For me, the frame breaks in me have been deep thought from both an engineering perspective and cultural scaffolding perspective, paired with real travels to places where technology was limited (either be practical circumstance like going to a rural village or intentionally like a silent meditation retreat).

A graphic I still come back to is the good life project ( https://goodlife.leeds.ac.uk/ ) with inquiry around how many planets of stuff even the alternatives require from a planetary boundaries perspective. There's more technical works like https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m .

It's Musk

People are just substituting God with false idols and cults.

That deep need to believe in something bigger than self is not going away, it will always be there, it can be filled with religion or something else.

I believe the least destructive way to fill it is with sports affiliation so I won't be so cynic about the SuperBowl hype come this February

Delivery or not doesn't imply improvement. Progress for the sake of progress is not necessarily an improvement either.

On the other hand conditions are ever changing and our knowledge of the world changes our understanding of those conditions. To me these things nearly always imply that we should act in some direction to improve our lot. I don't see many people willing to put in the work. I see a lot of people willing to sit on the sideline and talk about how the people on the field are dumb or what they're doing obviously won't work, and that they are evil scheming villains who will surely change the world for the worst for their own benefit.

What ideological purposes do you think Musk has? What is the ideology he is pushing building rockets and electric cars?

The internet is part of the issue, but only part. Long-term political strategizing is another part, and a third factor is 9-11 which seems to have permanently traumatized the USA. As a simple example, information displays on subway platforms in my area are still putting up announcements about how public bathrooms in the subway station are closed for security reasons. It's been 21 years since 9-11 and major cities in the US are too freaked out to figure out basic things like public bathrooms and instead live in a permanent state of mental emergency.

See also: The Revolt of the Public by Martin Gurri which focuses a lot on the criticism issue

A billionaire tells his critics they should build stuff instead of criticize him, as if their opportunities to do so are equivalent, and as of criticism and building stuff are mutually exclusive? That doesn't hold a drop of water.

We didn't have enough respirators because of critics? My recollection is that we failed to invoke the Defense Production Act and impress companies into building them. This was based on the values of the Trump administration (who saw this as a violation of free market principles) and not an overabundance of criticism; as an executive order, it would have been immune to veto.

The piece goes on to argue the federal government is a vetocracy, and I can agree that Congress is in a state of gridlock like 90% of the time. But that isn't because of critics, that's because of party politics and deficiencies in the structure of Congress. This is a cynical power play to sabotage one's opponents, not criticism run amok.

I can agree that there's "vetocracy" in the sense of gridlock, but when you say "critics rule the roost," I remain unconvinced. Perhaps the answer is to be found in the book you recommend, I have not taken a look at that yet.

Our billionaires subscribe to greed is good capitalism and hoard their wealth though. Musk bucks this trend and therefore gets a ton of my sympathy despite his erratic nature. We need more Elon Musks not less.

I don't know what to suggest for your situation - maybe talk to a family lawyer? I have the impression that the NHS is probably not up to providing the kind of mental health support needed to deal with a broad spectrum social problem.

Sometimes I legitimately believe that the SCP foundation or something like it is real because it feels like elites who are totally asses have reality distortion fields around them.

I don't think it's exactly completely delusional or obsessive to be sad that your dad is now financially unstable and obsessive about a single thing to the point it's alienated the people around them.

You can be well adjusted and sad that someone close to you is on a bad path.

You can even resent people you blame for enabling that path.

Are you going to tell me with a straight face you didn't tell them there was something wrong with them ("diagnose them")?

If your stated belief is real, then I'd encourage you to reflect on why you were willing to violate this principle, and why, after being challenged on it, you deflected.

TIt is common to dismiss someone discussing something they care about, on the grounds that they care about it; they created this account to talk about Musk, so we shouldn't be surprised that's what they're doing. They related something painful, so we shouldn't be surprised it upset them. None of this should be held against them or discredit them.

If you were in there shoes, and assuming everything they said was true - is there really a different way that you would have expressed it?