Toxic individualism

[billvon 2,991]

(Warning - long ass post coming at you)

I recently saw an essay complaining about Burning Man.  This is nothing new; complaining about Burning Man is a full time job for a lot of people.  It was better last year.  X Y and Z has ruined it.  The art sucks.  Etc.

But this particular essay was well written and was much larger in scope than just an art festival in the desert.  The author talked about how the pandemic has changed us, and what we've lost as a result.  And one of the central themes in his essay was the sort of toxic "rugged individualist" meme that the pandemic has only reinforced.

We are all social animals.  We need human contact to grow up, to develop our minds and morality, and to survive and prosper in the world.  And we evolved to do this in person.  We have actually evolved structures in our brains that have allowed us to confidently and accurately navigate the sort of societies we evolved in - groups of 20 to 500 people all living near each other.  We read signals both verbal and non-verbal from people, and our own responses feed into this.  

We feel, exhibit and sense shame, for example.  And if someone in your society does something stupid or dangerous, and they exhibit shame afterwards, you have an indication that they probably won't do it again.  If they do NOT exhibit shame, then it might be a good idea to keep a careful eye on them, put them in a position where they can't do any damage or even eject them from the society.  It is a way to keep a society in regulation, and we evolved this because societies without such a regulatory mechanism tended to fall apart more often when people could not determine who was likely going to work in the society's best interests.

We feel homophily and are more comfortable with people who look, talk, act and smell like us.  We exhibit this in what we wear, how we talk, what we buy and how we ornament ourselves.  And when we see someone radically different - we become suspicious.  We are cautious and fearful around them.  And again, this came from a time when a stranger suddenly appearing in a tribe of people was usually a danger sign.  Was he from a different tribe that wanted their food?  Would they take over their territory?  Societies that felt homophily and xenophobia simply survived better.

As we developed our own moralities, this kept working for us, but it took effort.  Homophily/xenophobia is at the very heart of most of the racism and bigotry we see out there, and we have to work to overcome it.  Fortunately, for decades, we have been making that effort, and gradually things have gotten better.  First at a personal level (i.e. we don't immediately attack or flee if we see someone of a different race) and eventually at a societal level (i.e. all races have similar rights today.)

But then technology arrived.  And all that mental circuitry we evolved over the centuries doesn't work when you can't see/hear/interact with people.  You no longer see the cashier at the store, so you lose that connection to the larger community.  You no longer talk to people face to face, and so that ability to see shame (and anger, and sorrow, and all those other emotions) went away.

Larger cities also caused problems.  Even if stores still had cashiers, they'd change all the time - and no one can get to know even 1% of the people who live in a city like Los Angeles or New York.  That link to the larger community was impossible to maintain directly.

And this played into one of the more toxic US memes, the "rugged individualist" who doesn't need anyone or anything, who rides off into the sunset on his trusty horse (or his truck) self sufficient and proud of it.  Of course that's a myth from the get-go - he didn't build that truck or drill for oil or refine the gas for that truck.  He got it from other people.  And it's a myth at a larger level, too.  We cannot exist as normal people without contact with anyone else, because we need that feedback at a very basic level.  We evolved to use it.

Then the pandemic hit.  And now not only were other people obstacles that the rugged individualist had to avoid - now they could actually kill you.  People avoided society for their own protection (and the protection of that society.)  There was absolutely a good reason for this, and we need only to look to Italy to see what would have happened if we had not isolated to that degree.  But it certainly didn't help with the growing barriers between people.

And then the right wing lost power, and they needed some wedge issues to bring themselves back into power.  So again they turned to fear of the other - they used that xenophobia to their advantage.  They played up the fear of immigrants who were swarming our borders and were going to steal our jobs, take over our neighborhoods, attack our women and bring drugs and crime.  Fear of criminals in big cities.  Fear of government agents who were going to do all sorts of nefarious things like take your guns away or disable your car remotely.  Fear of the "Deep State" whatever that is.

And one of the side effects of all this was the sense that you needed a gun to protect yourself from all those "others."  It didn't matter that that gun might hurt others, because they were rugged individualists who didn't need anyone else, and the greatest threat was from those "other" people anyway.

Another result, of course, was the radicalization and extremism we see on the web right now.  It became possible to convince people that liberals were pedophiles who wanted drag queens to take over teaching kids, because if all you see is your carefully-curated Facebook page, you don't see any of those cues that once convinced you you lived in a society.  And that mental machinery that classifies people as "us" and "other" starts trying to run without any of its normal input, and so comes to preposterous and bizarre conclusions.  (i.e. the Lizard People, the pizza basement child sex ring, "I have to kidnap Pence to save us.")

And of course the not-quite-diametric opposite of rugged individualism - socialism - has become a pejorative for one political party nowadays.  The same socialism that brought us national parks, our military, our roads, the Apollo program, nculear power, the Internet - has now become a curse word for people who identify with that sort of rugged individualism.  The idea of a society coming together to support something like the Apollo program is now seen as some sort of vile perversion that takes away their independence and freedom.

That attempt to divorce people from society, unfortunately, works politically - because the more isolated you make people, the more you can frighten them.  This is the pattern that David DePape (Pelosi's attacker) followed.  Starting out as a fairly normal guy, people who knew him watched him descend into a pit of "isolation and darkness, spending his time immersed in an online world of conspiracy theories and bigotry."  His former employer said that "if you got him talking about politics, it was all over.  Because he really believed in the whole MAGA, ‘Pizzagate,’ stolen election — you know, all of it, all the way down the line."

And of course to the right this isn't a bug, it's a feature.  Because if you can do that to people, they will vote the way that republicans want them to.

So I don't see a good way out of this.  Once a party realizes that fear and isolation works, and they think the benefit (power and money) is worth the cost (violence and degradation of American society) there is nothing to stop them from working towards just that.

[riggerrob 643]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

" ... So I don't see a good way out of this.  Once a party realizes that fear and isolation works, and they think the benefit (power and money) is worth the cost (violence and degradation of American society) there is nothing to stop them from working towards just that."

Why does this remind me of politics in Germany 90 years ago?

The National Socialist Party got into power by using thugs (e.g. SA) to pound political opponents into pulp.

It took an even bigger bully - Joseph Stalin - to un-seat Adolf Hitler's Nazis.

Do we want to see a repeat?

History may not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.

Edited November 2, 2022 by riggerrob
spelling

[Bigfalls 111]

3 hours ago, billvon said:

because if all you see is your carefully-curated Facebook page, you don't see any of those cues that once convinced you you lived in a society.

I consider Facebook anti social media.  What friends, you probably don't even know most of the "Facebook friends"

Things were better when you saw your friends in person, face to face.

[kallend 2,027]

4 hours ago, billvon said:

 

And this played into one of the more toxic US memes, the "rugged individualist" who doesn't need anyone or anything, who rides off into the sunset on his trusty horse (or his truck) self sufficient and proud of it.  Of course that's a myth from the get-go - he didn't build that truck or drill for oil or refine the gas for that truck.  He got it from other people.  And it's a myth at a larger level, too.  We cannot exist as normal people without contact with anyone else, because we need that feedback at a very basic level.  We evolved to use it.

 

Recall the heat Obama got from the GOP when he said pretty much exactly that?

[airdvr 210]

It will be a problem as long as both sides are living in an echo chamber of their own beliefs...kinda like this forum.

I have a friend whose political beliefs are pretty much the polar opposite of mine.  I still enjoy his company but when words like "plandemic" and "election fraud" fly out of his mouth I tell him we are old friends and I won't get involved in talking about that stuff.

It's difficult not to get into a debate in person...much easier online.

[billvon 2,991]

44 minutes ago, airdvr said:

It will be a problem as long as both sides are living in an echo chamber of their own beliefs...kinda like this forum.

This forum echoes your own beliefs back to you?

[airdvr 210]

11 minutes ago, billvon said:

This forum echoes your own beliefs back to you?

I see posts I agree with and ones I don't.  Said it before...the forums have moved me more towards the center.  Kinda like throwing a suitcase off the Queen Mary, but there it is.

[BIGUN 1,314]

On 11/2/2022 at 1:30 PM, billvon said:

And one of the central themes in his essay was the sort of toxic "rugged individualist" meme that the pandemic has only reinforced.

https://www.wisdomwordsppf.org/2016/10/28/the-problem-of-hyperindividualism-and-its-impact-on-american-life/

[wmw999 2,447]

Good find

Wendy P. 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

On 11/2/2022 at 2:30 PM, billvon said:

So I don't see a good way out of this.  

I've lately been posting morosely about our future to the point that Phil is concerned about my booze supply. I'm grateful for his concern, and have endeavored to make the necessary corrections, but the facts on the ground are anything but encouraging. Hard times are a comin' for many. Folks who live in blood red states will have a tough row to hoe. For those of us in blue states not a lot will change. Also, we skydive operators are ring fenced against recessionary economies if history remains intact. Everyone else should plan to hunker down.

[billvon 2,991]

4 hours ago, airdvr said:

I see posts I agree with and ones I don't. 

I do as well, and I value viewpoints like yours and Biguns even if I disagree with many of them.  (That's also one reason we tolerate some of the more trollish posters - they may not add much useful content, but they do help keep the place from being too homogenous.)

[wmw999 2,447]

The more Bigun posts, particularly things like the article on toxic individualism that he linked above (good read), the more hope I have. Because we have common goals, with sometimes different approaches for approaching them. And what is diversity if not accepting the need for different means of approaching things?

Not just Bigun; he’s just the poster here who exemplifies the self-examination here the best to me. Particularly who identifies as conservative.

I think I need to start looking locally for people to work with. Since I live in a bubble, it might not be as easy as it might have been in Houston. But identifying common goals and working towards them is a way to start looking at “we” over “me.”

Wendy P. 

[BIGUN 1,314]

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

But identifying common goals and working towards them is a way to start looking at “we” over “me.”

It has to be "we" over "me" for us to unify as a nation and minimize the ever-widening gap between our parties. In 1982, Reagan and O'Neill were not only polar opposites, but some would say enemies. Yet, when the economy was tanking, not unlike now, they sat down together and came up with the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. Both sides gave a little ground and "we" worked together.  

"We" need to do that again. I am looking for a leader that can work toward unifying both parties. That can focus on the US' future. 1. If Trump winds up on the ticket, a) I will not vote, and b) I will probably change to the Independent Party, sit in the jacuzzi, sip on some bourbon, and every once in awhile roll over on my stomach so the world can kiss my ass. 

Thank you for the compliment. 

[billvon 2,991]

Good example of this sort of toxic individualism from Facebook below.  They will not be swayed by anything at all - not guilt over being wrong, not new information, nothing.  The only thing they trust is themselves.  

 

[BIGUN 1,314]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

not new information

I think the biggest problem we have is people don't read to any level of depth anymore. 

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

3 hours ago, BIGUN said:

It has to be "we" over "me" for us to unify as a nation and minimize the ever-widening gap between our parties. In 1982, Reagan and O'Neill were not only polar opposites, but some would say enemies. Yet, when the economy was tanking, not unlike now, they sat down together and came up with the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. Both sides gave a little ground and "we" worked together.  

"We" need to do that again. I am looking for a leader that can work toward unifying both parties. That can focus on the US' future. 1. If Trump winds up on the ticket, a) I will not vote, and b) I will probably change to the Independent Party, sit in the jacuzzi, sip on some bourbon, and every once in awhile roll over on my stomach so the world can kiss my ass. 

Thank you for the compliment. 

Hi Keith,

Re:  I am looking for a leader that can work toward unifying both parties.

I like to be optimistic, but I wonder if there is one.  I'll continue to stay hopeful.

Possibly Gavin Newsom or Paul Ryan.  That's one from each major party with, IMO, neither from the extremes.

I am fairly certain that both are planning on a run for POTUS.

Anybody else with a suggestion or two?

Jerry Baumchen

Edited November 4, 2022 by JerryBaumchen

[ryoder 1,590]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Keith,

Re:  I am looking for a leader that can work toward unifying both parties.

I like to be optimistic, but I wonder if there is one.  I'll continue to stay hopeful.

Possibly Gavin Newsom or Paul Ryan.  That's one from each major party with, IMO, neither from the extremes.

I am fairly certain that both are planning on a run for POTUS.

Anybody else with a suggestion or two?

Jerry Baumchen

Jon Stewart.

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Keith,

Re:  I am looking for a leader that can work toward unifying both parties.

I like to be optimistic, but I wonder if there is one.  I'll continue to stay hopeful.

Possibly Gavin Newsom or Paul Ryan.  That's one from each major party with, IMO, neither from the extremes.

I am fairly certain that both are planning on a run for POTUS.

Anybody else with a suggestion or two?

Jerry Baumchen

Mitt Romney and John McCane were guys like that and look how they were treated.

[jakee 1,489]

5 hours ago, BIGUN said:

a) I will not vote,

Why not?

[wmw999 2,447]

29 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Mitt Romney and John McCane were guys like that and look how they were treated.

John McCain would very possibly have won if he hadn’t chosen a “fuck you liberals” running mate. Not a good look for bringing us together. In 2000 the Republicans had the opportunity to nominate him and look how he was treated.

Wendy P. 

[jakee 1,489]

52 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Mitt Romney and John McCane were guys like that and look how they were treated.

Right, the GOP have treated McCain and his family fucking disgracefully since he was a candidate, so what hope does anyone else have?

[airdvr 210]

6 hours ago, billvon said:

Good example of this sort of toxic individualism from Facebook below.  They will not be swayed by anything at all - not guilt over being wrong, not new information, nothing.  The only thing they trust is themselves.  

 

Is this about climate change?   lol

[brenthutch 444]

39 minutes ago, jakee said:

Right, the GOP have treated McCain and his family fucking disgracefully since he was a candidate, so what hope does anyone else have?

With the Rs taking the House and possibly the Senate, the Biden/Harris administration will have no choice other than working in a bipartisan manner with the Rs to repair the damage caused by the one party rule of the Ds. 

[GeorgiaDon 362]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Mitt Romney and John McCane were guys like that and look how they were treated.

Look how they were treated by their own party!

[jakee 1,489]

53 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

With the Rs taking the House and possibly the Senate, the Biden/Harris administration will have no choice other than working in a bipartisan manner with the Rs to repair the damage caused by the one party rule of the Ds. 

Oh hey look, a diversion.