Concept

 I’m not sure who still remembers it. It’s been ten years now, maybe even longer, since modern liquid drum and bass was still in its early beginnings.

Nevertheless, in my view once Chilloutbear was already questioning the very concept of mixing through his approach back then. Indirectly, he was also questioning the normality of mainstream DNB and its rave culture as such. Through his approach, he was setting different values from those represented by the mainstream drum and bass at the time.

There was a certain distance in it—an intentional separation from mainstream DNB, whose music is built on entirely different principles and values. That is also why the tracks uploaded by Chilloutbear were not commonly mixed into traditional DJ sets. A conventional, “formed whole,” as we know it from DJ sets, did not emerge there. 

I don’t know whether he was consciously aware of this distance, but that is how I perceived it.

Something similar happened when, in 2017, someone said about me that I was doing liquid only because I was a beginner, and that once I “woke up,” I would start doing neurofunk. It was exactly the opposite. I had already known drum and bass for sixteen years. I started creating liquid DNB mixes precisely because I did not identify with the mainstream— not only the Czech one those two were talking about.

Their rave culture, on the contrary, “woke me up” to the point that I reject it for years. And when modern liquid appeared, it was something that influenced my person. They did not understand (my) liquid drum and bass. It is not the same thing as neurofunk. Liquid tends to be more thought-out, more conscious as a genre—this is also why it was once referred to as intelligent jungle. It is not music for mindless rave intoxication, which is often associated precisely with harder strands such as neurofunk.

My first mix, Memories of The Future (2016), was—based on the logic described above—conceived in a similar way to Chilloutbear’s work. Nevertheless, in 2017 I decided that liquid DNB could be mixed in a way that preserves its inner logic. I therefore added SN and began, in my own way, to mix tracks, singles that truly resonate with me. 

Shutdown the Dissolution II

 In Shutdown the Dissolution I mentioned social services in relation to my own person. 

And since I often speak about the Netherlands, which inspires me, I could also name something from a visible fundamental systemic differences between how social services function in Czechia and in the Netherlands.

I am certainly not the only one who can see these systemic differences, nor the only one who has gone through—or is still going through.

 The Netherlands:

 The state has long relied on a relatively consistent strategy in the field of social care: It rather prefers working with a smaller number of workers who are well prepared, professionally qualified, and systematically supported, rather than employing workers without the required education and experience.

 Czechia:

 In social services, there is often an effort to quickly fill staffing capacities regardless of the level of preparedness.

 The Netherlands:

 In this model, the client is not perceived as an “experimental object.” The system is set up to minimize situations where procedures are searched for only during the provision of care.

 Czechia:

 The system is often set up in such a way that procedures are sought only in the course of providing care.

 The Netherlands:

 The worker is not exposed to expectations of improvisational adaptation without sufficient support. Responsibility is clearly structured, defined, and enforceable. Social services cannot excuse themselves by citing staff shortages or systemic failures—every actor knows exactly where their role begins and where it ends.

 Czechia:

 In the Czech environment a man often encounter situations where people without adequate professional preparation enter direct care. Training is usually brief, focused mainly on operational basics, and there is an implicit assumption that the worker will somehow manage. 

Responsibility here is often not systematically anchored—it is not clearly set but rather transferred ad hoc onto individuals (even onto individuals without any education or experiences). 

 The Netherlands:

 Emphasis is placed on structure, predictability, and continuity of relationships. Every intervention has a professional rationale, and workers know exactly why they choose specific procedures. The client is not an object of improvisation but the subject of long-term planned care.

Czechia:

 Work is often reactive—interventions come only at the moment of escalation (even by workers without any education and experiences) and a large part of decision-making rests on individual intuition and the worker’s momentary assessment rather than on clearly defined structures.

The Netherlands:

 In the Netherlands, qualification is not understood as a formal requirement but as a basic tool for protecting the client, the worker, and the system itself. Entry into the profession is gradual and conditioned by specific education, supervised practice, language competence, and mandatory ongoing training. Without meeting clear criteria for education and practice, it is not possible to perform given roles. In other words, without clear education and experience, no one is allowed into direct care.

Czechia:

 In the Czech system, requirements for workers in social services are often lower or bypassed for operational reasons. When entering direct care, appropriate education or prior experience is often not required. Workers in social services may have no education or practice at all. They are often thrown in at the deep end and expected to somehow cope. The result is a system that can fill shifts in the short term—often it appears that the primary goal is simply to cover shifts—but in the long term this leads to worker burnout, client insecurity, and above all the absence of clearly defined care approaches. This results in inconsistencies in work methods, crisis resolution, and interventions themselves, weakening both the quality and continuity of the service provided.

 The Netherlands:

 The Dutch approach seeks to protect all parties involved simultaneously. It protects the client by minimizing the risk of care failure. It protects the worker by providing time, competence, and professional support. It protects the social services through clearly defined rules of operation, and it protects the entire system by limiting the need for constant crisis management in “emergency mode.” This model places higher demands and means a slower entry into the profession, but its result is fewer traumatic situations, fewer failures, and less pressure to rely on improvised solutions. 

Yes, yes

 I often deal with the quality of life in different countries. When I once thought about what the idea behind Sidney SN should be, I chose For a Better World as the core idea. Events surrounding my own life also convinced me of the nature of ordinary people from Germany to Western Europe proper, as well as of the everyday environments I encountered during my visits to various countries.

I am also very critical of some Central European countries, such as the Czechia. This concerns cultural and economic reasons, as well as the mentality itself. The Czech Republic appears economically loss-making and often falls into deficit. I also dislike the common urban development in the Czech Republic. Western cultural values of dignity are different. Recently, the Czech Republic was also labeled in a survey as one of the least friendly countries: the Expat Insider Survey 2025 by InterNations — a global online survey among people who live and work long-term in a country other than their own. It evaluates various aspects of life, including how “friendly” locals are towards foreigners and how easy it is to make friends or establish social connections. This survey also indicates one of the factors why the Czechia is loss-making from a one mental perspective and can quickly fall into deficit.

I also often ask myself who would want to come from abroad to work in the Czech Republic when Czechs hates and created toxic environments, or infrastructure and economic itself, because in other European countries one can be better off economically, culturally, and in human terms — and that, as a person from another country, I would rather skip the Czechia. This is also the economic aspect of the Czech Republic: that Czechia is a loss-making country.

It is also true that various surveys and indices rank other countries at the top as well, for example Switzerland or some Northern European countries. However, the fact that I often talk about the quality of life in the Netherlands is also supported by the Numbeo Quality of Life Index (QoLI). The Netherlands is also a country I often describe as coexistent, and thus the opposite of what the Expat Insider Survey 2025 by InterNations shows about the Czech Republic.

QoLI is based on several factors by which it assesses quality of life. These factors include the Purchasing Power Index, Safety Index, Health Care Index, Cost of Living Index, Property Price to Income Ratio, Traffic Commute Time Index, Pollution Index, and Climate Index. The Numbeo Quality of Life Index ranked the Netherlands first worldwide for Quality of Life in 2026.

In other words, the Netherlands ranks first because it has a balanced work–life balance, high-quality and accessible healthcare, high safety and stability, strong purchasing power, efficient transport and cycling infrastructure, a relatively clean environment and a sustainable approach, and a society based on respect and coexistence.

These are factors I frequently mention about the Netherlands purely based on experience, even without surveys like QoLI. Low hierarchy, direct communication, and a strong culture of mutual respect in everyday coexistence. Emphasis on aesthetics, air quality, and long-term sustainable planning. Short commute times, high-quality public transport, and everyday use of bicycles. A favorable ratio of income to expenses. Low crime rates and strong trust in the functioning of institutions (which do function). A universal healthcare system with a high level of care and prevention. A flexible work culture, emphasis on free time, and relatively low pressure for “constant performance.” And cultural richness.

Expensive isn’t really that expensive

 I used to smoke for years, then I didn’t smoke for seven years. When flavored cigarettes started being sold, I began smoking again… That was sometime around 2016. For the first two years, my smoking was more occasional — I was trying out different kinds of flavored cigarettes. I developed a liking for menthol Marlboros and started smoking them more actively around 2018.

Maybe smoking was normalized for me even more by Charlotte de Witte. At that time, I was listening to Charlotte de Witte constantly. I liked her modern techno and also the values she brought into techno — not underground, but mainstreaming. Charlotte de Witte also visibly liked smoking, and I told myself that I could enjoy it in a similar way too.

I perceived my renewed smoking as a kind of game; I saw cigarettes as lollipops. When flavored cigarettes were banned, I switched to Marlboro Gold, which I still enjoy to this day. If these cigarettes didn’t exist, I would probably quit smoking, because I don’t enjoy other ones. I even have a problem with Marlboro Reds.

In relation to Western countries, I sometimes hear Czechs say that cigarettes in the West are overpriced. But this isn’t true when you consider wages in Western Europe versus the Czech Republic.

Before I say anything about prices, I’d like to point out that in countries like the Netherlands, cigarettes are less accessible than in the Czech Republic. They are sold only in licensed shops; in these shops they must be hidden, all cigarette packs have the same dark-colored packaging, and unlike in the Czech Republic, they are not commonly accessible to minors.

The price of cigarettes is often judged simply by how much a pack costs in a shop. But this perspective is misleading. The real cost of smoking doesn’t arise from the price tag, but from the relationship between income, accessibility, and market regulation. That’s exactly why a paradoxical feeling can emerge that cigarettes in different countries cost “roughly the same,” even though their nominal prices differ significantly.

At first glance, the difference is obvious: in the Netherlands, a pack of cigarettes costs significantly more than in Czechia. But the absolute price says nothing about the real burden. What matters is what percentage of a typical income a smoker gives up for cigarettes. And here, the differences start to blur.

In a country with higher wages, even a more expensive pack becomes a relatively bearable expense. In contrast, in a country with lower incomes, a cheaper pack can be just as painful for the budget — or even more so.

If we take basic wages or average income into account, we find that a smoker in Czechia often spends a comparable share of their monthly budget as a smoker in Western Europe. The difference is that in Czechia, there is less room left after covering basic expenses.

Cigarettes therefore paradoxically appear cheaper to a Czech person than in Western Europe, but in reality they take a bigger bite out of disposable income in the Czech Republic, especially for people with lower wages. Smoking in Czechia can thus be relatively more expensive than the price tag alone would suggest.

Availability also plays an important role. In strictly regulated countries, cigarettes are harder to access, less visible, and under strong control. Smoking there is not impulsive. In Czechia, by contrast, cigarettes are commonly available in small shops and convenience stores, age checks are often weak, and social tolerance of smoking is higher. This leads to more frequent consumption, even though the pack is nominally cheaper. And cigarettes are easily accessible — even to young people (minors).

Price is reflected not only in money, but also in quality. In Czechia, a looser market creates space for old stock, parallel imports, and greater differences in taste. Stricter regulation means more stable quality and a smaller grey market.

When people say that cigarettes in different countries “cost roughly the same,” they’re not talking about the price on the pack, but about the feeling of accessibility. That feeling arises from a combination of price, income, regulation, and sales culture. From this perspective, cigarettes in Czechia are not as cheap as they seem — and in Western Europe, they are not as inaccessible as their price might suggest.

Swamps of Central Europe

 Yes, yes… I often criticize a country, but however it sounds, in my opinion, it’s legitimate. It also often irritates me that many Czechs hate Western Europe, and possess some kind of socialism or nihilism. These criticisms, however, have no real basis, because Western European infrastructure is at such a level that being in the Czech Republic feels bad by comparison. Yet in countries like the Netherlands, far more advanced infrastructure is powered by renewable energy despite all the criticism.

I have already written an article, Little Wonders on Dutch Rails, which focused on the frequent atmosphere of traveling through the Netherlands—not just in the evening or at night on weekends. I also wrote about Dutch atmosphere in Contrasting Reality.

 Now, I will focus on infrastructure, trains, and public transport. For me, trains in the Czech Republic are terrible: they run slowly, are often delayed, not announced, noisy, and the railways themselves are loud. In Germany, trains are at least fast and comfortable, even if not always punctual. Compared to the Benelux, train transport—and transport in general—in the Czech Republic is awful. Anyone familiar with the Benelux would hate Czech infrastructure.

In the Czech Republic, low track speeds are not the exception but the standard, with hundreds of temporary restrictions and poor track geometry. Trains run slowly even where they could technically go faster. Delays are common, often unannounced or announced late/incorrectly. In the Netherlands, every minute is announced accurately, and ticket refunds are issued for problems on the track.

Information systems in the Czech Republic are fragmented and inconsistent. It’s not unusual for staff themselves to know less than the passengers. This leads to a feeling of powerlessness and chaos. This problem is reinforced by the operational culture, where the “it will somehow get there” mentality (not just about trains) and lack of clear responsibility mean that delays accumulate and are not addressed at the source.

Noise. In the Czech Republic, people don’t even realize that such loud railways don’t exist in the Benelux. The same applies to trains. Another significant deficit of Czech railways is acoustic and operational quality. Old rails, corrugated undercarriage assemblies, insufficient noise reduction measures, and often outdated vehicles lead to high noise levels. All this contributes to the perception of railways as “uncomfortable and noisy,” especially compared to the quiet, soundproofed systems in the Benelux.

Public transport in the Netherlands and Belgium is fast (the trains themselves are high-speed), reliable, and regular. Punctuality often exceeds 90% of trains (European above-average), and in exceptional cases, services are temporarily suspended to prevent cascading failures across the network. Modern vehicles with quality soundproofing and interiors, along with smooth rail surfaces, ensure quiet and comfortable travel. Transparent and consistent information systems allow passengers to plan journeys with confidence, even when disruptions or minor delays occur. As with everything in the Benelux, quality is considered a fundamental part of life. In the Czech Republic, almost not at all.

The lag in Czech infrastructure is caused by fragmented infrastructure, insufficiently modernized tracks, and outdated vehicles. Weak transport management: missing central predictive planning and crisis management systems. Or a lack of a culture of responsibility: delays and problems are tolerated instead of systematically eliminated.

Luxembourg also offers free public transport, including trains, buses, and urban transport. This ensures maximum accessibility, reduces car traffic and also emissions, and provides passengers with simple and predictable travel options.

In 2026, Czech railways are still below a critical quality threshold in terms of speed, reliability, comfort, and operational culture. The contrast with the Benelux and within speed in Germany is overwhelming.

The philosophy of infrastructure in the Benelux is clear: it is a public service oriented toward passengers, prioritizing punctuality, comfort, and respect for people. Problems are addressed systematically so they do not disrupt the entire operation, unlike the Czech model, where delays and failures remain tolerated and cumulative.

Problems in Czech transport are not limited to railways. The road network is chronically underdimensioned and overloaded, the condition of surfaces and transport infrastructure is often inadequate, and maintenance is irregular. As with trains, the principle of “it will somehow get there” applies—the system lacks sufficient reserves or predictive management to ensure smooth operation. Vehicle quality is also different in the Benelux.

In contrast to Czech infrastructure, the Benelux represents a model of efficiency, speed, and transport quality, while Czech railways lag not only technically but also operationally and culturally. The difference is evident not only in speed and reliability but also in comfort, information, and the philosophy of the whole system.

This situation affects not only travel time but also safety and comfort. Compared to the Benelux, where infrastructure is systematically planned, well-maintained, and complemented by quality public transport, the Czech approach to infrastructure seems outdated, fragmented, and improvised—just to make it look like something works.