Solution To World's Problems

[imported_iluminado]

(excerpt from a previous post at "that-other-site.com". My apologies to those who have already read it)


Get rid of Tribalism......

Racism, religious extremism, nationalism, and fascism are all born of the same root—Tribalism-- the loyalty and glorification of your tribe above others. These dangerous factors of tribalism are often linked, and clearly have much in common. They are among the top causes of hatred, violence, wars, and injustice in the world today. The world would be a much better place without people who exhibit this sort of ignorant ideology, regardless of which “tribe” they seek to place above the rest of humanity, whether it be their race, their creed, their flag, etc. I feel pity for these pathetic sheep, who can never stand as individuals, and who can only exist as part of the aggregate. They need to derive their sense of self-worth and personal values from scriptures, moral/military codes, legislation, national anthems, KKK meetings, etc... These people are quick to surrender free-will, the most precious of God’s gifts, and are ready to condemn others in exchange for “guaranteed” salvation, or a lonely pat on the back from those in power. Don’t worry little lemmings... you are indeed true patriots, true soldiers of God and Country. You are truly PATHETIC!--Little pawns in someone else's chess game that you don't even care to understand.

I believe in the human spirit, and I believe in Freedom. I believe in the amazing power of our brains and our hearts to guide us through life so that we make the right decisions. I believe we are individually capable of recognizing justice, fairness, and righteousness--that we can tell right from wrong.

When we finally realize that we all belong to the same “tribe”, and that a life here is not worth more or less than a life elsewhere, only then will we know what freedom and justice truly are.

[Rikbe]

Interesting but not quite correct, you ignore 100 000 years of evolution, you don't mention what made mankind the top of the foodchain, you advocate an utopy that is in contradiction with human nature and all laws of nature.

If you don't understand, I will explain another day, just too tired now.

[imported_iluminado]

Actually, I understand evolution quite well, and I don't advocate a Utopian ideal without any basis. I understand the historical socio/biological patterns that have shaped human nature until now, and I only hope that we will soon evolve enough as a human "tribe" to realize that we are not cave-bound Neanderthals anymore. You are right, mankind is presently at the top of the food chain, but that does not prevent the possibility of our extinction. Just look around....quite a bit of wars and violence going on. Nuclear/Biological weapons cannot discern who has in fact "evolved", they only know who has the trigger...and I am sorry to say there are way to many trigger-happy nuts running around, on both sides of the political spectrum.

The strong will survive? Not at this rate...at the end of it all, there might not be any of us left to continue evolving. I guess that means that roaches will be congratulating themselves on their Darwinian superiority once all humans have destroyed each other.

[Rikbe]

Originally posted by iluminado
Actually, I understand evolution quite well, and I don't advocate a Utopian ideal without any basis. I understand the historical socio/biological patterns that have shaped human nature until now, and I only hope that we will soon evolve enough as a human "tribe" to realize that we are not cave-bound Neanderthals anymore.

Your reasoning is based upon the supposition that we are superior to the Neanderthals. Well, we are not much superior. We still have the instincts that kept us alive during 100 000 nds of years, the instinct that motivates us to achieve. The failure of the Soviet Union learns us that we are not ready to live in a world were everyone is equal to each other. Each one of us still wants to be better than the other in order to give his descendants the best chances to survive. In our modern world, hunting grounds and territory are replaced by bank accounts and other forms of power. But basically, nothing has changed.
Soviet Union did an attempt to brainwash the population to become model citizens. We know the result. Human instinct can not be suppressed. It takes evolution, and evolution is slow, thousands of years will not be enough.
Naturally we can use selective breeding by eliminating all individuals that are not conform the ideology, like we outbreed the aggression of dogs.
What do you want? Make humanity a bunch of robots without feelings? Do you think it is enough to have your stomach filled and spend your life listening to music, say to each other "peace be upon you"?
The sole and only fact that you are writing here means that you are not satisfied with this world and it means that you will not be satisfied in any world. That means that you do not fit your own ideal.

Imagine a world were everyone would be equal, no one would have ambition anymore.
Who would invent new medications against always mutating diseases? Who would resolve energy questions? Who would take responsibility? The people as a whole? Sorry, that is absurd, humanity would disappear by lack of surviving instinct.

[imported_iluminado]

Originally posted by Rikbe


Your reasoning is based upon the supposition that we are superior to the Neanderthals. Well, we are not much superior. We still have the instincts that kept us alive during 100 000 nds of years, the instinct that motivates us to achieve. The failure of the Soviet Union learns us that we are not ready to live in a world were everyone is equal to each other. Each one of us still wants to be better than the other in order to give his descendants the best chances to survive. In our modern world, hunting grounds and territory are replaced by bank accounts and other forms of power. But basically, nothing has changed.
Soviet Union did an attempt to brainwash the population to become model citizens. We know the result. Human instinct can not be suppressed. It takes evolution, and evolution is slow, thousands of years will not be enough.
Naturally we can use selective breeding by eliminating all individuals that are not conform the ideology, like we outbreed the aggression of dogs.

Ok, I can sort of see your point about people marking their "territory" with bank accounts and other forms of power, and how this is perhaps the modern equivalent of urinating on hunting grounds to keep others at bay. Your reasoning however, is actually no more valid than mine, since it is based on your personal opinion that we are still not very different from Neanderthals. I beg to differ- I have much reason to believe most of us have come a long way from our cave-dwelling days, and there is quite a bit of obvious historical evidence to attest to that assertion (I will not go into detail because outlining human progress since the days of Neanderthals would take longer than a lifetime).

I do somewhat agree, however, about the instinctive human desire to achieve, compete, and to nurture our young. I also agree that, as noble as communism might be, most people are not ready to overcome certain competitive instincts, egoism, or other character imperfections. Having said that, I fail to see how your anti-communist manifesto is a fitting reply to my argument. Nowhere did I propose such a system. Surely you can make the distinction between defending equality in the value of human life and the universal right to freedom, and denouncing an individual’s right to personal property.

What do you want? Make humanity a bunch of robots without feelings?

On the contrary, I believe in individuality and free-will, which is clearly the complete opposite of what you describe. It is tribalism, with its mind-numbing structures and its constant appeal to the masses, that turns humanity into mindless robots devoid of logic or feelings.


Do you think it is enough to have your stomach filled and spend your life listening to music, say to each other "peace be upon you"?

I have no clue what you are trying to say with this sentence. Perhaps it is a simplistic assumption about me being some kind of naive hippy or something like that. I don’t know why you would make such a completely unfounded statement.

The sole and only fact that you are writing here means that you are not satisfied with this world and it means that you will not be satisfied in any world. That means that you do not fit your own ideal.

Again, this does not make any sense to me either. But in the words of John Stuart Mill:

“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.”

Imagine a world were everyone would be equal, no one would have ambition anymore.
Who would invent new medications against always mutating diseases? Who would resolve energy questions? Who would take responsibility? The people as a whole? Sorry, that is absurd, humanity would disappear by lack of surviving instinct.


I don’t need to imagine such a world, because what you describe has nothing to do with my argument. I fail to see why you so fervently insist on presenting chewed-up anti-commie arguments in reply to this post. Denouncing tribalism in favor of the individual, and defending the unquestionable equality in the value of human life hardly proposes communism as a solution. Perhaps you are reading another post. In fact, my position defends individual accomplishments and achievements, but it divorces them from tribal segmentation. These human achievements are attributed first to the individual, and then to all of humanity. In other words, if a great doctor finds a cure for a horrible disease, then that is his/her accomplishment as an individual, independent of his race, nation, religion, etc... Similarly, if a person commits a horrible crime, then that is the fault of that person, and not of his/her “tribe”. Surely this is not that hard a concept to understand. I have never suggested communism or forced economic equality as a solution. I do not know why you are making that connection.