Americans are choosing to be alone, but we should reverse that

I feel like it's the opposite. This was caused by the destruction of individualism.

When people are individuals, you know the name of your butcher and which farm your wheat came from. Now it all comes from the collective and you can't participate in the process without being a drone. Working for Walmart is not the same as operating your own farm stand. You lack autonomy because decisions are made collectively by corporations and legislators, and that makes everything bland, homogeneous and fungible.

>The fundamental force behind this is individualism. Every single technological innovation has made it easier for the individual to function better alone. Every societal change has emphasized the individual right over the (real or perceived) benefit of the collective. This trend seems to accelerate and absolutely nothing that is happening in western society even remotely suggests a possible turnaround.

I've long captured this by saying that a society based around the individual is a contradiction.

> But you'll do all that against massive societal forces.

What forces exactly?

> A few decades back you'd join one of the few organizations or clubs that happened in your area, and instantly be in a reliable community (if you adapt a little - let's ignore all the downsides for a moment).

I’ve joined two different clubs. One 7 years ago and one this year. Both have resulted in good friends, outings, and even trips to other states. There are more people who want to see more of me than I have time for.

> Friends would hook you up with a partner who's as nerdy as you.

I met my wife at a friend’s party 5 years ago.

> When I was young random strangers had regularly great conversations on trains. A city street was a village, you knew everyone.

I know my neighbors on both sides and across the street, and routinely have conversations with people I meet when I’m walking my dog.

> That is not coming back anytime soon.

I don’t think it’s gone anywhere. As far as I can see there are far more groups of people doing interesting things than I have time for. Mostly I’m turning down opportunities.

If you ask me, it's because humans fucking suck to be around. Myself and yourself included, along with everyone else.

Marrying? Fuck that; pun intended. Friends? I can count the number of true friends I've ever had with one hand. Co-workers and comrades? Ultimately, we're just there to make ends meet. Societal collective (eg: neighborhoods, villages, towns)? Well, we're here talking about this because such things have become pieces of history.

I crave solitude, even if in practice that solitude relies on a handful of people and organizations that enable it (eg: supermarkets, gas stations, power company). Interacting with people fucking sucks balls, the less of it the better I say. I'd sooner deal with machines or our fellow animal peers.

The way I see it, back in the old days people tolerated being around each other because that was a hard requirement to long-term survival. But that is no longer the case, and given that relinquishment and freedom, I for one am going to take full advantage of that freedom and enjoy something my ancestors couldn't.

Of course, this also means I won't have any descendants to enjoy what I enjoy (or enjoy what I couldn't), but that's none of my concern because I don't care about leaving behind offspring in the first place. Individualism baby, everyone including Mother Nature can go pound sand.

<< That is not coming back anytime soon.

I am posting this as a person born and raised in a rather small community. I personally do not yearn for the good old days when 'everyone knew everyone' and there were things to do together. We did things together, because of geographical convenience and random chance. We had no other options so we did kids things. Granted, I was lucky to be included in that particular group, because they all were much, much smarter than me, but despite relatively pleasant memories, I enjoy my current situation much more.

<< When I was young random strangers had regularly great conversations on trains.

I accept that being extrovert and/or social is(was?) the default mode in polite society, but I think we can agree that not everyone is built the same way. I certainly do not talk to strangers bar some unusual turn of events that requires cooperation.

<< Every single technological innovation has made it easier for the individual to function better alone.

Is that a bad thing? We can now individually decide the life we actually want to lead with minimal interplay between various mediators that would have been mandatory only decades ago. Should we not be celebrating this as a tremendous achievement of humanity as a whole?

I think this analysis, and the analysis of the opinion article, jumps to too many conclusions.

This article says that the trend has started since 2013. In what way has American individualism changed since then? I would say it hasn't. How could American culture shift that much in less than 10 years in this specific span? I don't buy that explanation without more thorough study.

American individualism has existed far longer than the data in this article. We've been sitting in cars by ourselves since the mid-century. I am most skeptical about easy and simple explanations like the one you're describing.

For one thing, I'm looking through the data and I'm struggling to find the data that the chart is representing: https://www.bls.gov/tus/database/tustabs.htm

Is anyone else able to find it?

> Every single technological innovation has made it easier for the individual to function better alone.

Isn’t it more nuanced? In order for someone to not need a wife for laundry service, we rely on the manufacturer. We rely on electricity.

It seems like we become more tightly dependent (single directional graph) on more people in order to feel superficially less intertwined.

I think people need other people more than ever. We just might not need them to be our masters or servants.

Individuals thrive in communities. Individualism is doing your thing.

What we have in the west (and increasingly the east) is the opposite: the creation of isolated cogs, educated to be mere cogs, following mass fashions, work as replacable units, and leave no mark of their existence.

Their "individuality" is reduced to consumerism, and is sold to them through chosing among ready made brands (of gadgets, clothes, cultural products). They're "invididually" part of market groups.

Those are, as you observe, better able to function alone than in the past (e.g. no need to cooperate to get it), but they also have no support group, and often not even family and friends to support them, and help them do anything and to allow them to be able to resist (work conditions, political pressure, etc).

They're not individuals, they're cogs with cookie cutter "identities". Nobody knows or cares who they are even - because each of them is as good as any other, just a unit to get some services of.

As kid I spent time in an old fashioned Russian serf type village, where a bunch of families lived together and worked a bunch of strips of land. It was the best time I ever had. Everyone had a job to do, and they were happy to let you help. The tasks you were given seemed fulfilling and meaningful.

Today is horrible. Nobody lives with family or knows neighbors around here. No more church. There are some craft clubs, but what's the point? Anything you can make pales in comparison to what you can get for a couple of bucks from Amazon. Growing a garden also seems pointless when you see the local grocery store. There are a bunch of hobbies but they also seem pointless when you look at a few Youtube videos and see all the popular channels doing exactly what you would like to but a million times better.

Honestly if I didn't have a kid I'd probably hang up my hat, but I do need to figure out how to make sure the kid doesn't have this experience.

(p.s. moving back to the Russian serf village is not the solution, that place is now ruined, young people moved to the city, old people died off or drank themselves to death. One guy hung himself.)

I'm in a similar situation in a very rural area, except probably worse to some degree. I do have a couple of family members local, but there's no bars, zero dating potential, no hobby groups, and no events for people my age whatsoever.

I've seriously considered moving to a city, but then I'll have to lose the tiny bit of social interaction I actually do have, my family. In some ways I want to believe I could build a better social life in a city and be happier since there's more opportunity on all fronts, but I don't actually believe that would be the case.

I've never even met my coworkers, my social life is non-existent. It's actually crazy to think it's even possible to end up in a situation like I have.

The loneliness has seriously messed with me mentally at this point and I really can't see things getting better anywhere I am. I'm not sure I could muster the will to move at this point anyway. I think I may be too far gone.

I don't have a fix for you, but I completely get where you're coming from.

Hey, can relate. Your situation seems tough, but you're right, you're not alone in this situation. Something I've noticed as I got older is just how isolating the US can be. The predominate culture is for children to go to college (oftentimes far away from family), then move to a city (again far away from family).

People don't go to church or other religious gatherings as often so people don't build community that way as much anymore.

And now that work is remote/hybrid, as you said, even when you go into the office there isn't much there. I think the US is really failing from an institutional level in that the only reliable way I have ever had of meeting new people was schooling. A dream of mine is that community centers become well funded and become just a place to hang out (like a library but with more activities) and can help facilitate bringing communities together and building those relationships.

But I hope something changes for you, and you do something to change it. Best of luck!

My solution, and I respect its not for everyone, is learn to cook and start inviting people around for weekend lunch/dinners. I think this is more personal and better than heading to bars and restaurants.

I find this is a really good way to build a social network and become part of groups. It may be a little intimidating at first, but as it becomes regular, it's easier to add new people to an existing friend group than many new people together.

If people get along start expanding to other things. Weekends away or days trips to do hobby x. Bring new people in. Understand sometimes you have to move on from people that dont fit. But overall put in the effort to be the organiser.

I think people sometimes forget as an adult you often have to put in effort to build new relationships. It doesnt happen as organically as it did when you were young. There's huge value in it and we'll worth it I feel.

I definitely recommend meetups. I think the key is to accept that some will be duds, but keep trying. And don’t overspecialize.

I moved to a new big city a while back, and meetups (from Meetup.com but just because I don’t like FB) were a huge help. It was hard at first, I picked some really bad ones but then I found better ones. It’s still hit or miss but I know the good ones are out there.

I have ended up with one I go to regularly — for a topic I’m not even super interested in, but I’ve met very interesting people there. Plus one I used to go to that I could drop in on if I felt lonely, it’s not topic-based. I even lead one myself, once in a while, going to art shows: that’s pretty stressful for me but also rewarding. Enough so that I’ve thought about starting another, unrelated one.

In about a year of doing this, I have made two friends and am probably making a third, and I have a backlog of meetups I’d love to try out if my schedule shifts and I could go to them.

It felt a little weird in the beginning, because I’ve lived in a few different cities and always made friends randomly. Honestly I felt like a bit of a loser, like who goes to meetups? But as far as I could tell it was meetups or spend all my time in the bars, and I really didn’t want to get stuck in the latter groove. And there’s nothing loserish about recognizing your situation and working to improve it.

(A lot of meetups involve drinking anyway, so if you like bars it’s easy to combine.)

Good luck, I hope you find your people!

I am with you. I just want to share that succeedsocially.com has a lot of straightforward advice in a clean, ad-free format. In particular it talks about social issues more likely to afflict HN readers ("I hate small talk" "nobody likes my niche interests" etc. <3) I've found it helpful personally, maybe someone here will too.

Two ideas for you to consider: 1. If you can, get a dog, it will force you to socialize, plus they will keep you company when it's just the two of you. 2. If you can, do one year remote in a traditionally friendly society. E.g I have a friend in Medellín, Colombia. 50% of her apartment building are expats, they do stuff all the time.

Big city seems to be the key. Loneliness is the default in a modern city, because we can. It used to be that daily needs led to friction that sometimes (if people were social enough) led to interaction (introverts were much less likely to engage so it usually took a lot of friction before interaction becomes possible). Schools (and universities) still provide the largest field for such interaction. Everything else has been largely automated away.

If we accept that this is a problem, then we should think about ways that force people to be near each other again, somewhat artificially. This is different than building a bar or making a meetup and expecting people to come - only the most extrovert want to go there.

I agree. There's a big difference in being lonely and being alone. There's also a big difference between isolation and loneliness. You can be isolated but not lonely, and likewise you can be lonely and surrounded by folks.

The other facet here is that it's easier to choose loneliness than isolation, though it's less likely to be chosen directly. I feel like it's chosen indirectly by choosing avoidance of vulnerability. Vulnerability is the price you pay and risk you take to ameliorate loneliness.

Hardly anyone can fully become isolated. You have to work to live, and so by default you are forcefully un-isolated. Loneliness however can come about by avoiding being vulnerable with others. Men seem to be particularly susceptible to this avenue to loneliness.

It is a better definition, but it's still not complete. For example, if I'm talking to Fred about a movie we both saw, and Fred found it really funny and I found it really tragic, and I can't manage to get my point accross, I will feel lonely. That means that for me, increasing the amount of social interactions can make the problem worse, as that will reinforce that idea in my head that I can't be understood by other people.

I'd expect there to be a high correlation. People willingly choose to spend less time with friends and devote themselves to activities when the choice is easy because those activities are almost completely fulfilling, except occasionally when they aren't fulfilling anymore but the person is still alone.

On the other hand there are people who can't bear to be alone at all. Which seems like a different issue.

Yes, blessed solitude; medieval writers were often longing for it. Personally I am a totally misanthropic reclusive hermit and I'm lovin' it!

Another thing is in developed countries with domestic ZPG, like US, Japan, Italy, etc. Even if people didn't want to be alone, having none or fewer children means necessarily some will be alone even if they prefer not to.

It will probably be difficult to have any mainstream support of that idea, because allowing people to be alone and think by themselves goes against the society we’ve built for centuries.

Sure, the concept is praised. But even monks were supposed to live in small communities.

There’s of course the not so cynical take of people not bound by networks being harder to rope in a common direction. It’s supposed to be a virtue, but from a position of power it’s a pain in the side.

I think an additional thing being missed in loneliness, as described by the article, is that it doesn't consider that talking to someone via text chat or phone call is not that different in terms of fulfilling social interaction needs.

By the article's definition, I'm an extremely lonely person because I very rarely physically spend time with others.

But looking at pure social interaction, I speak to all of my family for hours every week and have been essentially constantly talking with a couple of online friends (who also share my interests very closely) for several years now, which would be completely unrealistic in-person. So I get lots of social interaction and it's all the sort that I really value. As a result I wouldn't really consider myself to be lonely.

Even when I did have a mainly in-person friend group, it was hard to meet outside of school since everyone has their own things to take care of, so it was usually easier for everyone to just interact via more remote-friendly means.

The easiest place to feel lonely is in a big crowd.

There really is a massive gulf between small-town friend-making strategies and big-city friend-making strategies.

In a small town you can form a friend group by osmosis, because there's exactly two churches, exactly two bars, exactly one grocery store, so you see everyone regularly and, furthermore, you have no choice who to socialize with, and you know everyone else also has no choice who to socialize with, so you all might as well socialize together and be "friends" even if you don't really actually like each other all that much. You'll be cordial with everyone, but gossip runs rampant and even your best friend might be cruel to you when out of earshot.

In a big city, it's the opposite. You can be desperately lonely despite being surrounded by throngs of people at all times. To make friends, you have to really try and put yourself out there. It's hard. But once you do, you may find it more fulfilling, because instead of settling for people who were merely there, you've filtered the city to people who share your interests and found people who you actually want to be around, and you know the people who want to be around you aren't just doing it out of a dearth of options. Higher risk, higher reward.

Here in Nevada City, I ran a D&D game pre-Covid. Restarting afterwards has been frustrating despite me putting considerable effort into flyering at local cafes and advertising on Meetup and Facebook.

I was speaking to a friend runs a local yoga studio and event center, a lot of in-person is simply struggling.

Also, it doesn't that Meetup.com is now broken in many ways - for example, it won't give me messages on my phone.

Wrong. My college chemistry textbook had a small aside about an important organic chemist in the 1920s who was responsible for many foundational organic chemistry techniques and theories. I forget his name. The blurb ended with his death — he committed suicide after lamenting that his friends always had female partners on the weekends while he, on the other hand, was always alone. The man died of loneliness in the 1920s. Later editions of the textbook removed the blurb entirely… how stupid and foolish.

If you have an amazing personality then you will want to hang out all the time and have lots of sex and everyone will oblige you because you’re fun to be around. It doesn’t matter what the context is. Yeah, if you’re one member of a 25 person Inuit tribe, you won’t be lonely ever. But just because a bunch of people in the USA are narcissistic idiots who are intolerable to be around doesn’t mean anything about the way the world is going.

Not to mention, the specialization and unbundling of each of these into separate aspects becomes a business opportunity to the point that if enough people decide to pay to play, the orignal free versions lose a critical mass of support and cease to exist. Thus, it becomes less and less possible to participate socially without participating in monetary exchange. This represents a financial barrier to social participation and all of the second-order effects that entails.

Even with religion it's entirely possible to be a good religious person without ever really interacting with anyone. Suit up, go to Mass/Worship/Synagogue/Whatever, do the prayers, etc, smile at people, leave. (The joke is "doing something religiously" means for only an hour on Sunday, after all.)

You have to work at it (though to be fair, it seems every religious group will have the person who will start conversations with anyone) - but you have to work at it anywhere.

One recommendations I'd make is don't look for "age group" things - because this will often overlap with people looking for dating partners, and that can be all sorts of confusing and messy. Be open to joining or working with groups that contain people older, younger, or of all ages.

Disagree. I was absolutely miserable when I was forced to meet with people in real life, although I enjoyed some interactions, deep down I never liked hanging out with them. Unless you are very lucky and born in a location where you can easily find like-minded people or if your personality is suited for meeting random people and not having any preferences in friends (kind of people who can be friends with anyone they meet), then being forced to meet people is hell. I'd rather have online friends that have similar interests/sense of humor etc... Than have forced and shallow "real" relationships where I have to change who I am in order to fit in.

Church in this context is a third place, the place outside of work and home.

Church is one option

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place

The issue is that people are not willingly alone, not that they aren't comfortable being alone.

It is not just churches, at least in the US there used to be all kinds of community groups around different things, these all seem to be disappearing. Things like Mens/Womens Fraternal Organizations, Miltary / VA organizations, or even something like Bowling leagues etc. While none of these have disappeared completely it does seem their membership numbers are decreasing in a similar way to churches

Yes, churches do have positive effects on the cohesion of a community. The problem is that the corruption of the churches has countered their positive effects with negative effects and soured people on the church as an institution. In theory, there's no reason we can't have communities with strong senses of cohesion without deferring to a church, but you have to actually build such a thing and not merely rely one to spring up out of nothing. If you're lucky, perhaps you have a church in your community that hasn't been irrevocably co-opted by authoritarians.

As a counterpoint, we still have school (the effect including parents), our job, local markets, local bars, local events (library talks, festivals, “neighborhood day”, national holidays celebrations etc).

Occasions to meet people abound for most people interested to, and we make a conscious choice to not go, or at least not bound in these events to keep people out of our private spheres.

There are any number of clubs, associations, etc., that you can join to get some of the same effects.

You’re a very physically attractive man if you managed to get 40 dates in one year.

Your experience will be nothing like that of an average looking man.

"I had women ghost me or leave the table when they realized I didn't work in finance"

I've dated extensively in SF and NYC and never had anything close to that kind of experience. To me, it's all about being deliberate and particular about who you go out with before you go out with them.

YEah the whole tone of the article is that there is something wrong with lonely people . That's not really helping them

I made this exact point in this thread elsewhere. It is gross negligence to not even consider peoples finances and stress from lack of said finances as effecting how much we socialize.

Who the hell has the energy to socialize these days? I get paid less and less, my boss acts like I am selfish for wanting a raise while simultaneously expecting me to do 3 peoples job, and its crushingly depressing thinking about how I will likely never have enough to retire or live a comfortable life in old age.

Who the hell is surprised that people are just sitting at home?

US society is being torn apart by the rich, and almost every social issue we have in this country is directly connected to that.

Look at the recent rail strike, some of those workers only get something like 40 days off a year, that is INCLUDING their "weekends". It is absolutely out of control how badly the average american is being crushed by a society with so much wealth and knowledge.

My friend group is pretty economically diverse and also cost-conscious, and most of our social activities are free or nearly-free. We hang out in public parks, get together in each other's homes, and go hiking, camping, or to beaches. Optionally, you can put out some cheese and crackers and a cheap bottle of wine, and now you're all having a nice time together for $20.

I'm well-off these days, but I still enjoy doing free/cheap stuff, because I'm there to hang out with my friends, and they're the same friends whether we're sitting on a blanket in a park, or eating three michelin stars. I highly recommend suggesting free activities to your friends, if they're currently in the habit of going out to bars and restaurants and other $$$ activities. Just try it! Maybe you'll all like it.

This, and time poverty

Guilty as charged! Turning 30 soon, just shed the last remnants of my prior organically grown social circle, having judged so many people for their emotional callousness, sloppy thinking, and lazy ethics. Most of these days I don't even have anyone to talk to, which is why I've taken once again to that most inadvisable endeavour of writing my thoughts on the Internet!

I literally know one or two people who treat others with essential kindness and strive to make their lives meaningful. I wish I had more ways of giving back, because if it wasn't for being able to talk with them once in a while, I'd seriously be doubting my sanity right now. At the same time, it's just not right to lean too much on them - there's only so much anyone can do for your existential problems. So once in a while we share a moment of "yeah bro, I see it too, things are going downhill in a profound and horrifying way, but it's OK, we know we won't let it get to us and we'll figure it out eventually". And that's about as much relating to people that I do these days.

Could I choose to "unjudge" the people who I've held to what apparently these days is an unrealistically high standard? Easy, I've had many opportunities to try it! People can be quite forgiving of past misunderstandings, the problem is that they don't seem to learn from their mistakes a whole lot. I'm like, "okay, this person might not really be so great, but they're not a horrible person either, so let's give myself a chance to share some sort of meaningful experience with them!". It goes alright for a while, then I end up having to unilaterally struggle to maintain a basic mutual comfort zone while trying to dissuade poor attempts at gaslighting. (Apparently, it's considered "toxic" to tell others when their behavior is causing harm or distress?)

Somehow it's becoming very difficult these days to be a decent person - as defined by the bare minimum of not engaging in violence or manipulative behavior because you treat others like human beings - and be social at the same time. I remember when the Internet used to provide opportunities for just that. Right now it's doing the opposite; who would've thought that a marriage of mass media and the Cold War military-industrial complex would naturally act to set people apart. People are bombarded with so much emotionally charged but otherwise completely nonsensical information which has nothing to do with real life, that if you somehow fall through the cracks of that whole shared hallucination, you're effectively a pariah.