Social Confrontation

[icopress]

This is a thought of social confrontation and a few Rhetorical questions. For those who do not have Deep Meaning Seeking Syndrome, just skip this.

Our ancestors rarely had to contact people of opposite views by means other than weapons, so our natural instinct is to assume that anyone outside our group is wrong for this very reason. We all know perfectly well that the language of diplomacy is very peculiar, that it is the language of allusions. It is as specific as, say, the language of a doctor or a lawyer. And its content is predetermined, as a rule, by the political guidelines of the leadership. We use subtexts on a daily basis in many areas of our life, and if people always said what they really mean, it would only complicate our life.

We have been taught all our lives that we are the best! Therefore, we are so fond of thinking that we value the diversity of opinions and respect other people's points of view, but in practice everything happens exactly the opposite. We tend to break up into groups and then firmly believe that others are wrong if they are outside our circle. We think we see right through others, although we ourselves are carried away by the idea of ​​social masks depending on the circumstances. The idea is so ancient that the word personality itself comes from the Latin word persona, which the Greeks used for theatrical actors. And that's okay, and if you've never felt bad trying on a mask, then you're probably a psychopath.

Any political party also develops its ideology to unite certain groups under its auspices. Every community, from LGBT people to the Ku Klux Klan, strives for integrity, creating norms and values ​​that help separate the self from others. Have you ever wondered why some social groups consider themselves to be better than others? And any political struggle comes down to the manifestation of intolerance, while trying to revive outdated models of power .. Indeed, in fact, there is a struggle between the political ethics of our countries, and ordinary people are closely intertwined with each other.

I find the explanation for this in the fact that before 1991, politicians were more or less in control of the situation. And after the collapse of the military-political blocs, we got more and more opportunities to meet face to face with those who did not belong to our circle. ... And you ... Do you see the only correct way to defend the social and cultural core?

[odolvlobo]

Our ancestors rarely had to contact people of opposite views by means other than weapons, so our natural instinct is to assume that anyone outside our group is wrong for this very reason.

The means of most contact has always been trade. Weapons follow.

[franky1]

before trade, was battle and theft of neighbouring clans
..

anyway.
when groups teach 'we are the best, we are this we are that'. that forms a mindset that the group empowers themselves and finds separation from those not in the group
sometimes it can be used positively to recognise people without, and try to bring them in and raise them up to the same standards. and sometimes its a go chest thumping 'if your not with us your against us' war cry

hundreds of years ago. when it would take days to travel just a few hundred miles.. people would battle other lands because they knew if the battle was won or lost. they could move and be days ahead/away from enemy and never be found again, meaning no long term harm/repurcussions
its the same reason a modern racist would be polite to a neighbour but be vulgar and hateful to a stranger. because they think 10 minutes later they dont have to see the stranger again

these days when we realise we are just one planet and there is no where to hide, we start to realise we have to think of the long term survival, rather than just the current event

eg .. russian/us relations seem bad. but russia's long term relationship with america is good. they buy iphones, KFC franchises, mcdonalds. and heck they even helped take americans to the space station

once clans/groups/races/countries realise the cant escape a situation. then you see them start diplomacy

[CryptocurencyKing]

On the note of our ancestors hardly meeting except during trades and sometimes battle, this could be tide to language barrier and the fact that, the few times they encountered strangers, it often resulted in wars and so, being solitary became a most instead of choice and it kept the peace. Some clans didn't even inter marry amongst other clans. Hybreed of clans were considered outcast.

Now, we have a common tongue and different course to meet over for the very essence of our people. Inbreeding has been known to be bad as it conserves the disease within a clan in contrast to interbreeding which could also profound solution to the problems of inbreeding.

I for one though might disagree with some people at some point but still, it shouldn't stop people from getting along. Imagine if their were no contradictory views. The world would have been stock with one form of solution and new forms of innovation would still be a lot of thoughts away. After all, we all have different faces and so, when you see the beauty in another person, you appreciate life the more. Such is our thoughts and having contradictory views is a good thing. Pretence is the enemy of contradiction.