Stoicism at its most reductive is the goal of improving what things you can influence, and relieving yourself from the emotional burden of the things you can’t influence.

Now that can be a useful tool and for a lot of people there are lessons to learn from it. If for instance you get road rage at another driver, stoicism would tell you, that you cannot influence that other drivers behaviour or driving ability, so you should release the anger you hold towards them, and instead work on what you can influence I.e. your own driving technique to drive leaving a bigger gap, better anticipate other road users etc to avoid the situation in the future. That would be great advice, it will improve your state of mind, mood and your driving.

There you are, I’ve saved you reading the book lol.

However stoicism is good for maintaining the status quo, because it concentrates on acceptance of external events which can lead to political apathy. Rather than challenging the systems that create your material conditions that are the cause of your ails. It doesn’t have to be that way, but a lot of modern stoicism is right wing rugged individualism accept the status quo and don’t get so upset about the world (and its injustices). “We’re destroying the planet and doing genocide, but you personally can’t change that so why are you so emotional?” That’s my main beef with it. I think it’s a practical way of dealing with everyday annoyances, but not good for tackling systemic issues as it can promote a tragedy of the commons.

Though I will say it could be considered a good call to action. Stop whinging on the internet about problems (I.e. having emotions about something you aren’t influencing), go out and do something about it! (I.e. Actually influence the thing)