
How Loneliness Is Tearing America Apart - pseudolus
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/23/opinion/loneliness-political-polarization.html
======
npunt
Suburbs are structurally lonely (your own castle with as little reliance on
others as possible), and only ‘work’ when paired with other sources of
community. Those sources are disappearing for a variety of reasons but the
transfer from physical -> digital, communal [1] -> personalized, eating out ->
eating in [2], public space -> private space, friend time —> media time all
add up. We also don’t have strong culture around co-habitation within let
alone across families, and a bunch of other culture things that keep us
isolated physically and cognitively.

Look at schools and retirement communities for examples of how to design
community that keeps us present and with others, then compare to what most
experience.

There’s a space between the immediate self/family and the super broad
impersonal gov’t and/or hired services (that pave your roads, deliver your
food, etc) that is severely under-developed in our modern context. Local
interdependency and pooled resources isn’t a thing. My read from talking to
several peers in 30s is an openness to explore alternative community
structures (eg like a kibbutz) to bring this close community back. I get the
sense from many that there’s just _something missing_ and we’re all starting
to rediscover the ways communities in the past organized themselves to fill
this important place in our lives.

[1] communal being other-oriented or at least aware of others needs versus
having our needs ever more optimized and personalized. This causes mindset
shift.

[2] there are stats showing rapid increase in delivery over dining in past
10yrs, I believe it’s now majority takeout/delivery these days

~~~
clarry
> Suburbs are structurally lonely

My European perspective. I wouldn't blame it on suburbs in particular. I would
blame most if not all forms of city living. Most people live in flats where
nobody wants to have anything to do with their neighbor and there is no
communality. People move in and move out, nobody cares. The less you have to
hear of your neighbor, the better. FWIW I would rather have a 'burb castle
than a flat where I have to smell and listen to idiots drink, smoke, fight and
blast music. And I think I'd rather get to know the neighbors over at the
adjoining castle than the scum in these neighboring flats.

Now farms and other isolated & rural towns are a different deal. There you're
no longer mass of people. You actually get to know the community around you,
and people don't come & go nearly as much.

~~~
fjsolwmv
The reason your city is so bad is in large epart because the families move
away to suburbs. In the burbs, you still get disturbances like constant
lawnmowers and leaf blowers, at least in lawn-crazy USA.

~~~
sgt101
Also planning laws - apartments for singles and couples are cheaper to build
and higher density than apartments for families. If planning law mandates
sufficient accommodation for families the dynamics change.

------
afarrell
There is a skill to running a friend group which regularly does activities
together. It isn't a particularly deep or study-intensive skill, but there are
things to learn about how to communicate about logistics and activity-
preferences. Once you learn that and are able to practice it, having friends
becomes much easier.

It does however also depend on meeting people who also have a reasonable level
of logistical and calendar-management skill. Not everyone has this skill and
not everyone prioritizes exercising it. If you have contacts who cannot
unambiguously agree to meet you at a particular time at a particular pizza
restaurant, you have to be willing to search out different contacts who do
have sufficient skill, caring, and resources.

------
rdl
The non-PC argument here is that diversity directly opposed to community, and
I think there's some truth to it. If everyone in an area has lived there for
their entire lives, it doesn't really matter if it's apartment buildings, a
small high-density European-style town, or suburbs. If the rate of migration
in/out is low enough, newcomers assimilate, assuming the society is welcoming
and they interact.

There are lots of places where immigration (both within the US and
internationally) is very high, and where people often only intend to live for
a while for work, so there's not much in the way of community, and people
don't make much of an investment in building institutions (beyond their
immediate household and workplace).

It's ok in technology or other well-connected professions (because I probably
care more about my interactions online and at conferences with the ~200 or so
security people from around the world that I closely follow, vs. anyone from
my home town or where I've ever physically lived), but for anyone else, it
probably sucks a lot. The only culture I've ever seen which seems to deal with
that level of constant migration in anything approaching a functional way is
the military, and there it's due to an overarching identity, lots of highly
artificial forms of identity (the "unit", rivalries, etc.), and lots of
traditions and institutions actively encouraged.

~~~
jgh
> The non-PC argument

If you want to have a reasonable discussion about these things, don't front-
load your argument with labeling people who disagree with you in such broad,
and frankly wrong, strokes.

~~~
ashleyn
"Non-PC" is often used as a dogwhistle to bring back white racial communities.
I stop reading when such nationalism is even hinted at.

------
Beefin
The thesis from Sebastian Junger’s book Tribes esplains it best: when a
community has a common stressor, that strengthens the social cohesion. An
incredible point made was that Israel has the lowest sucide rate of all the
third world countries, and guess what he attributes it to? Mandatory draft.
The common stressor that every single countryman can empathasize with each
other about is war. While it sounds depressing it serves as an example, do we
as a nation, state, city or even neighborhood have a common stressor with each
other? Antecdotally I find it challenging to think of something like that for
my community.

~~~
coldtea
> _An incredible point made was that Israel has the lowest suicide rate of all
> the third world countries, and guess what he attributes it to? Mandatory
> draft. The common stressor that every single countryman can empathasize with
> each other about is war._

The second part would explain bigger empathy/cohesion (the have a common
stressor), not less suicide.

I'd say it's rather that the draft can make you see often BS personal problems
people tend blow out of all proportion for what they are (in other words, it
"hardens" you). If you have to be accountable to a sergeant, wake up every
morning at 6', do drills, have to learn to work and live with others whether
they fit your echo bubble or not, etc, for a year or two, you get a taste of
more stuff that awaits in the real/working word than you'd get starting from
being overprotected and spoiled by your parents all your life.

~~~
fjsolwmv
How would that help? If the draft makes you hard enough for reala world
without killing you, why doesn't the _real world_ make you hard enough for
real world without killing you? These "overprotecting parents" are still
around in the real world (or not), so what's the difference?

~~~
coldtea
> _why doesn 't the real world make you hard enough for real world without
> killing you_

Obviously because the army does that in a controlled environment, where the
expectations are already set for what you'll get (you're going there knowing
it will be so and so -- and even at that there's army suicides, through much
more rare considering the kind of stressor it is).

Whereas overprotected people can go into the adult world thinking they will
crush it and be rich, famous, free of drudgery, have the perfect love life,
marriage, or whatever just for showing up (or just for "working hard").

You also do that along with others around your age, and you all go through the
exact same shit, and are at it together 24/7.

In short, the army emphasizes that you're not a precious snowflake from day
one, you're just one of many in the camp, so you have time to soak this
message in. Whereas in your "real life", failure will hit you hard, and it
will feel like it's a personal failure.

And, last but not least, you also know it's gonna end in 1 year or so, and
everything's compartmentalized. It's not your life. Whereas a failure to get
that dream job and having to scrap by can feel like your life (in toto) being
a failure.

> _These "overprotecting parents" are still around in the real world (or not),
> so what's the difference?_

The role of the "overprotecting parents" ends both when you enter the camp or
the adult world. They can't fix things for you in either case (e.g. fix your
broken job dreams or love life).

------
cgb223
Just an anecdote

I live in SF and it has plenty to do. But last night despite aching to get out
of the house I couldn’t.

I don’t have a ton of friends out here and the ones I have are frequently busy
with their own projects/life

The typical offered advice is join meetups to meet new people, but a search of
meetups going on last night were only for events where you drink heavily (a
weekly beer pong tournament for backpackers, that I’ve been to twice only to
find it’s a huge rip off and nobody shows up) or for niche groups I don’t fall
into (LGBTQA+, Elderly, meetups for specific racial groups)

Every now and then I’ll go out anyway, just go to a bar and see what happens,
and maybe 30% of the time I’ll meet cool people, but those relationships never
blossom. I’ll text them after and then later in the week to hang that next
weekend, and lo and behold they’re busy

I do clubs/exercise classes during the week, but so far, those haven’t
blossomed into outside of club/class relationships. Every now and then I’ll
ask if it feels right.

My roommates are cool and my age, but much more of the “finance bro” type. I
don’t mind that so every now and then I’ll suggest we grab a beer or watch
basketball (they’re really into the Warriors) but they usually pass. I think
they can tell I’m not quite like them.

In terms of dating, dating in SF is kind of a crap shoot, What with there
being something like 2 guys for every girl out here (thank you tech), but when
I do get a match on tinder and go on a date it usually goes well, then we’ll
go on a few more then I inevitably end up ghosted, or call it off if it’s not
working from the other end

Loneliness exists inspite of our efforts not because of it.

I’ve been in this city for over a year now, and despite all of the effort, my
friend group hasn’t grown

~~~
drvdevd
So, drinking can be problematic, but I highly recommend Karaoke, and ...
moderate drinking.

You may cringe at the idea, but it’s worked for me in the past and can be a
way to enjoy drinks with complete strangers with whom you have nothing else in
common and often without planning ahead.

When I had no friend group, I created a small one around Karaoke night - with
complete strangers. I imagine the same might work for other things like pool.

------
Invictus0
I'm curious to see if there are any statistics on loneliness and race. I often
see the black people in my city sitting on porches and benches in the evening
and chatting with each other; it seems like a very nice community and
something I wish I could have been a part of growing up. Same thing with the
Latino community: in my mom's country, people still practice an open door
policy among friends, still gather around the TV and scream at the sports
players for hours. There is no white community so to speak: people today would
probably say that's racist. But I think a lot of white people remember the "it
takes a village" days, the days before we decided to demonize anyone that let
their kids out of their sight, when television was just becoming affordable.

------
booleandilemma
I’ve lived in the US my entire life, and I’ve come to feel like American
society is one big competition to be more well-off than everyone else. Does
anyone else feel this way?

I think this is why I have difficulty making friends.

~~~
sethammons
I think it is the type of people in your circles. Social elite, east coast,
etc is where I hear that sentiment.

I grew up poor. The only one-upsmanship I recall was in story telling or
joking.

Now as a well off adult, my social circle is much smaller, and since I just
moved, it is about zero, but I've not seen this competition from my cohorts at
work.

~~~
tnecniv
This is the same thing I experienced and I grew up in a wealthy east coast
neighborhood. The parents were more competitive than their kids. Since high
school, all of my close friends have come from wildly different economic
positions.

------
jonahrd
I do actually feel pretty well settled with some sense of community where I
live (Montreal), but one thing I've noticed while applying to jobs is how many
jobs are super aggressive about relocating me to NYC or the bay area. They
almost don't listen to me when I say I'm not leaving Montreal, like I need
some sort of excuse to want to actually stay where I currently am.

~~~
howard941
It's probably more a demand that the new hire be on-site than it is an
inability to claim the perfect excuse for remaining in Montreal.

------
Theodores
The atomisation of society goes back a long way, however, I believe that the
era of atomised society we now know was ushered in by Reagan and Thatcher.

What changed then was stranger danger. With schemes such as 'Neighbourhood
Watch' (in the UK) people saw strangers as potential threats, just there
wanting to break in, steal the VHS player and sell it for heroin. Strangers
were not welcomed as visitors, that was not the default.

Much else happened then to destroy community and make it so everyone was out
for themselves. In the UK we also had the privatisation of social housing and
the privatisation of public transport. The car became king and the poor could
end up being those terrifying homeless types that nobody likes to see but take
for granted nowadays.

In generations before Thatcher/Reagan there was TV and that apparently
destroyed community. True we might not have been going down to the church hall
to have a dance or to play board games, however, at least with TV families
watched programmes together in the front room. Plus with only a few channels
you could talk about TV with people in ways you can't today. There was still a
national conversation, even if it was about what David Attenborough had
brought to the small screen the night before.

Community is the enemy of consumerism, if people are sat in a public space
enjoying company then they are not in their cars going to shops and buying
commodity entertainment. But consumerism has kind of died too, people do not
shop like they used to as any mall can testify to.

Despite everything that is wrong people are innately wanting to have friends
and be part of a community. This will never go away, even if those needs are
currently met by proxies in social media and opioids. Although Thatcher grade
leaders may want everyone divided and living in an atomised society, human
nature will win in the end. Long live the revolution.

~~~
vbuwivbiu
Thatcher, a despicable witch, once said: "they [the homeless etc] are casting
their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There
are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do
anything except through people and people look to themselves first"[0]

A Selfish Gene, atomistic, self-centered worldview, one which precludes all
prediction, modelling and appreciation of collective behaviour of the kind
that emerges in complex networks like society.

It's a simplistic, neat, well-partitioned model that's easy to communicate and
understand, and it totally fails to model real life.

[0]
[https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106689](https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106689)

------
mymythisisthis
People have been ruminating on friendship for a long time. Here is an essay
from Samuel Johnson(the guy that wrote the dictionary), 1758.
[https://www.thoughtco.com/decay-of-friendship-by-samuel-
john...](https://www.thoughtco.com/decay-of-friendship-by-samuel-
johnson-1690245)

------
supakeen
It's easy to point out that this is caused by 'the internet' or 'modern
technology' replacing the need for human interaction. We feel less alone but
are more selective about our friends, live in smaller echo chambers.

In meatspace there's this thing where you want people to like you if you meet
them, possibly enforced by the fact that someone might punch you if you rile
them up. On the internet we select our own groups and then with group dynamics
we try to be the 'cool kid' which results in maybe racist in-jokes or maybe in
radicalization.

I really have no idea how to even begin solving this and if this has to be
solved at all. It seems everyone's stance is hardening and we're drawing
starker 'us vs them' lines or just aren't interested in others' plights as we
can just select the small subset of people that fit with our current mindset.

~~~
threatofrain
In meat space, where are the places to meet? Where are the weekly town
celebrations, or the courtyard everyone retires to? Everything is locked up by
money.

~~~
nroets
Starbucks is not locked up by money. On my recent trip to the US, I
encountered quite a few (homeless) people in there who came to charge their
phones and they got ice water for free.

~~~
reaperducer
Starbucks is a very interesting part of this.

It’s success in the 90’s and early 2000’s was largely due to it being a “third
place” — the place where people would gather outside of home or the office. It
was very social. Very much like the way the corner bar used to serve the same
function in decades past.

But then Starbucks decided it didn’t want people hanging around in the stores
so much, in order to make room for more merchandise and to increase churn.
They were reconfigured to make people go in, spend their money, and then just
go. Or worse — use the drive-thru.

I actually met the person responsible for the furniture at Starbucks stores.
This was right about when the stores got rid of comfy, squishy chairs and went
to those tall, spindly metal backless stools. I asked her how anyone was
supposed to sit comfortably on those things for a long period of time. She
didn’t have an answer, and then the corporate PR guy stepped in.

She was a small person of Asian descent and, IMO, had designed Starbucks’
furniture for herself and her circle, which fit nicely into Starbucks’ density
goals. To me, it seemed like it never occurred to her that people of
statistically average size, or even fat people, should be made comfortable in
the stores.

If you were a frequent visitor of Starbucks in the 00’s, you’ll remember it
was right about then that the coffee chain went from being a neighborhood
fixture to just another corporate outpost.

~~~
yhoneycomb
>She was a small person of Asian descent and, IMO, had designed Starbucks’
furniture for herself and her circle, which fit nicely into Starbucks’ density
goals. To me, it seemed like it never occurred to her that people of
statistically average size, or even fat people, should be made comfortable in
the stores.

Could you elaborate more on why you believe this? Seems a little out there to
me.

------
androidgirl
Is there anything we can do to stop being lonely?

Over the past few months, I have made great progress on developing habits to
fight my depression. I wake up very early, hike, work on my side projects, and
go to communal hacker spaces sometimes.

However, I and many others still feel very lonely, it's like we all live in
seperate bubbles and can't connect deeply. I have no idea what causes this
divide. Have humans always felt like this?

~~~
Regardsyjc
That's amazing! I think people might have misconceptions over how many deep
relationships you're supposed to have. I used to feel lonely that I didn't
know enough people who had similar interests or passions as me.

Something that helped me the most was learning how to love myself and I'm
still learning. I used to hate being alone in my own company. I would have a
lot of anxiety.

Someone told me to do the things you love and you'll meet people along the
way. This has worked wonders for me. The most important thing for me was
learning how to be vulnerable, open, and to trust people again.

After that it was figuring out what I actually wanted with my life. It helped
me realize that I didn't want relationships with people who brought me down
and it helped me figure out who I did want to have relationships with.

I don't think it takes that many relationships to feel fulfilled. But I do
feel that as we get older, we have less room for relationships in our lives,
and culture tries to tell us otherwise when it's simply not true.

I feel like I've gotten to the point where I can't have any more deep
relationships, any additional responsibilities to the ones that I already
have. I think deep relationships, the ones that fulfill you, come with
responsibilities, and thus you can only have a limited number of them.

------
tekla
I find it strange that I have friends, but I'm always feel alone. I live in a
huge city, work has good people that are genuine friends outside of work, but
I always feel alone. Everyone talks about meetups and conferences, but I find
them to be extremely superficial interactions.

I also only ever see people outside work for social purposes about once a
month or two. I've tried going out more, but nothing really ever happens.

I don't get being social/

~~~
astura
I think most "friendships" with people you work with feel like this. Try
spending time with people you don't work with.

~~~
tekla
I have friends by the sheer fact that we went to HS together and ended up in
the city.

If I didn't have that, I would have no friends at all. How the hell do people
make them?

~~~
badpun
I made my lifelong friends playing competitive magic the gathering in college.
It was thousands of hours together, playtesting, improving our game, trading,
going to tournments across Europe... All done on a tiny budget, which created
hardship, which helped the bonding. It would be impossible to expend anywhere
near this level of time commitment while holding a full-time job BTW.

------
bragh
There is a good reason why people are escaping small towns. If you are even a
little bit outside of the mold, such as being into reading instead of cars as
a guy, you will be ostracized by a huge part of the community. And may God
have mercy on you if you are into the really weird stuff, such as liking
programming, tinkering with electronics or anime.

~~~
clarry
I do not believe people are leaving small towns because they can't watch anime
or whatever.

They're leaving small towns because small towns are not the place to look for
education and work.

Idk what constitutes small in your book. I grew up in towns of around 10k to
23k people. Had no trouble being a nerd, playing video games, reading,
watching anime, coding.

Now I'm in a city an order of magnitude larger, and more lonely than I've ever
been before.

~~~
kitten_mittens_
I lived in the Northeast Megalopolis for a bit before moving to Germany.

In the eastern US, I didn’t know anyone prior to moving there for work. The
city was very anonymous, to put it lightly. The only people talking to you on
the street were homeless.

I’d go to meetups and flit around, but it was hard to put down roots where
everyone was friends with their college buddies from MIT or Harvard. The
school I went to in the West isn’t famous for anything other than football.

I moved to Germany figuring that I didn’t have much to lose, being deracinated
and all. It’s strange how many more people try to talk to you on the street.
Mostly drivers and older ladies asking for directions.

Since I don’t speak German, I’m very isolated now though. It’s easy to
discount interactions with service workers at CVS or Whole Foods when you’re
going through them, but I think that it’s the sort of foundational thing even
loners like myself need.

~~~
clarry
I was going to make an example out of these interactions..

My experience is that in smaller towns you see the same store clerks, mailmen,
and other service people again and again and they will recognize you. Some
will have a little chat with you, and you get to talk about your life every
once in a while, even if just a little. That kind of daily interaction is a
heck of a lot more than one might have living in the isolation of a big city
where the same service people are too busy serving too many faces to really
recognize or chat with you. For a total loner, it could mean a lot.

------
watwut
My impression is that many people sneer at the things that are necessary for
building relationships or consider them lazy/stupid/etc. Things like doing or
not doing thing just because others like it. Things like going home to familly
instead of staying late. Coordinating with friends to help each other - you
are supposed to be individual. Or just socializing without networking or other
practical gain.

You are supposed to work 70 hours a week and change job every two years and be
aggressive in pursuing own goals. It makes for a good economy, but also for
loneliness as there is no space for trust and relationships building.

------
h0p3
I am trying to build real friendships out in the open. If any of you want to
make a friend who will listen very carefully to you, talk to me!

[https://philosopher.life/#Find%20The%20Others:%5B%5BFind%20T...](https://philosopher.life/#Find%20The%20Others:%5B%5BFind%20The%20Others%5D%5D)

~~~
clarry
404

------
softwaredoug
I’m highly skeptical. There’s only one piece of data cited in the article. In
that data, the only mention of a possible trend is this

> shows that loneliness is worse in each successive generation.

Basically if you read the linked to report, the data show older people are
less lonely than younger people right now. That’s not the same as showing
loneliness increasing over time. There are many plausible reasons for younger
people to be lonelier... it’s just as likely younger groups are always lonely
and lose loneliness as they age.

The rest of the article talks about partisanship, which is a different issue
entirely. Indeed as we sort ourselves into ideologically similar communities I
might expect loneliness to decrease.

~~~
Spooky23
Social institutions started falling down once TV appeared and was demanding of
attention. You had to be around at 8pm on Tuesday to see your show.

Now with phones we have even bigger attention sinks.

End of the day, the rise of cheap entertainment and the long decline of
mainline religious organizations, erosion of ethnic organizations, etc have
led to a lot of social problems. There was an article a few weeks ago
suggesting that even romantic relationships are having problems as people have
trouble with social contact and apps have made sex on demand a thing.

~~~
softwaredoug
In a grant-funded and eyeball driven world, science and media have perverse
incentives to cherry-pick data to show trends that don't really exist.

You live long enough, you get skeptical of 'sky is falling' narratives...

~~~
resg4mp
Have you read "Bowling Alone" by Robert Putnam? It's a tad outdated, but
describing the same trends of growing loneliness and isolation. And sure
enough, the author concluded that television was a factor (though not the
primary factor.)

The book makes its case through data. Lots of clear charts and a great
appendix at the end. The author spends a lot of time discussing his
methodology and potential problems with it.

I tend to be skeptical, like you are, of "sky is falling" research coming from
academia. Especially when the conclusion is that TV is bad for us (Sounds like
my nagging parents trying to get me to play in the back yard!). But after
reading this book, I'm stumped. I can't say the author is cherry picking the
data. Surely there are limitations to the research, and the book is upfront
about them. No, there is definitely something going on. The research makes
that clear. And electronic media is likely a part of the explanation.

------
AnimalMuppet
I think that we long for genuinely human interaction. The absence of that
makes us lonely. But tech-mediated interactions reduce the amount of human
interaction. (Having this conversation on HN isn't the same as us having the
same conversation at a bar, even if we say the same things.) We get more
interaction via tech (across the world, not just in the same room), but much
of the human touch gets lost.

But I think the problem is bigger than that. Our philosophy has dehumanized
us. It's basically a question of who we think we are.

As a society, we no longer believe in God. We believe in the physical universe
- in matter and the laws of physics. That means that all we can be is matter
that obeys the laws of physics. That's all we can be, because there is nothing
else.

In particular, we can't have any free will or any ability to make a real
choice. Matter that obeys the laws of physics doesn't choose anything - it
just obeys the laws of physics. We're just machines made of atoms obeying the
laws of quantm electrodynamics, which make up biochemicals obeying the laws of
biochemistry, which make up neurons obeying the laws of neurology - and
nothing more.

We can't love in the real sense of the word - choosing what's best for the one
we love - because we can't choose anything. Even the lesser flavors of love
are just a matter of biochemicals and neurons just doing their thing.

There's no real beauty in any objective sense - there's just certain things
happen to hit our neurons in a certain way.

For that matter, there's no truth, either, and not just in the postmodern
sense. If our brains were built by evolution, they were built to give a good
enough answer fast enough. They were not built to find actual truth, even were
such a thing to exist.

So in this view, free will, love, beauty, and truth - everything we thought of
as making us human - are dead. We're just machines, just like the computers on
our desks. As more and more people believe this (and start to act like it), it
becomes more and more rare to be treated in a genuinely human way. The result
is that we are lonely.

~~~
sudosteph
You might really enjoy the short book "The Abolition of Man" by CS Lewis. It's
not a fantasy or apologetics book like he's known for, doesn't presume any
christian or theistic view point, but it describes a very similar phenomenon
to your observations, what he calls "men without chests".

I will say that there are actually places (in the US at least) where what you
describe is not the societal norm at all. But there's tradeoffs with
everything. Super visible religiousity and expectations of constant amiability
and politeness do have some downsides. It is less lonely though.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
I've read "The Abolition of Man". It is very simply written, and takes serious
thought to get the depths of what he's saying (at least for me). Great book...

... but _this_ comment wasn't based on "The Abolition of Man". It was based on
"He Is There And He Is Not Silent" by Francis Schaeffer. (His stuff is _not_
very simply written, and takes even more thought than Lewis does. I've had to
re-read it maybe a dozen times over two decades in order to - mostly - get it.
Still, highly recommended.)

------
filesystemdude
It's interesting to me that among the HN readership, the majority of the
conversation here is either "This is true because it matches my experience."
or "I had a different experience and therefore this is false."

Cities and suburbs (and rural places too, for that matter) all fall on a
spectrum, and probably a bell curve. People do too. I think too many of us
expect happiness to come from the place we're in magically, as if it takes no
effort to find it. You still have to work to connect with people no matter
where you live, However, this doesn't invalidate the contribution that certain
build environments make to loneliness.

------
axilmar
Personally I don't think it's the work/life balance that is different from 60
and 70 years ago the reason of loneliness.

I think it's the combination of the world getting smaller, via technology, and
the rise of individualism the increased standard of living gives us.

From one hand, the too small world frightens us, it makes us want to shell
ourselves from the big nasty world.

On the other hand, we think we are special and the others around us not worthy
of us.

Greece has the exact same problem (which was made worse by the recent crisis),
perhaps in different numbers, since family ties are strong here and people
don't usually relocate to find work, but it's still a problem.

------
JohnBooty
This is weird to me because I feel like it's easier than ever to have a social
life.

Looking on Facebook, Meetup, etc. I can easily find local groups that match my
interests. There's a local Ruby group, gaming groups, tennis and other casual
sports leagues, and so on. Social media is actually pretty cool for that when
used judiciously.

My wife and I -- despite not being particularly glamorous or anything --
actually experience a fair bit of anxiety due to having more social
possibilities than we could ever really say "yes" to. We've got long-time
friends in the area and I meet a fair number of people that make me think, "I
bet I could be pretty good friends with that person, if my slate wasn't full
already...."

I think the big change from previous decades is that social interaction is
more _focused._ It's more interest-based.

Yes, there's less of that "sit on your porch in the evening and talk to your
neighbors as they walk by" and "get to know your local postal clerk on a
first-name basis" kind of thing, and something good has definitely been lost
there.

Perhaps the ultimate result to all of this is that all of this is that while
it's easier than ever to make friends... it's also easier to fall through the
cracks. There's crazy levels of social interaction out there, tailored to your
interests, _if you reach out and do it..._ but unlike the old days, it ain't
gonna reach out and grab _you._

I imagine that in the old days, you sat on your porch/stoop on summer evenings
and your neighbors may or may not have strolled by and settled in for a beer
or glass of lemonade or whatever, including Fred and Betty from down the
street who also might have mentioned that they're looking for more couples to
join their bowling league or some such thing.

It's sad that doesn't happen any more, but I bet there were also a lot of
nights when nobody strolled by, and perhaps Fred and Betty were jerks anyway
and maybe you didn't really _want_ them to stop by. That was also a shit way
to find very specific interests like a local Ruby group or a local group of
transgender Civil War reenactment aficionados or whatever. So, some things
have been lost, and some things gained.

~~~
dorchadas
I don't think the issue is having a social life, though. It's more that a lot
of those interactions are very superficial and often center around one thing.
In general, people aren't making very meaningful, long-lasting connections
with those people. At least, that's been the experience at the few meetups I
went to. Now, I've gotten lucky with a boardgame group which has some great
people that I now hang out with outside of the group (after a few months of
going), but in general most of the interactions from there just feel so light.
Which is fine, if that's what you're looking for (and it often is; I just
wanna play games, not necessarily make great friends, though I'm glad I did
with this group), but I feel that being lonely often makes people want _more_.

I do wonder if you being married has anything to do with how you perceieve
that? I'd expect that it does, since you two have each other for
companionship.

~~~
JohnBooty

        at the few meetups I went to
    

I feel you, but I think any interaction would be light and superficial the
first one or three or ten times, wouldn't it?

But I think what you said does feel really true. If a group meets once a
month, it would take ages to form some real bonds, and people are popping in
and dropping out all of the time, so it's hard to know which of the people
would even be people you'd want to "invest" in, in terms of putting in the
effort to get to know them better.

------
nabla9
> When people have a hole in their life, they often fill it with angry
> politics.

Mass psychosis - solution to loneliness.

------
woogiewonka
I didn't read through the full article but I want to comment anyway. I think
the problem is much more complex than simply "gig economy". In all likelihood
it is a combination of multiple issues that compound on one another. Gig
economy certainly plays a part in that compounding effect that causes
isolation and loneliness but it is certainly not the only factor. Take a look
at an average family today: you have a father and mother who both work jobs,
stay late, outsource their parental duties, all just to keep up with the
lifestyle they created or the bare minimum to survive. The kids are on their
phones, ipads and whatnot and the adults are setting the example at the dinner
table (what.. wait, nope there is no dinner table anymore as everyone just
eats whenever, and if they do, they are on their devices). The growing
isolation at home fosters a behavior that leads to ever more isolated
existence in outside relationships. With the media constantly being pumped
into our brains, we must have the latest and greatest gadgetry for what? To
consume more media and become even lonelier.

The growing class divide, carefully curated media channels and a widening gap
in haves vs have nots encourages an us vs them attitude. Combine that with a
social media existence that allows you to select which highly tuned group you
want to belong to and you've got yourself an information / viewpoint silo that
breeds hate.

Then you have an ever-growing selection of consumer products that aims at
creating a finely attuned solution to every need but in fact creates a sense
of bewilderment and unhappiness.

Of course not all is terrible, as (some) businesses compete, you get better
and better products / services (not always) that set a high bar for
expectations. When the next burger, 4k TV or haircut is unsatisfactory, the
feeling is compounded as we now have so much to compare to. How can anyone be
pleasantly surprised when the bar to compare to is perfection?

Take our family again, the kids are going to college and accrue a ton of debt
and are left to pay for it after graduation. No problems, unemployment rates
are low, just go find a great paying tech job right? Well, now every entry job
requires 2 years experience and nobody wants to hire college graduates. Take
another dose of depression here and add it to your collective loneliness
profile.

Then we have the corporate behemoths that stifle competition and create
massive enterprises which control your life. Want to switch internet service?
Forget it. No alternatives. Want to complain about a service you don't like?
Good luck with that, you'll be connected to India and I'm sure they will put
your suggestion in a corporate suggestion box... In some aspects we have too
much choice and in others not enough. This of course leads to stress,
frustration, anger, and despair - all of which feeds into the pool of
depression. If yours isn't full, someone else's is getting there, and once it
fills up it starts spilling out.

It doesn't stop there. US in particular is great at fostering a culture where
we must blame everything on ourselves. Didn't get a good product? Your fault!
You chose it. Didn't get the right president? Your fault! You voted for him.
Didn't reach your personal goals after listening to that life coach / feel
good guru podcast? Your fault! Don't you know, you're in charge of your own
destiny! Forget asking for help, that's for the weak. Oh, but when you do,
make sure to see a mental health professional since privacy is important (just
don't complain when they share their information with insurance providers who
will decide which therapy you should undergo).

Consumption, consumption, consumption. Take advantage of everyone to make an
extra buck. Screw over your co-worker for that promotion. Outsource that job
to an overseas contract worker - who cares about your fellow neighbor.
Speaking of neighbors, why are they making so much noise? Well, don't bother
talking to them because you know you won't. How dare you knock on their door
and say hello, that's just weird! Nobody does that.

And people wonder why they are lonely...

------
projektfu
I can't help but notice that it's written by Arthur Brooks, the president of
the American Enterprise Institute. The AEI is essentially the mouthpiece of
large-corporate capitalism. Brooks writes a lot of these articles, if you look
at his collection on his website. You take some problem that has in its nature
the alienation of people from their meaningful purpose in the world, probably
because of the needs of corporate capitalism. Unfortunately, large-scale
solutions, such as industrial policy, are not in the allowable repertoire of
the AEI, so his proposed solution is for people to ... do something about it.
Try harder? Not sure.

Edit - fixed grammar in first sentence.

------
mikestaub
The increase in loneliness has been associated with the rise in social media.
I am trying to build a new type of social network to help reverse this trend,
I would love for you all to join me and help grow the community!
[https://peapods.com](https://peapods.com)

------
polskibus
Is this a result of people having lots of direct interactions with mobile
phones instead of people these days?

------
seibelj
Family and friends are the most important, valuable assets you can own. Don’t
compromise those for money.

------
sgt101
Probably far too late to comment on this, but it struck me that the
relationship between loneliness and privacy is not well explored. Does anyone
know where there is any research about this ?

------
duaoebg
America is being torn apart and loneliness is a side effect.

The culture wars. The gender wars. The importing of people from third world
cultures. The inbalanced economy. The stagnant wages. The drug epidemic.

The US is in a long slow decline into a low trust society. I can now buy my
way into nice places and largely myself from the effects. But I grew up poor
and old my friends and the rest of my family are not so lucky. I’ve seen what
happens to the poor and middle class in America and I only see it getting
worse for the foreseeable future.

------
cylinder
I blame this on the built environment of the US. Nothing is human scale or
people oriented. It's commerce and cost oriented. Very few independent shops
in most cities. No concept of a high street or village of shops, no public
square, nothing.

I'm referring to the post WW2 America. Obviously, you'll find these things in
the old core of New England and parts of the South.

~~~
reaperducer
That sounds like a old, outdated stereotype from a 1990’s cartoon.

Many (most?) American cities of any size have spent the last 20-25 years
trying hard to make their cities more pedestrian friendly. Some even require
that any new building over xx floors have street-level retail or other
gathering places in order to make urban life more vibrant.

Unfortunately, success is scattered. It’s a chicken-and-egg problem. But as
more people move to cities, things seem to be improving.

~~~
ams6110
Yes but it's all artificial. All those ground floor shops are places that sell
things or offer services that most people are not interested in.

------
Dowwie
the article concludes with the point that it ought to have started with -- you
have to be the change you wish to see in the world

~~~
dorchadas
The only issue with that is when everyone else is still hooked to the reasons
for loneliness (culture, phones, etc; there's a lot of them). It's gotten to
the point where there's almost nobody for you to interact with anymore, and I
fear it's just going to get worse as younger and younger kids get phones and
grow up with phones and not having to interact socially.

------
wolco
No one talks about the irrational fear of talking to strangers. We are lonier
because we have been taught to not trust.

------
tempabc11789
Um the people in the confederate States were super neighborly and friendly.
Not sure this is the cure-all recipe for avoiding antagonism between factions,
or sections as they used to be called.

~~~
cjslep
I am not sure what this has to do with loneliness. And I am not sure why you
feel the need to emphasize "Confederate States" when it has a name: Southern
Courtesy. Having growing up in the region and both given and received Southern
Courtesy, it's more about community building and less about breaking out of
loneliness.

When a bunch of Yankees moved into town during my childhood, they also were
quite friendly but just in a different way. They're people too and I find the
whole distinction rather silly anyways. Both groups have their nice folks and
both have their mean folks.

Also it's perfectly fine to _be alone_ , as it doesn't mean you have to _be
lonely_.

~~~
tempabc11789
The conclusion from the article was: Each of us can be happier, and America
will start to heal, when we become the kind neighbors and generous friends we
wish we had.

My point is that the neighbourliness of the southern states in no way healed
the sectional rift. Ie the author didn't backtest his theory against history.

So either the authors conclusion doesn't follow from his premise or the
conclusion is unrelated to the rest of the article (which I did read), or the
last paragraph is not a conclusion or the whole article is just nonsense?

------
carapace
We seldom sing together.

------
black-tea
It's possible that what we're witnessing is behavioural sink[0]. It's been
observed in other mammals that overcrowding leads to social degradation and
eventual total failure of the population.

[0]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink)

~~~
Baeocystin
I used to live in Montana, on the outskirts of a small town. There were few
enough people around that it was trivially easy to take 10 minutes getting
even further out of town and find yourself at a trailhead that hadn't been
used in months.

My point is that if you did wind up seeing someone else, it made you _happy_
in a way that just doesn't happen when you live in a more densely-populated
area. And this coming from someone who is in general a rather reclusive
introvert. But it was a good feeling to live at such a density that seeing
other folks was essentially always a positive.

~~~
black-tea
Yep. I often go for walks alone in the countryside and I'll often stop and
have a short conversation with every person I see (which may only be one or
two). I wouldn't even do that at the large company I used to work, let alone
in a city.

------
fromthestart
How much of this loneliness is caused by romantic longing? Marriage is
increasingly devalued, the age of virginity loss is rising[1], maybe romantic
partners just recently had a greater role in keeping these feelings at bay?

1.[https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2018/p0614-yrbs.html](https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2018/p0614-yrbs.html)

------
ziont
I used to be lonely, I used to want to belong to a group, I used to want an
identity.

Then I realize these desires are causing suffering.

Through meditation and medical marijuana, I've been able to free myself and
realize, these are the artifacts of our Tribalistic nature.

But we live in a modern world, access to everything except the ones our
ancestors used to value. I've come to enjoy solitary more and more.

~~~
drankula3
I think ignoring or suppressing our tribal nature en masse is part of the
problem. We evolved in an environment of small, closely related communities,
and develop in groups and out groups. Without a sharply defined in group,
everyone becomes part of the out group, meaning we default to distrust until
proven otherwise. It's sad.

~~~
ziont
It's a dire state of affairs. Some people on HN will go on never marrying,
having kids, or ever being in an intimate relationship. Race and culture also
plays a big factor but society tends to only look for whatever elevates them,
gloss over the uncomfortable truths, almost a collective ego which it shields
itself the true side of human nature: The race towards monopolization of
violence in the tribe through which the actors and directors of this selected
group are able to exploit the mass and writing the rules of reality. One set
of rules for us, the other for the rest.

I just don't find this human world exciting or interesting. I've come to
loathe it. I am bound by karmic law so it's not like I can do whatever the
fuck. I almost feel like my religion binds me to a life of a eunuch. Unable to
indulge in one of basic human needs, unable to connect, because I've been
trying to numb out this world since I was a kid. It's no wonder I am alone and
others like me find themselves all alone. Our inability to bond, communicate,
express is conditionally instilled through environmental circumstances you
can't change. So I guess that's how Karma dictates who gets born to a nice
loving rich family to everything that isn't. But society blames people like
me, it's _my fucking fault_ , there's _something wrong with me_ , that if _I
just said the right things or meet the expectations in some quantitative
manner_. No more. The will to fight disappears and a sense of calm and
wellness from submission to the present offers a warm refuge powered by the
extra serotonin floating around due to medically induced state of inhibiting
the reuptake process.

The present is the only Truth. The past and the future lives only in our
memory and imagination.

------
endomatrix1
The funny thing about this article is that it says political tribes are the
reason for American division.

Then the NYT editors choose to award cogent comment status to a list of
comments blaming it all on the GOP.

They can’t help themselves.

------
thanosnose
Fear sells. And the news sell fear.

Something is always tearing america apart. We are always on the brink. The
past few months, it's facebook tearing us apart. Last year, it was putin and
the russians tearing america apart. The year before that, it was
trump/hillary.

------
jhcl
When you sculpt your country as a dog-eat-dog community go cry on someone
else's shoulder. If you feel that social structures like in Europe are too
socialist of communist for your taste you lost the discussion before you
started it.

------
starpilot
> When people have a hole in their life, they often fill it with angry
> politics.

Couldn't outrage culture be seen as a good thing? What is the appropriate
response, if not outrage, to rampant systemic racism, sexism, and other forms
of social injustice? Should we just lie down and accept it?

~~~
krapp
"outrage culture" generates outrage for its own sake - not for the sake of
motivating productive action, since outrage isn't necessary for that. Twitter
is a great example of the futility and impotence of outrage culture on
display. The vitriol I see in my feed accomplishes nothing but clickbait,
virtue signaling and memetic toxicity, it certainly doesn't _help._

------
throwaway713
> There is profit to be made here. The “outrage industrial complex” is what I
> call the industries that accumulate wealth and power by providing this
> simulacrum of community that people crave — but cannot seem to find in real
> life.

... does The NY Times lack self-awareness or are they doing this on purpose?
If I had to blame one media organization for increasing polarizarion and
divisiveness with the goal of increasing readership profits, it would be the
NYT without a doubt.

