You Should Know
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated. We are not here to ban people who said something you don't like.
If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
view the rest of the comments
While there are plenty of cultures on the planet, they all seem to trend towards authoritative leaders. There are probably some very small cultures that are exceptions. But it seems to me if you get a group big enough, it goes that way.
As for you personally. I mentioned mutations. You had some differences that allowed you to escape the societal pressure to be a conservative. And likely without that pressure, you wouldn't have come so far to the other side. The issue is that not enough people are born able to do that. And often they end up persecuted for even trying. So the mutation doesn't propagate as much as those without it.
No, I'm sorry, but you are wrong about this.
It's not an issue of biology, it's an issue of society. Humans have constantly resisted and struggled against unjust rule. The drive for freedom is innate, and nearly impossible to fully quench.
The major issue is that the systems of oppression we are in are so complex that their true nature is hard to grasp, and it feels nearly impossible to fight against. That's the problem - not that humans somehow "evolved" over maybe a hundred generations to be subserviant - and it can be solved through education and by building an optimistic movement focused on growth and incremental achievable goals.
Humans did not evolve to form hierarchical societies, that's completely and absolutely ridiculous, I'm sorry. The structures of society we have now are very modern and would be completely unrecognizable (and much, much less free) to someone even a short thousand years ago. Evolution does not happen over that kind of a timespan.
Not to mention that evolutionary psychology is a bullshit quack discipline almost exclusively practiced by extremely racist people to justify their eugenics and race science.
You are very confident about things that are easy to prove wrong.
Hierarchical societies have been around a long time. A very large variety of animals today have hierarchical concepts in their socialization. So you can use your inflamatory statements to try and hide how little basis the things you say have in facts. But it doesn't make them any less false.
The more "I'm sorry"s, "ridiculous", "bullshit quack...", and association of the opposing view with racists and such you do. The more obvious you have no real logical arguments. Just like the people who talk louder to get noticed because they have nothing to say that people are interested in.
I have literally studied ancient human civilizations. Please, I am begging you, go educate yourself about early human societies, how they were structured, what the average daily life of someone living in those societies was like, what their relationship to authority, power and hierarchy were, and the history of nation states. I can't provide an education to you over the Internet, but you can at least learn for yourself instead of repeating whatever brainwashing has been instilled in you.
I can lead you to water, whether you drink or not is up to you.
Look back at your own comment history, then look at the comment with all the drama. It stands out a lot. Normally you are level and making logical points, but in the one with ridiculous and such, you aren't.
Can't seem to find that book available on libby, so will have to do some extra digging. My info comes from mainly articles, not books. So I will take a look, as sometimes articles can misrepresent the people they are quoting or the work those experts have done. But usually that is done to sensationalize things. Not much of that happening in the area of ancient societies.
Sorry for the slow reply, I've been meaning to get back to you for nearly two weeks now, but I wanted to wait to collect my thoughts and to be in the right kind of head space to address your comment.
At the end of the day, I'm a flawed human, I have all sorts of feelings and emotions. Sometimes, I get upset, or angry. I try to avoid engaging with people when I'm feeling that way, but again, I'm not always successful at the things I attempt.
Now, to be fair, I'm sure you would agree that there are some things which are just absurdly wrong - for example, if someone was arguing that the earth is flat, for example, I might just dismiss that argument as ridiculous - not necessarily because I can't disprove it, but because it's not in my interests to engage with that argument in good faith - maybe because I'd see it as a waste of time, or because I know that it's a topic that I find personally distressing and want to avoid so that I don't get too worked up.
I agree that dismissing claims as absurd is very unconvincing, but sometimes people just believe different things from us, and that we can't always convince people to change their minds. That's just something that we all need to accept to remain sane in this world, especially if we're inclined towards arguing with others on the Internet.
The truth is, I was raised by someone who held extremely racist, white supremacist beliefs, and that person would regularly use evolutionary psychology and similar arguments to justify their beliefs. It was also a very abusive environment, as you can probably imagine. So this is a really tender area for me, which is why you saw the reaction you got.
I am not accusing you of believing in any of those things, I'm sure you don't, I'm sure you're a very kind person who cares about rationality and doing the right thing, so please don't misunderstand me - what I'm trying to explain is that the topic is kind of triggering for me, and that there are lots of people who use similar arguments for, what I'd consider to be, evil ends.
Actually, it happens all the time, that's one of the reasons I got a bit upset with you - I see it all the time and not only do I find it extremely frustrating as someone with a lot of knowledge of ancient human civilization but it's almost always some far-right crank nonsense. The paleo diet is probably the best known example of this, but a lot of scientific racists use ancient human civilizations to justify their racism, western chauvinism, white supremacy, and so on. Heck, there's a reason fascists always seem so obsessed with the Roman Empire. Carl Benjamin calls himself Sargon of Akkad for a reason.
Anyways, with all of that said, I'd like to share a link to a section on an anarchist FAQ - Does revolutionary Spain show that libertarian socialism can work in practice? - I think it's pretty interesting and demonstrates a historical example of a functional anarchist society. For a functioning anarchist society today, you could look into the Zapatista movement in Mexico, too.
So a few ideas. Saying agree to disagree is an easy way out if a subject is triggering. They say a broken clock (analog lol) is right twice a day. Even a flat earther could say something that is true in their argument, or even have an interesting idea that might lead somewhere. So while dismissing themmis the easy way out, and it is okay to take the easy way sometimes, it still isn't the best way. And yes, we are all flawed, I have no shortage of flaws myself.
On the topic of justifying. I'm not trying to justify actions. I am trying to say we should expect them and not be surprised by them. We shouldn't assume the person is just completely evil, but that they are too weak to do better, to do what is right, and they have succumb to ancient instincts that are no longer needed, but still exist nonetheless. Humans are mostly driven by chemicals they can't control.
Ass for spain. I agree that if a group manages to hit critical mass, it can for a time operate as under anarchist ideals. But one of the ways it was accomplished in spain was that those who didn't share those ideals could leave. And many of such people were also the ones dieing in the civil war. So it is almost like selecting a group by eliminating those of a certain opinion, and allowing any left to leave if they want. In the end, those of that differing opinion are simply outnumbered. And humans are known to go with the flow. That is why too many put up with dictators they don't believe in. It can work in a small cut out of society. But to do it for the whole of society would require getting rid of a significant amount of the capitalist. Which is why I say, not enough of us have evolved past that drive for power and influence yet, for it to work. And I wish I knew how to speed it up. But progress will slow down when it happens. And thats okay. The overhead of communication and such is just much highed when organized by committee versus a single leader. Ifeally we find a way to elevate leaders who aren't in it for the power and influence. But that is very hard.
It's the best way for me. I'm guessing you don't have experience with PTSD, but if I get into an argument with someone about a topic which is triggering, for the next day or so, I won't be able to sleep, I'll have hallucinations of terrifying things which aren't there, panic attacks that come out of nowhere, cold sweats, flashbacks... I could go on. I don't care if someone might possibly have one good idea amongst all of their bad ones if that is the cost.
Yes, of course, that is absolutely a foundation stone of anarchism: voluntary association. Everyone must always be free to associate, or not, as they see fit.
True capitalists who actually own capital are vanishingly few compared to the working class. They're a rounding error. We do not need to get them on side to succeed. They can go off and do their own thing if they want to, have a real Atlas Shrugged society in a mountain. In reality, they need us, so once there is a critical mass, they will either join our society, or learn to work for themselves, rather than by exploiting others.
If you're talking about self-serving behavior, I understand what you mean, but anarchism is actually completely compatible with self-serving behavior. In fact, one of the major traditions of anarchism, egoist anarchism is entirely centered around that concept.
Finally, the "drive for power and influence" isn't in our nature, but it is rather a response to environmental conditions. Do you see an elephant at the circus and assume that juggling balls must be in an elephant's nature? If we change the system of incentives which govern our society, human behaviors will change and adapt to match.
This can never, ever work. Even if you find people who aren't in it for that, they will almost definitely always be corrupted. Power corrupts. That is one of the founding principles of anarchism.