This is more a comment on unDeveloped as a whole rather than this particular song, but it does contain some references to Animist
Born into an unforgiving world, particularly in America. From Day 1 the pace of life is too fast, there's a sea of entertainment that can be damaging that people are often not protected from, information from all corners, poor social services, a host of societal problems that aren't easily fixed... just so many traps one has to avoid in order to live a good life. And usually these problems work their way into individual lives and create havoc, some worse than others.
So throughout your whole childhood exposure to such problems can leave you unDeveloped psychologically. By the time you're an adult you're already in a rough spot, already in a hole. And from this disadvantaged point, this unDeveloped state, you have to move through the rest of life.
One such example of a problem one would face from the very beginning is growing up in an environment where you're indoctrinated with religion and denied access to knowledge that individuals in the past painstakingly spent their lives working toward. So you're like 18 years old and you've been fed a heavy diet of these religious ideas your whole life and have no desire for critical thought, like a salmon or something.
And so people are unDeveloped and they perpetuate these systemic problems because their psychological state was sort of fucked from the start maybe. Again, born into a world that compromises them from the beginning.
Then you look at how to solve the societal problems that put people in these positions from a young age. But it's like a snake eating itself.
If you try to put in regulations that attempt to control behavior and make things better, eventually, if you take it far enough, you'll hurt our economy which only continues these societal issues. This is because you're trying to control negative behaviors that people make massive amounts of money from (all over the world).
I guess outsourcing societal problems is more appropriate?
But if you start stripping away regulations like this, then there's no help for people who accidently make poor decisions or end up in bad situations from a young age. Instead, there's no guidance, structure or assistance and your problems are your own to solve. If you make mistakes it's your fault because it's too dangerous to develop social services that help you.
So when everything's based around money you're in the stomach of a snake that's eating itself to an extent because too much freedom or too many regulations runs you into the ground.
Best thing you can do if money is still going to exist is keep the system somewhere in the middle perhaps, in awful mediocrity, and focus on changing people's minds within the system instead of changing the system itself. But... for every person who makes a positive change in their life, there's another who is forced down the wrong path by this unforgiving environment.
Individually you may find a way to escape the wreckage of this system eventually or avoid it totally if you're extremely lucky, but that's clearly not what happens for so many.
All you can do is hope incremental changes stick I suppose and people's thought processes will change at some point, some way. But I'm not sure that's the conclusion that the author came to in making unDeveloped.
It's like with eating fast food. That type of food causes so many problems in America particularly. But so many people rely on that industry for employment. Maybe overall it's bad for the economy because of the health costs but in theory it would be good for the economy for fast food chains to exist and it's up to the individual to make the right choice. But even if you convince one individual to eat differently, at least minimizing their consumption of such food, there's another young person with no money forced to eat that way. And does the government come in and tell McDonald's what they can and can't sell to consumers? That would hurt the economy and probably end up killing jobs as people would eat there less because it would be less addictive. But they would just spend money in other sectors right? And so jobs would adjust from one area to another. But if the food is less addicting they'll consume fewer calories, giving companies less money, but I guess that's less healthcare costs later on? But fewer healthcare jobs?
A poor analysis, but it does seem like things just go back and forth like this but we've heard it all before. Have to keep the prison system alive because it creates jobs and helps the economy, etc etc same old story.
So bad shit stays in this system because it's seemingly financially lucrative and so the problems perpetuate themselves. Society is just feeding on itself.
This is more a comment on unDeveloped as a whole rather than this particular song, but it does contain some references to Animist
Born into an unforgiving world, particularly in America. From Day 1 the pace of life is too fast, there's a sea of entertainment that can be damaging that people are often not protected from, information from all corners, poor social services, a host of societal problems that aren't easily fixed... just so many traps one has to avoid in order to live a good life. And usually these problems work their way into individual lives and create havoc, some worse than others.
So throughout your whole childhood exposure to such problems can leave you unDeveloped psychologically. By the time you're an adult you're already in a rough spot, already in a hole. And from this disadvantaged point, this unDeveloped state, you have to move through the rest of life.
One such example of a problem one would face from the very beginning is growing up in an environment where you're indoctrinated with religion and denied access to knowledge that individuals in the past painstakingly spent their lives working toward. So you're like 18 years old and you've been fed a heavy diet of these religious ideas your whole life and have no desire for critical thought, like a salmon or something.
And so people are unDeveloped and they perpetuate these systemic problems because their psychological state was sort of fucked from the start maybe. Again, born into a world that compromises them from the beginning.
Then you look at how to solve the societal problems that put people in these positions from a young age. But it's like a snake eating itself.
If you try to put in regulations that attempt to control behavior and make things better, eventually, if you take it far enough, you'll hurt our economy which only continues these societal issues. This is because you're trying to control negative behaviors that people make massive amounts of money from (all over the world).
I guess outsourcing societal problems is more appropriate?
But if you start stripping away regulations like this, then there's no help for people who accidently make poor decisions or end up in bad situations from a young age. Instead, there's no guidance, structure or assistance and your problems are your own to solve. If you make mistakes it's your fault because it's too dangerous to develop social services that help you.
So when everything's based around money you're in the stomach of a snake that's eating itself to an extent because too much freedom or too many regulations runs you into the ground.
Best thing you can do if money is still going to exist is keep the system somewhere in the middle perhaps, in awful mediocrity, and focus on changing people's minds within the system instead of changing the system itself. But... for every person who makes a positive change in their life, there's another who is forced down the wrong path by this unforgiving environment.
Individually you may find a way to escape the wreckage of this system eventually or avoid it totally if you're extremely lucky, but that's clearly not what happens for so many.
All you can do is hope incremental changes stick I suppose and people's thought processes will change at some point, some way. But I'm not sure that's the conclusion that the author came to in making unDeveloped.
It's like with eating fast food. That type of food causes so many problems in America particularly. But so many people rely on that industry for employment. Maybe overall it's bad for the economy because of the health costs but in theory it would be good for the economy for fast food chains to exist and it's up to the individual to make the right choice. But even if you convince one individual to eat differently, at least minimizing their consumption of such food, there's another young person with no money forced to eat that way. And does the government come in and tell McDonald's what they can and can't sell to consumers? That would hurt the economy and probably end up killing jobs as people would eat there less because it would be less addictive. But they would just spend money in other sectors right? And so jobs would adjust from one area to another. But if the food is less addicting they'll consume fewer calories, giving companies less money, but I guess that's less healthcare costs later on? But fewer healthcare jobs?
A poor analysis, but it does seem like things just go back and forth like this but we've heard it all before. Have to keep the prison system alive because it creates jobs and helps the economy, etc etc same old story.
So bad shit stays in this system because it's seemingly financially lucrative and so the problems perpetuate themselves. Society is just feeding on itself.