Why does the West put so much emphasis on individualism and dont see any benefit in collectivism? Why is the West full of corporate bootlickers that are too stupid to see that they are voting against their interests and are deluded to think that they are.somehow free? Why doesnt anyone see any alternative to Crapitalism and are fully convinced that it is part of "durrr human nachurrr" even though it has only been the primary economic system for like 200 years? Has the ideology really gotten so strong?
Why does the West put so much emphasis on individualism and dont see any benefit in collectivism...
Brody Roberts
Other urls found in this thread:
illinoisreview.com
twitter.com
Angel Ward
>has the ideology really gotten so strong?
yes
Sebastian Wood
Western thought is programmed so each individual cell or atom gets the biggest yield.
Philosophy- the science of difference and enumeration- is a disease and we can look at the “progress” of philosophy as a viral contagion. As we all know, Philosophy begins in earnest with Plato. The central concern of the dialogues (themselves a capture mechanism whereby the “oral” tradition is contained within what would begin the expansion/contagion of the first fully standardized, internal, highly abstract, economical, phonemic/atomistic representational exogrammic model) is “what is x in and of itself?”.
This archetypal question is advanced with much rigor and is indeed the archetypal question. This question gives rise to what I call “the problem of meaning”. Meaning is a new category arising in ancient thought and meaning itself arises with its necessary (ananke) organ- the soul. This archetypal questioning can be seen as “symptomatic” of exposure to something, thus it is a problem to be solved not by advancing the cause of philosophy but by seeking a cure. The Pharmakos, Logos and the Savior are all attempts at various times answers stages to contain and or cure philosophy. As a side note, Hegel is the AIDS of philosophy. The arising of what is x for itself is the “birth of the problem of meaning”.
Debord was a voyeurs voyeur and thus a radically incomplete thinker. Trapped within the completion phase of Cartesian/Newtonian/materialist voyeurism, Debord was unable to see the sorcerous aspect of his own compulsions. In other words he didn’t go far enough, deep enough, surreal enough in his contemplations.
There is a reason why the logos and light and vision and linear time and Utopianism and industrialism and Cartesianism and voyeurism reign supreme in the west.
Isaiah Peterson
So, what's the alternative again? Just give everyone a thousand bucks every month and similar government programs funded by taxing the rich?
Or should we be licking authoritarian boots that will redistribute all the wealth equally somehow and plan the economy more efficiently than the free market?
Ian Fisher
The west is not individualistic. Read Stirner.
Justin Diaz
>Or should we be licking authoritarian boots that will redistribute all the wealth equally somehow and plan the economy more efficiently than the free market?
yes
Juan Wright
I'm sure it will work this time!
Luke Kelly
not a communist
Jaxon Morgan
Based
Joshua Turner
>implying authorities will ever distribute wealth equally
Communism ends in gulags, always.