/lit/ - Literature

>>21658987
>As much as I'm persuaded by anti-tech literature your writing style reminds me of genre fiction and you make it sound like some kind of utopic vision, or rather an idealized, psychological state where everything fits in place. Which is to say there's a certain optimistic naivety, complete with assumptions instilled by fictional narratives such as 28 Days Later.
>Perhaps at a meta level much of what you say would transpire, but that's not necessarily lacking among tight-knit social groups in our modern era. And that's assuming you or other /lit/ posters who bear witness to this thread survive the collapse.
>Is it possible to want the other side without telling ourselves that the grass will be greener?
What I wrote isn't really "genre fiction" -- look into pic related. Humans placed into survival scenarios with a handful of other people feel an unusual sense of meaning and purposefulness in their lives. Every combat veteran will tell you about this; that surreal sense of brotherhood which you cannot get anywhere else. So my description was Romantic, but I tell you, this actually happens. If a collapse does happen, it would be a nightmare, but I don't really mean I want to live through that scenario. What I mean is, if a collapse does happen, and it's not as bad as the film Threads, people will likely be happier than they ever were in modern society.

Is it any coincidence that Existentialism and man asking himself, "Does life really mean anything?" came at the same time that war became taboo? Maybe our ancestors weren't too ignorant to ask this question. Maybe they simply felt enough purpose out of life, that they didn't have to ask.