Frances's Share: killed by the revolution he admired

Sorry, it seems I can’t read the entire article, as I’m reluctant to pay to see it.

I would say two things as a reaction to the above.

The first is that a free individual has the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. There ain’t no guarantee that you’ll ever actually catch happiness. Besides, our brains are wired to ensure that happiness is fleeting. The pursuit of happiness should be the thing that makes us happy…

The second is that if you can only be happy if you surrender your autonomy and curiosity to the diktats of a group, you may never have developed the courage to be truly free. Freedom means that you get to choose when to offer friendship. It also means that if the friendship is no longer palatable, to withdraw the offer. Both actions take courage.

I'm sorry you can't read the whole article. I've no idea why.
You may not be able to read this far, but I think the point is that whenever some lucky individuals get enough real individual freedom in order to pursue happiness, they quickly find that they don't want consumer products and leisure in the hedonistic sense. They want to get off the consumerist "train". What they do seem to want is meaning and connection, and this is found by being part of something bigger than yourself. It is not an individual pursuit at all. So perhaps freedom is not something you can do alone, certainly not if you want to be happy as well. Joining is not necessarily surrendering your autonomy. What sort of joining and connection you might choose to make is a whole other ball game!
I was at a conference at the weekend where the question of those big "happiness surveys" was discussed. The ones where you find that the Danish (for example) are the happiest people in the world, or that there is a point where the relationship between wealth and happiness becomes unmoored...... etc. A couple of interesting points:

Surveys during the covid crisis found that those who said they were "pursuing happiness" during those awful times, also registered themselves as the least happy of all groups surveyed. In repeated surveys, people who say their meaning in life is the pursuit of happiness are also the most miserable. (Reported by Beau Lotto, a neuroscientist currently working from New York University).

I agree with much of what you’ve said. According to Arthur C Brooks (there’s a great Triggernometry interview with him, by the way), humans are wired to be unhappy, not happy. The path to happiness is faith, family, friendship, and meaningful contribution such that you feel your happiness is earned (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=DZpyY3MBlfU&dp_isNewTab=1&dp_referrer=serp&dp_allowFirstVideo=1)

One zinger quote from the Triggernometry interview with Arthur C Brooks (highly recommended!): “Happiness is not the pursuit of pleasure. The pursuit of pleasure does not lead to happiness, it leads to rehab.” https://youtu.be/AoLvGVrc-nw?si=7f8Bs5mhLczb3wHl

Also, for most people, happiness is fairly constant, mostly about 7/10. Someone you loves dies, it’s 2/10 for a month, and then returns to that 7/10. You win the lotter, it’s 10/10 for a while, and then declines to that 7/10. The happiness that comes for retail therapy is fleeting.

Just for fun, I’d like to reframe a few of the things you’ve said into a more rational anarchist point of view.

“Get off the consumerist train”

In modern culture, this phrase conveys the idea that conspicuous consumption is morally wrong. I find this point of view disturbing for at least three reasons:
- Lack of stuff can cause unhappiness much more easily than too much stuff
- “that consumerist train” represents the meaningful contributions of myriad interdependent people. Reducing that train may not make you happier, but it definitely reduces the opportunities for other people to make meaningful contributions to your and their own happiness.
- An ostentatious toy can symbolize all the meaningful contributions made to earn it, it may not be happiness itself.

“What they do seem to want is meaning and connection, and this is found by being part of something bigger than yourself.”

From Arthur C Brooks research, happiness comes from faith, family, friendship, and meaningful contribution. To be loved by God, family, and friends, all of which are bigger than the individual, is not enough. Contributing meaningfully to increase that love, and thereby justify/earn that love, is also necessary.

My disquiet about the comment is that, intuitively, the power to grant or withhold your personal happiness is given to those managing the membership of that “something bigger”.

In contrast, I choose which “something bigger” I contribute to, and I know that I can make contributions in many different ways at any time. The worst thing the folks in charge of that “something bigger” can do is kick me out, or annoy me to the point I stop contributing and/or leave. Either way, I continue to have the power to make meaningful contributions and achieve personal happiness.