Jeez, i mean, people…. Look at them, study their habits, their mental arrangement, how they use their minds… THEY’RE ALL IDIOTS– WHY?? – BECAUSE THEY’RE *NOT* IDIOTS..
“FOOLS” would be a better description – this world is a SHIP OF FOOLS – if they WOULD ALL just become STUPID; they would get happy!
Happiness in intelligent people is a rare condition – the DIVINE lies closer to the idiot – THE IDIOT, like me, has a perpetual state of EASE, RELAXATION, GOING, that stems from a sort of STUPOR!
It’ s right! Right here in this quotation Meme of Nietzsche’s views and thoughts on a MAN’S HOPE!
Something like, paraphrased: “Hope.. The thing that keeps man rising out of bed every day and plow the master’s field, rather than losing all that hope and rather, FINALLY BURN THE MASTER’S FIELD TO ASHES..”
Goes along perfectly with the notion of; “Killing The Father Fucking The Mother” – that Jim Morrison had..
Tom overthrow all FAMILIAR LAWS AND TRADITION, finally BREAK ON THROUGH TO REAL LIFE OTHER SIDE – INTO FREEDOM BEYOND ILLUSION OF FREEDOM – A realization that you ARE ALIVE, so naturally you become ALIVE – to actually do the CRAZY shit which LIVING PEOPLE DO – like beyond conventual tradition of LAW & ORDER – breaking on through to the side of UNLIMITED FREEDOM; LIFE BEYOND the SLEEP-STATE of the everyday CONSPIRACYDUPE – to really embrace your sake of existing LIKE BEYOND THE NORM, the SLEEP! LOOK AT THIS WORLD OF MAN – IT’s NOT out of control–IT’S IN A SLUMBER of Goodie-two-shoes-NORMALS, all Bipedals walking around doing stuff that IS NORMAL TO DO – BREAK ON THROUGH THAT TO LIVE, live like life is actually something you actually do, THE FULL EXPERIENCE of going past traditional law and order – to the garden, the other side – “WHERE’S THE FEAST WE WERE PROMISED; Where is the wine the new wine…DYING ON THE VINE” – man is a sleeping creature of VIRTUE and CONTROL, subdued to ORDER…to sleep – the MAN is a MONGOLOID, A BRUTE that can’t see because he has never gone OUT OF HIS MIND, to become REAL!
As i see it- it’s ALL like in that Song “Alabama Song”- By The Doors – linked here, for your listening pleasure:
I mean, it’s all trajectory the NORMAL MAN FINDS IN LIFE; Whiskey and young sexy ladies!
ALCOHOL is actually a great TRAJECTORY in our human world – man must find the next WHISKEY BAR, the NEXT LITTLE GIRL, or he “must die!”
It’s like a CONCRETE ZOO – man has stepped away from NATURE, to replace his TRAJECOTRY OF LIFE– FROM NATURE TO WHISKEY AND HOT CHICKS.. If there’s ONE THING you can say about MANKIND – it’s that there’s NOTHING KIND ABOUT MAN, man is a OGRE:
Because, something i’ve been wondering; does being KIND makes a person look SILLY?? I don’t understand– see, i’ve done some bad things in my days, sure, i’m not gonna raise myself up as the perfect poster child- – BUT, i can say, HONESTLY, now after reaching middle age – AND all the torments i’ve been through – that i purely AM KIND!
How fucking hard can it be – to just BE BLIND, as in blind love – how hard can it be to just BELIEVE IN GOODNESS OF A STUPID, POOR, OLD HEART – to HAVE A STRONG, BIG HEART…most people can relate
I mean, i got PMA! Positive mental attitude – you can come TO ME whatever distress you’re in and i would never deride, i would give a blind-love, a purely-unassuming-indifference for whatever you’re blamed for.. I see you as a dead person would see you, I’M FREEDOM!
I got NO MOTIVES to rip anyone off and do anything bad, like get closer so i can screw someone – i purely would never BE ANYTHING BUT BLIND-KIND – Most people can probably relate, and some doesn’t deserve that blind kindness…some are just EVIL PEOPLE!
BUT IT SHOWS, just how the great EMPIRE of America is conceived – I know how i’ve spoken a lot about how our world really ain’t very aesthetically rich – and you may or may not agree with that – BUT, it’s not like taking a Brutalism concrete building and put some swirly, whimsical details ON IT
No, what i would have liked to see from the cradle of man’s recent age, created as architectural achievement – WOULD POINT TOWARDS A WHOLE DIFFERENT PERCEPTION OF REALITY
And that perception of reality, is often awoken by use of LSD; FUZZY/FUNKY– IT’S A STRAIGHT WORLD, a straight WORLD OF STEEL!
Just as an example – something you don’t find here in Sweden – about them Suburban-planned-areas where there’s basically IDENTICAL HOUSES, all erected in formation of rows and intersecting rows upon rows of THE EXACT SAME HOUSE..
I mean, isn’t that kind of coming from a mental-concept pointing to a disturbed mind at works of creating a unified, hellish landscape of formal NORM-DISSOLUTION?? Shaping the landscape to a COMPLETELY POINTLESS, UNIFORMAL, UNLIVABLE PHENOMENON of THE CON IN ALL IT’S INSANE HORRORS – a world of FULL ON STATUS QUE–LIFE? HOW can you settle in such a SLEEP-MODE, such a LOCKED WAY as living in once of THOSE HOUSES – and it goes to tell you a little something about THIS, MAN’S, WORLD – it’s NORMAL!
But if you don’t care for my perspective on the thing – here’s AI, giving his thoughts on the Subject:
I can see why those developments provoke a strong reaction. For many people, rows of nearly identical houses feel sterile, repetitive, or emotionally flat compared with older neighborhoods that grew over decades.
There are a few reasons they exist that don’t require assuming the planners had a disturbed or malicious mindset:
- Cost and speed. Repeating a handful of house designs is much cheaper than designing each home individually.
- Zoning and regulation. Developers often work within rules about setbacks, lot sizes, roads, and utilities, which naturally produces repetitive layouts.
- Risk reduction. Building what has sold well before is financially safer than experimenting.
- Consumer demand. Many buyers prioritize affordability, predictability, and low maintenance over architectural uniqueness.
That said, your criticism touches on something that urban designers, architects, and philosophers have debated for decades. There are genuine concerns that highly standardized suburbs can:
- reduce a sense of place or local identity,
- discourage walking by separating homes from shops and workplaces,
- create visually monotonous environments,
- foster dependence on cars,
- make neighborhoods feel interchangeable.
Writers such as Jane Jacobs argued that cities become healthier when they develop organically, with mixed uses, diverse buildings, and many different kinds of people interacting. Christopher Alexander similarly argued that environments built from repeating rigid templates often lack the qualities that make places feel alive.
Where I’d be cautious is with the leap from “this environment feels dehumanizing” to “it must have been created by disturbed minds” or “it’s a deliberate con.” Those are stronger claims than the available evidence supports. Large-scale suburban developments are usually the outcome of economic incentives, regulations, financing, and market preferences interacting over time. The result can certainly feel alienating without requiring sinister intent.
There’s also an interesting psychological angle. Humans generally respond well to environments that balance order and variety. Too much randomness feels chaotic, but too much uniformity can feel oppressive or lifeless. Many people experience identical housing tracts as sitting too far toward the “uniformity” end of that spectrum.
So I’d separate two ideas:
- Aesthetic and social critique: “This kind of development can be monotonous, impersonal, and may weaken a sense of place.” That’s a well-established and widely discussed perspective.
- Psychological diagnosis of the creators: “This reflects disturbed minds or a coordinated attempt to dissolve individuality.” That’s much harder to support with evidence.
Your reaction isn’t unusual. Plenty of people find endless rows of identical houses unsettling. The disagreement is usually about why they came to dominate parts of the landscape—whether they’re primarily the byproduct of economics and planning systems, or whether they reflect a deeper cultural preference for efficiency, predictability, and standardization over individuality and organic growth. Those are legitimate questions worth exploring without assuming a single underlying motive.