obviously to sell teen sex to people with various means of social lubrication; this has always been a thing but never has it so heavily been marketed to a generation in a "come on, do something" kind of way. So basically, this is one example of society scripting behavior by giving a very clear formula for how to go about doing things. Parties still happen but you're considered weird if you go to one for some action. Another thing is music. This is a big one. Scene/metalcore culture is probably the single most manufactured subculture you will ever lay your eyes on, all the way down to the big comeback this decade. The main reason I find it manufactured is because the scene basically packed up and left at the end of the decade. There were still bands doing that kind of thing, but it feels like the advertising budget ran dry so everyone one moved on. Bands like Underoath, Haste the Day, Alexisonfire all had the same "positive vibes be yourself" message- and what the hell was with the massive Christianity influence behind a sizable majority of these bands? During the 00s it's hard to accept that as "organic", even if they were coming from the American south.Like you said, there's few alternatives to the big box model, so everyone is kind of on board with the same thing, and even if you're not buying it, you still know what your neighbor is buying for themselves. This kind of ubiquity basically ensures that you will always have some insight or point of entry into socializing with people you want to know about.
>>84481128Legacy media had much more of a stranglehold on pop yes, but the early internet being not as algorithmized to the gills and the 2000s still being in a transitionary period from full blown gentrification also allowed for the diy scene to thrive. We'll never have bloghaus again.
>>84481291I didn't immediately think of it but I'd agree with the whole party culture aspect. I like a drink to unwind but don't over indulge. I always thought the era of movies glorifying it was retarded from dude where's my car to the hangover.Music is a given. It's money issues too but my local area has seen fewer festivals than before, though smaller bands etc are thriving. Honestly don't have much to add, maybe that I dislike how corpos are trying to get in on this, presenting as if their products werent influenced by big formulaic businessmodels. At this point I prefer original yet shitty content than the expected same old same old. You know your subculture is in trouble when stuff related to it pops up in or near busy shopping streets.
>>84481348I was gonna say something about online but ran out of room in the post. Popular sites at the time definitely sold a narrative that you were "in on the joke" by having such an insular culture that required complete loyalty to fit in. People like to say how there were so many more websites at the time, but the truth is that most people had their loyalty bought by one or two at most. No one was browsing 5 different boards at the time, pretty much everyone collectively agreed to be a permanent member of their place of choice. Why do you think the "Grove street. Home" was such a meme? basically the entire point at the time was that it was easy to find surrogate family. I think that was completely intentional too and part of the "just have a good time and be yourself" culture millennials had. now the internet is just a fashion show basically, but it's waaaaaaay more organic in a bloodsport kind of way. whatever happened to predictability indeed.
>>84481128>When I was >a young boy >My father>took me into the city>to seee the marching bandThey were really like this
>>84481572That song does practically nothing for my ears were they retarded back then or something?
>>84481572i prefer their song about teenagers
>>84481555How is it more organic? You can't even be sure you are talking to another actual person today or that they aren't paid to talk to you lol. How does having the ease of finding a place to fit in with actual people make it more manufactured? What is you tawmbout willus?
>>84481720because now the internet is sink or swim. if people don't like what you put out you're done, log off. back then you could be the biggest goofball ever and still find a place where you fit in and get the Cheers treatment
>>84481741basically if people are FORCED to accept you it's not very organic but reeks of script that tells people how to behave. now people only take what they want and move on.
>>84481741>>84481749None of that makes sense, how does having less barriers to express your goofballs ways make it scripted/FORCED? How does the present day conditions where capital has more sway in what sinks or swim make it more organic? Why are you starting to sound like one of those people that are paid to talk about topics on the internetz?
>>84481976> the present day conditions where capital has more sway in what sinks or swim make it more organic? it's probably not even a real person tbqdesu
>>84481991>Why are you starting to sound like one of those people that are paid to talk about topics on the internetzmeant to respond to dis uwu
>>84481976anon, a social script is a set of expectations and guidelines for how to behave. if there is always a palce for you to fit in then that means people are following an established agreement to let people find their surrogate family. naturally that comes with expectations for how to manage dissent, disagreement, tension, expectations, etcWhen such a social script dissolves, what you get is true market blindness where only the most in demand content succeeds. there is no guideline here because sometimes people don't know they want something until it shows up, and sometimes following the metrics for success doesn't work for whatever variable reason.
>>84482005why do you think the overton window is so blown out these days? because people figured out skirting social expectations is the best way to bait engagement. because there is less management of the people joining communities, people are free to go mine easily available previously ignored resources for their schtick. it used to be that if you wanted to join a community, you were welcome as long as you followed the rules. and because everything was scripted, people largely had the same expectation for behavior. but now for example if you want to fit in, instead of following you're community's rules, you find a community that lets you behave the way you want to behave. it has become a case of the group catering to the individual instead of the individual catering to the group.
>>84481128>the 00s were more scripted/manufactured than the 10s and 20sNo. Definitely not. I think you're underestimating current marketing techniques. 00's were more blatant and direct with their advertising, while modern product placement has leaned HEAVILY into casual/normal methods of advertising that you wouldn't even know it is a paid ad with scripts and actors. This is why youtube started requiring channels to state they are advertising a product.But fucking EVERYTHING on the internet is trying to sell you shit, and no adblock does not stop it.
>>84482005How is a community self regulating itself make it scripted? Nothing exists outside of a vaccuum so of course you are going to be interacting with codified expectations in one form or another. And no, the past codes of the aughts didn't dissolve, it's just subordinated to capital further so what happened is that the the human centipede that chugs said codes simply sutured its primary lip to billionaire butt. The very fact that it's easier to be made an updoot leper now is proof of this code being even more present than ever, not its absence. You are being incoherent.
>>84482116inside* a vacuum but you get the idea
>>84482116>How is a community self regulating itself make it scripted?because anon, like i said in my post the script at the time was "just be yourself and things will work out". my point was that people didn't get treated as outsiders because everyone was on board with making sure everyone could be themselves. so even if you were a loser at school, you could be a king online, because all you need to do is bring your beautiful self. the internet was quite literally a place where rejects could go to be treated decently. now, since everyone is online, there is more of the monoculture "well what have you done for me lately?" kind of behavior
>>84481555>No one was browsing 5 different boards at the timeuh, yes they were? if you specifically mean 4chan people absolutely did this and used various boards for questions or as primary resources. workout question? ask /fit/, cooking? /ck/ etc while having a general home board and other hobby boards. if there was a significant difference here it was that there were less boards so general interest ones were a mix of topics rather than telling someone to fuck off and take it to /his/ or /lit/. people absolutely used different websites and were in multiple groups. on 4chan alone it was a big fight between people who claimed to have a single home board and hated crossboarders which moot and the others found absolutely bizarre. they kept snapping at the same founding group for having accounts on different platforms like tumblr, reddit, twitter, facebook, standalone blogs, sa, etc while being friends with people who worked at gawker, pitchfork, vice, or who ran some of those other platforms (jack dorsey, david karp) or other websites like ytmnd or icanhascheezburger. and even then they got along but had ideological differences, like moot clearly says here he hates how people like said cheezburger man are profiting off the work of anons as leeches of content, which made anons suspicious and hostile of these people as parasitic.https://youtu.be/CHwxNHXpp3Apeople certainly had their persuasions but there was a reason gavin mcinnes in his vice era (before proud boys) was hanging out with tracie egan morrissey in her slut machine era in 2007-2008 jezebel right when it was created by gawker. he was walking around in heels for her amusement. everywhere was incestuous. when the retroactively named indie sleaze raunch culture of the early aughts online was replaced by social justice shit tests is when everyone decided to turn on each other and hide in echo chambers. everyone had ammo and personal armies. pic related would be the evil man-hating feminists of jezebel.
>>84482116>The very fact that it's easier to be made an updoot leper now is proof of this code being even more present than ever, not its absence.Anon, my entire point is that a sick person will do better in a society where everyone has to behave a certain way than a society that is basically just a simulation of the state of nature. So no, I would say that the social exclusion you see now has nothing to do with scripts and everything to do with organic trendsetting
>>84482157>workout question? ask /fit/, cooking? /ck/i don't think those were even boards in the 00s?personally, i had 2 sites i visited every day and then the other ones were more peripheral and i would use them here and there. i just mean to say that just because there was variety it doesn't mean variety was the point of browsing the web.
>>84482157not to mention people crosschanned literally all the time. its not like mentioning kraut or 420 was going to get anyone mad at you. 7 had a seething hatred because it was made in response to moderation changes just as 8 did later and both were hostile, but 7 largely ignored 4chan and just hated when they came over whenever the site was down yet again from a server crash usually due to ddos or overload of traffic on /b/ or something (/r9k/ shared a server, not sure if it still applies but the brackets up top show which boards were on which server so if there was a happening on /b/ /r9k/ would crash and /b/ inevitably would flood the other boards, mostly /x/, and would run off to other chans which they hated from disrupting their /comfy/ hangouts with annoying faggots). i think it was 5chan that was originally shilled in moots sa post along with some others and of course shiis work which literally started off with hostility. programmers, devs, mods, and other admins had their own chans. people consulted multiple sites regularly for content. a standard user of that era who swung left-libertarian might read cracked, the awl, vice, gawker, gizmodo, kotaku, jezebel, the mary sue, or many others just by manually checking them daily since they would only have a few articles a day, and that is only the most absolutely normie generic selection (except for the feminist swings of jezebel/mary sue and inclusion of gizmodo and kotaku, and that is specifically leaving out sites like feministing, feminist frequency, xojane, or other blogs for women or the million gaming sites for gamers). forums were popular as were actual established legacy media, but so were places like nylon, adbusters, and juxtapoz. time and newsweek were actually read. so were the huffington post, the atlantic, new york mag, the new yorker, bloomberg, and more. not to mention actual old shit like fark and digg which along with /r9k/ ended up coalescing into early reddit.
>>84482178>i don't think those were even boards in the 00s?uh, well you are wrong?https://github.com/bibanon/bibanon/wiki/4chan-History-Timeline/ck/ - april 7 2006/fit/ - feb 19 2008look how many boards moot would throw up at one time. dude loved making boards.
>>84482232IDK i remember this site having like ten boards in 2006, i only used /b/ and /h/ though so i don't really know. my posts are not really about 4chan specifically anyway because it's an anonymous site where you don't really get to know most people the people here
>>84481128Picrel might be why you feel that way. Everything needed to have an often not-so-subtle 'patriotic tinge' underlining it.
>>84482256yeah, maybe. 2.5 kids and a dog and etc, easy to make a ubiquitous cartoon with data on your side
>>84482148Which brings us back to the other point again: how does having less barriers to express your goofball ways, or as you would put, the expectations/script having less reinforcing power on the early internet space than it does now make it more scripted? It doesn't follow at all.>>84482164This doesn't follow too. The script isn't gone because obviously why would you be downdooted to cancelhell in the first place if not for not meeting the codified expectations, for the lulz? No, the expectations from the people you operate didn't go away, it's just that the codes are more downstream from capital now.
>>84482178>it doesn't mean variety was the point of browsing the web.sorry i just saw this. this is the literal entire point of the early web. do i need to start posting more talks by moot or any early web founder? this is completely ahistorical. the point of the early web was everyone jerking themselves off about freedom of speech and how the interconnectedness of the internet and diversity of opinions would open minds and create new paths to blah blah blah blah. turned out great. everyone decided to regress instead of I Am Become Enlightened, but both were destroyer of worlds.https://youtu.be/1INQ2gW5wBMhis whole thing and so many other architects of the time was that people being able to speak freely and communicate without barriers would lead to a more creativity and better communication, less bigotry without needing to censor everyone. they were big on idealism and technoutopian ideas of cyberlibertarianism. an internet away from the control of military and governments (lol given why the internet exists in the first place) and with the power to disrupt status quo. personally poole disliked the political part of this and was heavier on art, or so he said. his talk here discusses his perspective on the genuine kindness that anonymity and ephemerality can provide. in a space where there is no reward or punishment and where people think no one is looking, how do they behave? do their true natures come out, or do they adopt callousness and cruelty because a lack of repercussions allows them to get away with it? do they choose sadism or kindness?the internet architects were hoping for the best. they saw their platforms used for the worst. it blackpilled many and, when combined with their existing distrust of government, led at least partially to the neo reactionary movement in tech. if a bunch of 20 year old clever and creative men build everyone playgrounds and they decide to smear them in corpses before trying to behead their creators, what happens?
>>84482276Never could figure out how one has >.5 of a child. I fear I never will.
>>84482164Paying a room of Bangladeshis to astroturf an American talking point on X isn't organic trendsetting at all.
>>84482247okay. well i am expanding on your posts because 4chan is/was a cultural juggernaut at the time and citing specific historical data. if you do not want to discuss 4chan, feel free to address any of the other references in them, but it was part of a larger point about the changing of the internet and why it has done so that you are for some reason ignoring to be wrong about easily searchable information i have already provided you. you can see how many boards there were in 2006 and the entire history of the loli, shota, guro, and other boards there as well as the bbs textboards and not4chan being a duplicate host after the removal of the others. pointing out moot moved /l/ and /sm/ to not4chan would be a deceng counterpoint against my praising him of as an internet idealist, though people >contain multitudes.
>>84482299average of 2 children + average of 3 children divided by 2 = average of 2.5 children
>>84482326Never was a math major. Then again, that's part of why I'm on this site...religiously.
>>84482277>Which brings us back to the other point again: how does having less barriers to express your goofball ways, or as you would put, the expectations/script having less reinforcing power on the early internet space than it does now make it more scripted? It doesn't follow at all.accepting people as they are is a specific guideline for how to behave- it's quite literally a second nature behavior- when it's much easier to write off people that need to be wrangled into acting properly, which you get these days. only paying attention to the sexiest thing is the opposite, more natural option (that we have now). if someone steps out of line, you drag them back inside the overton window and force them to choose from acceptable dialogue options. eventually people learn they have to conform to the group if they don't want to get kicked out. literally stick to the script or get off the show. so you can be yourself as long as you are a part of the groupif there is still a script, it's closer to "only engage with what you like and shit on what you don't like", which is pretty distance from expecting people to act with moderately and friendly toward others. the critical difference is that one expects you to tolerate things you don't like and the other lets you express how you really feel (like, some kind of radical natural honesty). giving people what they want is considerably different from being yourself here because giving people what they want entails fitting a certain mold. in this case you are more likely to find a niche community where your identity is part of what people expect. basically: 00s, be yourself but follow the rules but anyone can join, 10s weird growing pains period, 20s be a certain way or find some group where you do fit in
>>84482068i think op is flattening at least two different social scenarios here. in the 2000s everything was more scripted in the sense that there was a strong cultural epicenter vs a counterculture and a few subcultures (in the public consciousness anyway, they have always existed). whereas now there isnt really a cohesive single culture in the sense that if you tried to throw up an image of a basic white woman in 2026 you would have to specify which ideological faction or numerous subcultures you mean because they have gathered more weight/media prominence. however you are absolutely correct in the way that scripting via advertisement has crept into sponsored content and seeded posts and how advertising has changed from 2000ish to now. in the 2010s brands tried to be your friend and be hip, now they simply pay people who others pay to pretend to be your friend to pretend to like their products. its the difference between seeing product placement in a sitcom everyone turns into on abc at 8pm on thursdays and discusses the next day around the water cooler at work and seeing a viral trend on tiktok suddenly be everywhere from algorithmic manipulation and shilling and within the week be in local stores.
>>84482290sorry, i mean variety from consumer perspective. yes, ideally you have a lot of options for where you can go, but eventually you settle on 1 or 2 places, and the point is that you get rewarded for your loyalty to these communities by being accepted an ingroup member.
>>84482340not like i was easier. i assumed .5 meant a baby for a long time. the point would be that a single child would have been considered unusual for a nuclear family and a family of 4 or more would have been considered large, like the brady bunch. the ideal family with typically one daughter and at least one if not two or more sons. personally i always thought the other son was a backup in case the first one turned out to be gay and this was a whole carrying-on-the-family-name thing.
>>84481291>and what the hell was with the massive Christianity influence behind a sizable majority of these bandsIt was an easy way to sell "heavy" music to people who otherwise would shy away from it. Just like how in the 90s Creed (who are on par with the "quality" of those awful bands) had to pretend to be Christian to sell their music to churches and thus reach bigger audience than they otherwise normally would. Thankfully by 20 years ago or so everyone had caught onto that grift.
>>84481128Nope. Some things were better, some things were worse. But the world continues getting worse overall as corps and governments continue the relentless march towards control, tyranny, and wealth hoarding.
>>84482303you're right, but if anything, the whole buy your success is even more cuttthroat and off the rails than it was before
>>84482345Oh so it's more of>heh having no rules is still a ruleThat's honestly a meaningless non statement and isn't what scripted in a manufactured sense that the OP is getting at. I could turn that back at you and say : >be a certain way or find some group where you do fit inis no less of a script than>be yourself but follow the rules but anyone can joinoh my lol i read that again and that barely makes any sense, you are probably just trolling.
>>84482370*either.>>84482367right, but i am specifically telling you that this was not the philosophy of the early web. it may have been from an advertising perspective from ad revenue via clicks and have taken over the early web when people started marketing towards their factions, but this was not what the 2000s web was like outside of forums having a particular annoyance with each other like sa disliking 4chan from spinning off from it and being their irreverent shitposters (despite the fact that many were users of both sites). this faction loyalty didnt come until later. thats why i am specifically citing seeming ideological opposites being so close. it was basically culture vs counterculture with the latter united against the former. misogynists, feminists, libertarians, leftists, all of those could get along if the primary camps were clever raunchy humor vs bush era conservative fussiness. this is why the alt right was such a big deal, it was new by taking the raunch and edginess of the older internet which the more liberally inclined had started to regret and demand accountability (otherwise known as apologies and fealty) for and reformatting the public image of conservative politics into something funny and countercultural. this fueled the trump wave just as it had originally fueled the obama campaign on the opposite side. this was around when all the cultural wars started, and that would be when, as you state, everyone was then forced to pledge allegiance to a side and any sort of multisite interaction was considered suspect instead of proof of flexibility. and as you have pointed out, yes, this absolutely was about trying to make people either firmly ingroup or outgroup and reward or punish them accordingly. it was fantastic both for marketing revenue for Your Side and for the suppression of free information/dissemination of misinformation or specific political narratives. but it didnt happen until about the mid 2010s. the 2000s were different.
>>84482385>more cuttthroator more manufactured wouldn't you say?
>>84482411ok, you would agree a script where the mandate is laissez faire omni bellum is less programmed than a script that preaches radical acceptance right?>chad gets all the views and we all love chad >everyone gets views and everyone is friendsnight and day difference
>>84482385i dont know if its really more or less off the rails or if its just more prominent in general spaces now. financial advisors, lifestyle gurus, life coaches, all the shit youd see tied to timeshares or other scams, all of that self improvement pay to play success stuff was always there, and it was always a con job. but it was more formulaic and full enterprises. now any random person on the internet can claim to be one of these and all they have do is cause enough of a stir online by mocking someone, get attention, and some idiot will pay them money. the attention economy has been a boon for scam artists. a shame anonymity didnt win the ideological arms race, but it was always the underdog. i think the attention economy and the monetizing/competition of victim narratives has made people more callous and sociopathic though.
>>84482418i am not talking about philosophical ideals, i am talking about social function. it's very simple, you find a site you like, you integrate into the community and learn the lore, and they treat you like family. now it's closer to finding a place where you know the people will agree with you for political reasons than finding a place where people agree with you because they want their community to be more active
>>84482418>this faction loyalty didnt come until later.you're wrong, consider the RICE wars on gamefaqs
i mean just look at these song lyrics from 2005But we make it easy to belongWhich means it's easy to be wrong"Put some plastic in your titsYou'd look better as a blonde"
>>84482428having read this back and forth with the other anon i am really not sure why you think the social darwinist nature of the early web still having the potential for people rejected from one group to find another group where they fit in is more scripted - and you seem to think this is a negative - than the current nature of the internet where you can be effectively doxed and bullied off of it entirely if someone decides they dont like you for whatever reason. one of the primary rules of the early internet was to lurk moar so you could learn the culture and assimilate without giving off vibes of an intruder that would be publicly humiliated until you left. the fact that this can happen just as easily now but that persistent identity means your rejection follows you permanently and can even have real world negative ramifications rather than allowing you to change, adapt, or express different aspects of your personality in different spaces seems far more of a stringent ingroup vs outgroup social script to me. its the difference between normie emotional social dynamics vs i guess autist competence based hierarchy taking over the internet. the feminization of digital spaces, basically.
>>84482428Sure? Though the laissez fairy homuna homuna bellum would fit the 2000s very well, you could say fag more openly then and joke about no-no age bracket rape and sometimes the worst you'd get are just groans, so what are we getting at here?
>>84482490idk, i'm not saying it's the deepest most logical thought. i guess it's actually dumb since so many people are arguing against it>>84482516i never said there was more to explore
>>84482463i never used gamefaqs and am unfamiliar with what you are talking about. looking it up doesnt seem to bring up any results. care to elaborate? if not, post disregarded.>>84482451okay, and i am talking about philosophical ideals of the early internet and how it affected and was affected by social dynamics. try multithreaded parallel processing. we dont disagree on your point about people being in political echo chambers now at all. i am explicitly stating that i agree with you about that and why it has changed to be that way. good point about activity levels though, i didnt take that into consideration but youre right, that would make a massive difference for smaller communities like forums and ircs compared to discords that can have thousands now. still, similar to both there are only a handful of actually active people shaping the climate of it and it can be relatively easily manipulated with a little persistence. since you are bringing up activity levels, yeah, that would be a big component here. in a forum of maybe a couple hundred at and most and more like <60 regular posters, people become characters in a dysfunctional family dynamic rather than eject people based on disagreements. even using 4chan itself as an example with its board-tans you could say oh theres uncle /pol/ talking about the jewish question again, haha, and it was more of a harmless quirk. i think a large problem here was that this allowed others who were more vicious in their hatred to think they were welcome, same as all the edgy humor, and you end up flooded with stormfags talking about killing all kikes when people just want to shitpost about anime. and now its the nazi website to msm which means more nazis show up, basic replacement theory.
>>84482527why back down from your argument and call it dumb just because others are disagreeing? this is supposed to stress test your beliefs. if the logic was concrete, it would only strengthen them and perhaps change a few minds itt. when being sincere it is good to be open to reconsidering your beliefs, but if someone argues against it that doesnt mean that they are dumb in any sense or that you need to back down. this is anonymous anyway, its not like someone is going to follow you around going HEY DIDNT YOU SAY THAT STUPID SCRIPT THING. people only do that on here when someone is super fucking annoying and shitting up the board with spam.>>84482516i miss when people could take a joke and knew that the people saying faggot online were mostly people being called faggot irl, not the ones gaybashing others to death while screaming it. real pedos and rapists ruined all the provocative jokes.
>>84482540>i never used gamefaqs and am unfamiliar with what you are talking about. looking it up doesnt seem to bring up any results. care to elaborate? if not, post disregarded.Random Insanity and Current Events (RI+CE= RICE) were two social boards on the site that had a giant rivalry because they were so similar. i feel like maybe it was just that site but board factions were a pretty common thing, to the point certain boards had rules against factions. so no, i don't think faction-based rivalry came later i think it was around longer than you might thinkanyway, if the idea is dumb it's dumb. i'm done defending myself
>>84482527Alright then anon, nice chat. Have a pleasant night or morning.
>>84482578>why back down from your argument and call it dumb just because others are disagreeing?because maybe i'm wrong?
>>84482584babe i am also the one talking to you about sa and 4chan having a rivalry though i neglected to mention lowtax telling everyone who would listen that moot was a white supremacist pedophile while he beat his wife. and mentioned 7 and 8 chan wars specifically. but did not mention adtrw being the bane of sas existence because anime = pedos especially those on rh of the moe persuasion or what the fuck fyad was doing at any given moment. i am aware of minor website and board wars and already addressed it. i was talking about major social media platforms becoming ideological ecochambers and people who were regular users of multiple platforms being forced with their careers and public reputations at stake to pick a side in stupid shit like gamergate, which was billed as feminists attacked by woman-hating incels for no reason even though there were more than two sides, and all of them were duplicitous, stupid, and complex. two social boards on gamefaqs having a fight analogous to /r9k/ and /soc/ being frenemies is not comparable to permanent culture wide changes in how people used the internet to signal political allegiance and what websites they used as ideological shortcuts to type themselves and others as either a friend or enemy.
>>84482584>>84482590You are so weirdly hostile even when admitting defeat.
>>84482649well, no one likes being wrong
00s were when culture started cannibalizing itself. This inevitably destroyed the basis of culture. Scenes became commodified recursively to the point of complete simulacrum. If the 10s and 20s were in any way better, it was because the genres and scenes of the late 1900s were completely devoured, and the only thing that sounded fresh was a kind of anti-music, the sort of brrt-zzt-click mumble song-rap that zoomers listen to.
>>84481291>Drinking. Zoomers collectively decided to shun drinking. They have other drug habits but consider drinking culture in the 00s. Songs like Tipsy or quirky beer commercials or movies like Superbad basically gave the greenlight for teenagers to drink and party wantonlyyoure REALLY overthinking thismilenials didnt invent drinkingthe previous generation didnt invent itthe one before didnt eitherit goes back thousands of yearspeople get bored, so they find stuff to do, drinking is a fun way to pass the time since it also removes some inhibitions, making it great for partyingand people would socialize more because there were less to do by yourselfwhat ended all that was doomscrollingnot sure how much you remember of the 00s, people would still be bored and have nothing to do and they would play with their crappy phones of the time and text each other, or if you were a loner cycle through old texts or pretend to be sending and receiving textswhat changed is that now everyone is constantly doing something, they dont even have to wait for replies, theyre texting while scrollingcompanies back then werent trying to manipulate teens, they were trying to appeal and sell to them, kinda different than current times where they just hijack your doomscroll feed
