I'd like you to consider a different perspective. Maybe ask yourself if your current perspective is too self-focused and maybe also a perspective that lacks self-awareness.
======================
I think you might be using a different definition of "smalltalk" than most people.
Me, for example ... I don't talk about weather or sport. I won't pretend to be interested in 'em either.
And yet, I have no problem engaging even strangers for 30m or more at a time. I just pick something in context and mention it.
For example, if you can strike up, and then continue, a conversation with the person next to you in line for boarding a flight, then you're golden. I once lead with "That's a damn small plane[1]. I hit my head the first time I went into one of those." to a tall gentleman behind me in the line, and had a 30m conversation with someone who turned out to be a very interesting litigator.
I mean, if you're in a specific place, at a specific time, and cannot find anything contextual to use as a conversation starter, then I don't think that the problem is that the whole world is too dumb[2] for your level of "smalltalk" topics.
When you "connect", you're not looking to marry the person, just find something you both have in common. If you run into too many situations where you have absolutely nothing in common with people around you, you are the problem, not the people around you.
[1] Embraer 139, or something. Can't remember now.
2] I dunno how else to interpret "talking for the sake of talking".
Well, partly it is indeed about defining smalltalk.
"then I don't think that the problem is that the whole world is too dumb[2] for your level of "smalltalk" topics."
I also don't think other people are too dumb to have conversation with me.
But I do value silence more, than well "talking for the sake of talking".
Meaning 2 people thinking they need to do smalltalk, but both people are not that interested in the other person. Casual blabla to pass the time. Or artificial attempts to "network". (Won't work like this) I can smile about such awkward conversations, but not take part in it.
Otherwise I can make deep connections very fast with completely random strangers and talk about anything. If I feel like it.
======================
I think you might be using a different definition of "smalltalk" than most people.
Me, for example ... I don't talk about weather or sport. I won't pretend to be interested in 'em either.
And yet, I have no problem engaging even strangers for 30m or more at a time. I just pick something in context and mention it.
For example, if you can strike up, and then continue, a conversation with the person next to you in line for boarding a flight, then you're golden. I once lead with "That's a damn small plane[1]. I hit my head the first time I went into one of those." to a tall gentleman behind me in the line, and had a 30m conversation with someone who turned out to be a very interesting litigator.
I mean, if you're in a specific place, at a specific time, and cannot find anything contextual to use as a conversation starter, then I don't think that the problem is that the whole world is too dumb[2] for your level of "smalltalk" topics.
When you "connect", you're not looking to marry the person, just find something you both have in common. If you run into too many situations where you have absolutely nothing in common with people around you, you are the problem, not the people around you.
[1] Embraer 139, or something. Can't remember now.
2] I dunno how else to interpret "talking for the sake of talking".