The three political 'isms'

[handle7]

Liberalism, Narcissism and Tribalism


Our modern society is ailing . Most of us struggle to label what's happening to us (some attribute it to secular existential nihilism, others to a cult of rationality, to liquid identities or to a neoliberal comodification and alenation). Yet we all feel it.

This is reflected in modern politics as well.
Focusing on Liberalism as an example: Why I believe that modern liberalism is akin to a mental disorder:

A healthy person feels both unique and connected. These two states of mind are fluid yet in a constant state of equilibrium.
And modern liberals claim to be both communitarian and individualistic too. But in their case, these two concepts are carried to extremes, and are compartmentalized and split.

 

[handle7]

Liberalism and skewed individualism

1."The modern world's traditional Christian and liberal roots have withered so completely that its ethical foundations have collapsed. On this point I agree with some genuine conservatives, few as they are. But unlike these conservatives, I see traditional Christianity as being the root cause of this collapse.
Western individualism is a secular echo of Protestant Christianity's powerful alienation of people from their world. From this spiritual perspective each of us is ultimately alone in seeking our salvation within a fallen world. As a nation of immigrants whose culture was initially defined in radical Protestant terms, we inherited a large dose of this viewpoint.

http://www.patheos.com/pagan/pathology-modernity-gus-dizerega-08-03-2012#BG3QEhpe5WMHGdBb.99
Pathology of Modernity: Individualism v. Individuality


2.Liberalism claims to be about freedom, recognition and self-definition.

Yet at the level of the larger society it encourages narcissism, isolationism and divisiveness
Social groups are encouraged to define themselves through the lens of a small group (I'm gay, I'm black, white, an atheist, a feminist and so on). In other words, to see themselves as different from other people, instead of viewing themselves as Americans, as being part of he whole.

At the level of the smaller in-group or tribe, 'liberalism shuts down their individual identity by limiting them to the definition of that tribe.'

 

[handle7]

Liberalism and tribalism

"Both liberals and conservatives have elements of tribalism in their philosophies.

The tribalism that liberals subscribe to is far more foul than conservativism's. Liberal tribalism is tribablism without any rules. The difference between liberalism and conservativism is liberalism supports ethical subjectivism, i.e. the belief that morality is based on an individual's choice -- while conservativism supports an absolute morality, i.e. the belief that there are certain external rules by which an individual is to be judged by.

As such, the tribalistic nature of liberalism, combined with their lack of any external rules, begets a tribe that behaves like a "mob."Liberals get things done, not through logic, evidence and fact -- but by means of shouting down speakers, forming together in large congregations, and destroying literature of dissent. The arbiter of truth thus becomes their emotions.

Conservatives are also tribalistic, but theirs is a tribalism with rules. Religion is generally the rule-book of conservatives.
As such, the conservative tribalism combined with external rules creates a tribe which behaves like an "army." Conservatives can function much more efficiently. They operate like an army. One person sets the goals and the rest of them follow.

The reason why so many children rebel from religion is because religion indoctrinates them without really telling them why they are preaching the things they preach. A young child, who by nature is a conceptual being as he is still hungry to learn about the world, like the individualist, will feel the pressure of being in a tribalist atmosphere.
But it is not objective rules that children run from - it is absolute rules, i.e. rules laid down dogmatically, without any obvious reason to follow them.

http://www.amberpawlik.com/Tribalism.htm

 

[Saint Peter]

sup, hash

 

[Misspent_Ute]

Liberalism has been rendered meaningless.

Right now, it is Progressive. They have returned to that label because of the damage they did to Liberalism which they adopted after the tarnishing of the Progressive label.

There are two political polarities Tribalism and Individualism. Either you are the property of your society with consensual rights or you are an individual with unalienable natural rights.

Everything else is a hybrid and all hybrids lead to tribalism because once your politics become focused on groups (unassailable victims) then the individual (and their responsibility to themselves) becomes dangerously diminished.

For example, the forced taking of Social Security began with impoverished widows and quickly grew to include orphans and then the disabled, not to mention all of the grasshoppers who decided to live life in the now and rely upon the ants to support them in the future...

 

[Misspent_Ute]

On a side note...


Is this the return of Hashy? Shabooh Shoobah!

 

[adrina]

sup, hash

Or Eyer. Hash isn't usually so long winded.

 

[Misspent_Ute]

I wasn't aware that Eyer had gotten banned again.

 

[about_average]

Seems weird to focus so much on liberalism when we have a president who's part of the narcissism and tribalism breed.

 

[Misspent_Ute]

Seems weird to focus so much on liberalism when we have a president who's part of the narcissism and tribalism breed.

That's what we kept pointing out when all of the Democrats were trashing him; he's one of you...

 

[richard_daily]

Liberalism has been rendered meaningless.

Right now, it is Progressive. They have returned to that label because of the damage they did to Liberalism which they adopted after the tarnishing of the Progressive label.

There are two political polarities Tribalism and Individualism. Either you are the property of your society with consensual rights or you are an individual with unalienable natural rights.

Everything else is a hybrid and all hybrids lead to tribalism because once your politics become focused on groups (unassailable victims) then the individual (and their responsibility to themselves) becomes dangerously diminished.

For example, the forced taking of Social Security began with impoverished widows and quickly grew to include orphans and then the disabled, not to mention all of the grasshoppers who decided to live life in the now and rely upon the ants to support them in the future...

You'll steal anyone's identity when it suits you, even a liberal.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Or Eyer. Hash isn't usually so long winded.

Sounds Eyer-esque.
Hashy is not known for complete sentences or coherent thoughts, but then, neither was his creator Queef.

 

[Rightguide]

You'll steal anyone's identity when it suits you, even a liberal.

Leave it daily to show up with an artful exhibition of assholism.

 

[handle7]

Liberalism has been rendered meaningless.

Right now, it is Progressive. They have returned to that label because of the damage they did to Liberalism which they adopted after the tarnishing of the Progressive label.

There are two political polarities Tribalism and Individualism. Either you are the property of your society with consensual rights or you are an individual with unalienable natural rights.

Everything else is a hybrid and all hybrids lead to tribalism because once your politics become focused on groups (unassailable victims) then the individual (and their responsibility to themselves) becomes dangerously diminished.

For example, the forced taking of Social Security began with impoverished widows and quickly grew to include orphans and then the disabled, not to mention all of the grasshoppers who decided to live life in the now and rely upon the ants to support them in the future...

Good points.
It is said that, regardless of where it's placed on the continuum (socialism: more 'communitarian' capitalism more individualistic), a healthy non-totalitarian society promotes individualism and avoids collectivism.


But why is it then, that political parties and mass media encourage the 'skewed or pathological' -do to speak- forms of these two innate human tendencies?

Instead of healthy individualism (a pull towards self-determination and actualization): narcissistic self-absorbtion and reckless pursuit of own pleasure. are rampant
And instead of feelings of connectedness, embededness: this tribal Manichean mentality.

I see the the first one -Narcissism- as originating the cultural revolution of the 60's. Like any movement, it had both positive and unintended negative consequences.
(*going off a tangent a bit: What is peculiar and paradoxica, about the American culture of self-absorbtion tho, is that on an individual level it encourages self-absorption, self-gratification and excess, yet at an institutional level, the protestant ethic punishes the ill consequences of such pursuits*).

I ascribe the second one -Collectivism- to this Progressive, Leftist or Modern Liberal fad or whatever one calls it.


So why are these two skewed so rampant today?

Are they just signs of cultural decay the death of an era or of an empire, or is it all by design?

 

[Saint Peter]

It is quite asskissey with AJ.

I say hash.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

The "-isms" as they are presented are foundationally bankrupt. Said another way, what a crock of horse shit.

It is a misguided critique based on a belief in the espousal of 'Identity Politics' as an outgrowth of so-called progressive ideology rather than seeing it for what it is, which is cultural backlash against the loss of individualism required by American Capitalism bolstered by the divisiveness encouraged the culture of American Capitalism.

 

[handle7]

I'm not attacking identity politics and other civic movements. . Discrimination and prejudice are an undeniable reality and need to be combatted.

But everything is good in moderation.
I'm just perplexed by the fact that these necessary civic movements that in theory are moral and commendable, have been distorted to such a degree.

See the safe spaces in Universities (code name for censorship of any idea that differs from theirs), Milo Yiannopoulos being atacked for being a gay man who isn't progressive (tribalism), the increasingly violent verbal messages from the Left against anyone who doesn't adhere to their ideology and their tribe.

How long before Leftista become desensitized by all these messages, and verbal aggression progresses to phyical aggression?
Wait. It already happened. See the Antifa and the Evergreen College incident.

 

[handle7]

Seems weird to focus so much on liberalism when we have a president who's part of the narcissism and tribalism breed.

Why am I focusing on Liberalis and/or Leftists instead of Conservatives and/or Right wingers?
They're a much more interesting topic.

It's common knowledge, and Conservatives are aware that some of theirs are bigoted and ruthless.

Whereas the common wisdom is that Progressives are the tolerant and open minded ones.
And for a group whose prime value is tolerance, many of them seem strangely unaware of the intolerance and potential violence from within their midst.

 

[nowisthetime]

Lol, if leftists have become aggressive it's solely in response to the violence and putrid hatred from the right. And even then it is a reach.

The rightists are the violent savages. The only thing that separates the Klan and Isis is one asserts it's violence against members of different races/ethnic groups and the latter is driven for dominance on religion. Both are rightists groups. Fear and paranoia motivates the rightists to violence.

You rightists have conquered and stolen the three branches of government, so what are you bitching about? You still can't even run the government right.

 

[DrDelirium]

There are two political polarities Tribalism and Individualism. Either you are the property of your society with consensual rights or you are an individual with unalienable natural rights.

This is a false dichotomy. Human beings are social animals. The individual always exists in and because of society. Whereas spiders, for instance, erupt from the egg in a survivable form and immediately go out to take their chances in the big world, human beings are helpless for an extended period and depend upon the nurture of adults, and the capacity to provide that nurture depends on being part of a social continuum in which skills are learned and burdens distributed.
All of the complexities of politics are learned in a social context. However 'individualistic' a person is, he/she is not able to provide, by themselves, all of conditions of survival, let alone laptops, eyeglasses, whole wheat lasagna AND designer jeans. Whatever skills in whatever direction an individual may have, they are not innate products of their own DNA, but legacies of the history of society. Furthermore, the expression of these capabilities acquired from society require the presence of society. Not only to provide the means, but to provide the purpose. None of the 'individualists' posting here, for instance, are content to keep their ideas to themselves, they find it important to express them in order to justify what on their face seem to be selfish and anti-social actions.
Every individual internalizes, and is the product of, a vast social-historical network. In many ways, the more of an 'individual' a person is, the more of this network they have internalized. The idea, for instance, of 'natural and inalienable rights' is a product of culture, several removes from 'nature,' which is also a cultural concept. Ants, sparrows, and pine trees, for instance, do not seem to have been imbued by 'nature' with any rights. And human beings only have rights by dint of belonging to a society that recognizes those rights. Without society, the whole concept of 'rights' is meaningless- rights only operate in relationship to other people.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

On a side note...


Is this the return of Hashy? Shabooh Shoobah!

And are you the return of the aka "AJ" "Forrest" "Gumpster"? I'd ask you privately, but apparently you don't have a mailbox.

If so, welcome back, kemosahbee.

 

[handle7]

sup, hash

Or Eyer. Hash isn't usually so long winded.

Sounds Eyer-esque.
Hashy is not known for complete sentences or coherent thoughts, but then, neither was his creator Queef.

It is quite asskissey with AJ.

I say hash.

Or maybe it's ButtwhipesAndCandyFloss

 

[BotanyBoy]

Seems weird to focus so much on liberalism when we have a president who's part of the narcissism and tribalism breed.

Why? It's distinguishing the two. Which is something the left hates because it exposes their bullshitting behind the label "liberal" and accurately so considering there isn't much of anything the left is liberal about.

And puts Trump on the left LOL.

The "-isms" as they are presented are foundationally bankrupt. Said another way, what a crock of horse shit.

It is a misguided critique based on a belief in the espousal of 'Identity Politics' as an outgrowth of so-called progressive ideology rather than seeing it for what it is, which is cultural backlash against the loss of individualism required by American Capitalism bolstered by the divisiveness encouraged the culture of American Capitalism.

Capitalism does not require the loss of individualism.

Socialism does.

You're backwards....again.

Lol, if leftists have become aggressive it's solely in response to the violence and putrid hatred from the right. And even then it is a reach.

The rightists are the violent savages.

LMFAO!!!

What a fucking retard....
https://img00.deviantart.net/7491/i/2004/03/1/c/socialist_leaders.jpg

You need to go back to school you ignorant dipshit.

 

[Hypoxia]

OP's use of null terms renders their posts and this thread meaningless.

Hey, which new alts do I get to stick on iggy now?

 

[handle7]

Such a thought-provoking post.

1.Human beings are social animals. The individual always exists in and because of society.
However 'individualistic' a person is, he/she is not able to provide, by themselves, all of conditions of survival, let alone laptops, eyeglasses, whole wheat lasagna AND designer jeans.
Furthermore, the expression of these capabilities acquired from society require the presence of society. Not only to provide the means, but to provide the purpose.

2.All of the complexities of politics are learned in a social context.
Whatever skills in whatever direction an individual may have, they are not innate products of their own DNA, but legacies of the history of society.
Every individual internalizes, and is the product of, a vast social-historical network.
.

2.
Indeed, and in a sense no one can fully escape indoctrination because our parents and institutions instilled in all of us certain narratives about the world. And regardless of their good or bad moral valence, they manage to keep a society united and functional.

Coming back to the present: The crisis that Capitalist or Neoliberal America is facing today is The Fourth Turning, when most people start to feel that the narratives that used to hold them together no longer apply, and there's a need for a new narrative.


1
By our nature we're embedded, and a healthy need to belong and cooperate come naturally to many of us. So it makes sense why people would embrace the new liberal, progressive or socialist narrative

On the other hand, it's becoming increasingly clear that aspects of the Progressive (as well as conservative party) have been subverted and radicalized and diverted.
But why do people refuse to acknowledge the radical elenents and cling to them, even in the face of the overwhelming evidence?
Is it because it's more about tribalism than a straightforward, innate need to belong?