Finding love: You get a hobby that you participate in with other people. You have to be friends first before entering a relationship because why would you want to be with anyone who isn’t your friend or doesn’t share the same interests you do?

Everything else: Yeah we’re fucked

Absurdism/nihilism can be the answer! Without meaning we can, and should, forge our own meaning for existence. As cliché as it is, learning to exist by ourselves is an important step before we seek others to share ourselves with.

I’ve deleted my Twitter account

Now stop reading Twitter. You can’t fix folks who want to wallow misery.

Stay off that shit. Problem solved.

The solution is to kill billionaires and make life worth living.

I would suppose that, like I did, those people are focusing on a problem they can’t solve, or are unhappy or unfulfilled in some other way that has nothing to do with what they are complaining about. They have their hearts closed off to whatever it is they need or are looking for. I can’t be more specific because I don’t know what posts you mean because I agree with sylver_dragon there.

Read history. You’ll realize that everything new is kind of old, things have been bad before, things have probably been worse before, and most importantly people have made things better time and time again.

Please provide screenshots of specific examples if you want a more productive discussion.

But having encountered this sort of doomer sentiment in the past and dabbled in it myself, will create a bifurcated answer.

For the individual, the answer is to create in him a belief that he can change his outcomes via effort. While it is very difficult to convince someone to change who is resistant to it, the best path is likely creating a supportive, long term relationship with that person that is empathetic to their desires and struggles, and then to show them real life examples of people who had their same problems and were able to succeed.

For society, my optimistic side says that the main problem is a lack of facilitation of living happy, healthy lives among young people where socialization is easy and encouraged. In our current model, the default is to be mentally and physically unhealthy, and to silo yourself in task-specific spaces, like home, work, etc. This means that there is a large chunk of the population - those who are unhealthy but with median standards - who are simply not attractive enough as mates to attract anyone they are attracted to. And then for the people who are sufficiently attractive, there are few opportinities to have spontaneous interactions with attractive strangers. So by creating conditions which overcome these issues, we could solve a very large chunk of this problem.

My less optimistic side says that the breakdown of monogamous patterns in society and the influx of information about the world via the internet has created higher modal expectations in women than the modal man can meet and results in an asymmetric “dating up” pattern in society, where it becomes a simultaneously entrenched and unspoken reality that men with greater dateability will have a surplus of female partners, while men with lesser dateability will have almost none. Yes, I’m aware that this sounds very black-pill-y. But idk, the math checks out - especially based on the number of (liberal/left leaning, educated) women I’ve encountered who have explicitly told me that they would happily be in a relationship with a man where he could fuck around on the side but they couldn’t (or some variation of this, like a girls only rule) - just as long as he was a good, committed, and supportive partner to them. And then the solution to this problem would be (best case) a sort of monastic class of less dateable men, or (worst case) the “spontaneous” creation of wars to burn off the excess less dateable men, or (worster case) violence from the less dateable men on society until some sort of equilibrium is reached.

And yes, I am aware of how doomer this sounds. I suggest we try to implement the optimistic solution first and hope it works.