does the ride end?

well it's like how marco polo wrote about dragons.
most modern historians choose to believe he's full of shit. I choose to believe that dragons pulled the khan's chariot.

>>2566017
same goes for any type of knowledge learned. once you begin seriously improving your learning the paradox is you become more discontent with the plebs around you

>>2566036
If I can give one piece of advice on the basis of this paradox, it's to stay the FUCK away from politics.
Do not touch. Lethal. Danger of death. Keep out. Entry strictly forbidden. $500 fine. Warning: Corrosive.

No! Not even recent historical politics (~post WW2, stay <1925 or earlier just to be safe.), you'll just start making links. No. No. NO.

>>2566084
tell me your experience i'm interested to hear

>>2566087
Not him, but my take.
Politics in the last 30 (40?) years has actually been in a very narrow box where you choose between multiple flavors of basically the same two or three political philosophies. If you become too engaged with the politics of earlier eras, if you start to see all the paths we aborted out of historical coincidence, you're perspective on what we should do about anything is going to get /weird/. Anybody who notices that you aren't in their part of the box is going to assume that you're from the retarded part of their enemy's box trying to slide them, and since you are one of only like 10 people who even understands what "A Magna Carte corporatist state with a hereditary CEO answering to stock holding syndicalists" would look like, you're never going to find your own tribe of like-minded political thinkers. Better, in some people's opinion, to just never worry about it.

>>2566107

Fuck, that explains me perfectly.

>>2566087
Politics is a field very dependent on making people do stuff, or at least how they do stuff - be it armed revolution or voting for you or just adhering to the NAP or whatever. This makes the problem of contempt for plebs (as a whole) even worse, while also making you increasingly depressed when you realize you want something that could work brilliantly, not just on paper but in practice - but is impossible to implement. God forbid you then find charts showing areas where things have gotten worse over recent decades. You very quickly extrapolate this to disaster.

And then you realize everyone else is still arguing over something utterly trivial in a competition between two major parties offering slight variations on the same core ideology a-la >>2566107 . At least with history you sort of accept in advance you're just looking at the past, with politics and political history there's always an underlying desire to improve the world as it is now - but it's a waste of time looking into what changes will make the world better or whatever because you're simply never going to see them implemented in any major way.

(Though I admit there's a slight intellectual laziness on my part in this pure pessimism, but it really is a great heuristic, and amounts to a zero-loss situation - either you're right *or* you get something nice.)