Both the problem and the glory of things, is it is Individualist vs Collectivist. Even "Muh Jews" is just a collectivism complaint, complaining that they're the most in-group-biased and out-group-harming. It all boils down to a distaste for collectivist ideologies.
The problem lies in the fact that it is individualist versus collectivist. It isn't 150 million versus 150 million, it's 150 million individuals who all happen to be against 150 million people all marching in lockstep with specific goals, oppressions, and dictats in mind.
So of course it is divided. We have 150 million different opinions. Some overlap, sure, but others don't. And we interact with each-other more than we interact with the opposition, and therefore, our non-overlap is highlighted more often to us, than the clear MASSIVE non-overlap with the opposing ideology. The opposing side is a cult-level echo chamber, they have no different opinions. They gain one opinion dictated from above, and no matter how contrary to prior opinions, it is now fact to them.
no? who would have a distaste for this aside from closeted sociopaths who think the world owes them everything? it's only the out-group-harming that anyone sane has any real problem with. if this was an actual part of why people dislike the jews or whatever collectivist group then we'd see just as much hate for, say, the amish. obviously, we don't, because the amish make a point of staying out of everyone's way.
the problem isn't individualism vs collectivism and ever since this image was drawn it never has been. it's always been about what people and groups of people actually do. i hate one serial killer or fraudster as much as i do a thousand put together, it's just easier to see the thousand. framing it as le epic libertarianism vs le fascist unity while only attributing half the enmity to what either of those use their ideology for only contributes to the divide.
i guess this reply also only contributes to the divide... we should probably find something we agree on.
The right need to embrace a more collectivist mindset. Allowing ourselves to become atomized ceded the strategic advantage to the left who embrace that kind of thing.
This is why "conservatives" never conserved anything. More concern with muh free market and line going up than actually keeping alive the traditions, culture, and most importantly the people who established them.
ape together strong. The individual is the building block of the collective, a successful collective requires successful individuals.
The problem is divorcing oneself from the community under the guise of individualism over the collective. Its like a cell of the body suddenly separating from the body and expecting to survive.
There are elements of collectivism that are extremely beneficial, if they can be taken without taking the whole package. Problem is, the whole package is a lot easier to "institute" than piecemeal items.
The right is spending it's time accusing each other of being bought out by this or that foreign country. Lmao I saw an anti Israel right winger get accused of being an Israeli shill for criticizing Candace Owens.
[the problem lies in that we have been brainwashed into thinking literal communism is good, instead of the collectivism that actually defines traditionalist worldviews]
"Individuals" aren't real. You are a product of your race and culture. The idea of "individualism" is peculiar to the White European Christian mindset, specifically the classic liberalism of Anglo-Germanic Protestantism.
It's "collective" whether you like it or not, now are you against the side of the hordes screaming "Kill Whitey" already?
What is this "we"?
Both the problem and the glory of things, is it is Individualist vs Collectivist. Even "Muh Jews" is just a collectivism complaint, complaining that they're the most in-group-biased and out-group-harming. It all boils down to a distaste for collectivist ideologies.
The problem lies in the fact that it is individualist versus collectivist. It isn't 150 million versus 150 million, it's 150 million individuals who all happen to be against 150 million people all marching in lockstep with specific goals, oppressions, and dictats in mind.
So of course it is divided. We have 150 million different opinions. Some overlap, sure, but others don't. And we interact with each-other more than we interact with the opposition, and therefore, our non-overlap is highlighted more often to us, than the clear MASSIVE non-overlap with the opposing ideology. The opposing side is a cult-level echo chamber, they have no different opinions. They gain one opinion dictated from above, and no matter how contrary to prior opinions, it is now fact to them.
this doesn't really make sense:
yes (obviously)
no? who would have a distaste for this aside from closeted sociopaths who think the world owes them everything? it's only the out-group-harming that anyone sane has any real problem with. if this was an actual part of why people dislike the jews or whatever collectivist group then we'd see just as much hate for, say, the amish. obviously, we don't, because the amish make a point of staying out of everyone's way.
the problem isn't individualism vs collectivism and ever since this image was drawn it never has been. it's always been about what people and groups of people actually do. i hate one serial killer or fraudster as much as i do a thousand put together, it's just easier to see the thousand. framing it as le epic libertarianism vs le fascist unity while only attributing half the enmity to what either of those use their ideology for only contributes to the divide.
i guess this reply also only contributes to the divide... we should probably find something we agree on.
The right need to embrace a more collectivist mindset. Allowing ourselves to become atomized ceded the strategic advantage to the left who embrace that kind of thing.
This is why "conservatives" never conserved anything. More concern with muh free market and line going up than actually keeping alive the traditions, culture, and most importantly the people who established them.
ape together strong. The individual is the building block of the collective, a successful collective requires successful individuals.
The problem is divorcing oneself from the community under the guise of individualism over the collective. Its like a cell of the body suddenly separating from the body and expecting to survive.
There are elements of collectivism that are extremely beneficial, if they can be taken without taking the whole package. Problem is, the whole package is a lot easier to "institute" than piecemeal items.
We can argue over minutia after our enemies are routed. That's what happened in the decades following the American Revolution.
The right is spending it's time accusing each other of being bought out by this or that foreign country. Lmao I saw an anti Israel right winger get accused of being an Israeli shill for criticizing Candace Owens.
Okay. So… maybe stop that from spreading?
"Individuals" aren't real. You are a product of your race and culture. The idea of "individualism" is peculiar to the White European Christian mindset, specifically the classic liberalism of Anglo-Germanic Protestantism.
It's "collective" whether you like it or not, now are you against the side of the hordes screaming "Kill Whitey" already?