Want Diversity, Prosperity - FOSTER INDIVIDUALISM

Individualism is a modern phenomenon, the concept can only find expression in a circumstance where society is big enough, easy enough and people are isolated enough to be able to survive absent a tribe. Individualism is constantly corrupted by the collective and the massive mass media narrative that is at play now in the world. Individualism is in large measure a spawn of the United States, an order, which aspires to deliver personal choice – the first of its kind in history. I love individualism as it merges with democracy and common law, because, at once, people act with autonomy and it is required that they respond to the interests of others; this is a beautiful thing.

It seems that when you get more than a couple of people acting together, autonomy gets challenged, especially in modern society, where groups tend to coalesce around a “special interest”. “Special Interests” are okay, what is unacceptable, however, is the way in which the actions of people associated with a special interest tend to become associated with “left” or “right” or one political brand or another. At the very moment, an issue becomes attached to a political brand, it gets distorted because politics are about power first and policy second. Given that in a democracy to forward an idea, one needs political mass (power), acquiring political mass requires accommodating large numbers of people and in the accommodation of large numbers of people, distortions occur. It is optimum to seek solutions to issues rather than distort issues to suit power, which rarely happens. By nurturing the Individual, by creating self-supporting, self-sufficient, independent people we begin to fracture “the group” and/or “group think”. This is a healthy thing, as it permits people to bring a critical mind to challenges.

Individualism in the modern context of social media, has “individualism” in effect being a branding exercise, one hopes that the broad-based ability to “mediafy” one’s self begins to fracture the narrative – under the “post WW2” mass media regime we were slotted into a bi-polar, tri-polar – or a limited polled political space and then slotted into one of about 6 or 7 stereotypes. The old media space held control over the populace’s thought under a narrow spectrum of competition; the modern individual is able to draw on, and build the “individual” from a broader spectrum in the social media space; allowing for a nuanced projection of self and a general societal circumstance of a more nuanced perception of others. Further, the coalescence of micro-topics or interests “on the tail” brings oddities into the mainstream as they gain resolution in a manner that would have never occurred in the past, generating a circumstance where “individuals’” emerge in a more varied and nuanced way. This is a beautiful thing as well, it is being challenged by the increasing regulation of the internet space – governments are seeking to once again restrict and control the data that feeds the narrative – as, where the narrative goes society goes. This is the paradox, the broader and more varied the data field, the broader and more varied the individual becomes; this well-spring nearly always brings disruption, and disruption scares the established and the established seek to suppress disruption - yet we need disruption to advance.

We must seek to enhance the individual, to foster diversity; individuals are rarely birthed in large monolithic institutions, in fact, large monolithic institutions are hostile to the individual. Institutions “haze” individuals out of existence or the bell curve does and forces them to fit the mould, rather than liberate them from the mould. Every individual is a point of emergence, we can smother that emergence with dogma, and conformity, thereby, retaining “norms” & “stability” OR we can seek at every opportunity to feed the creation of individuals that emerge un-subdued by the “old” and embrace the disruption that they bring us.   

Please click here for my professional website

Self Reliance - The Lost Cultural Artifact

Self Reliance - The Lost Cultural Artifact 

Self-reliance has nearly become unspoken, even maligned to a degree in society at large. Self-reliance is ofttimes mocked by the left as “anti-government” and promoted by the right to the point where the only things a baby needs are bootstraps. Self-reliance is critical to independence and from independence comes freedom of person, and by extension, freedom of thought. So self-reliance is a gift we can give to all people, a little at first and more as knowledge and resources allow. It is neither to be assumed to be innate nor to be assumed to be absent, it is something to nurture, or to acquire in ourselves. The government could be a part of its delivery, too often, however; the quest for power inhibits the extension of self-reliance by the government.

Self-reliance as a cultural artifact has left Canadian society in much the same way as the “pioneer spirit” has. The pioneer spirit, the willingness for a person to enter the wilderness and shape the land by the sweat of their brow into a productive enterprise absent the trappings of civilization, was a large part of the collective Canadian psyche pre-1960. The whole pioneer spirit entity had as large components self-reliance, do it yourself and independence; to be a pioneer has as reality these components by virtue of the physical realities of pioneer life. The local midwife was the neighbour that rode a horse 15 miles in a snowstorm to deliver your baby OR as often as not, was your husband. Pioneers were forced by their chosen life course to find their own solutions, to be self-reliant. The narrative until 1960 supported this pioneering reality as a quality, as a cultural component.

Since 1960 there has been collectivization in Canadian society, granted with some positive outcomes, but at the near annihilation of self-reliance as a cultural artifact. One can contemplate self-reliance as a meme in many ways, a way of "being" passed from one generation to the next.  Self-reliance has been attacked by the migration in the general narrative away from independence as a virtue, to a narrative the increasingly directs people to find a solution from society. The seeking of solutions from each other, neighbour helping neighbour is generally a good thing, the relationship is pure functionality, uncorrupted if you will, human by humanity.

The challenge comes, however, when the narrative drives people to self-serving institutions, in main created by or supported by government legislation.  The nature of our political system coupled with the migration to collectivism generates a pernicious circumstance where people become increasingly dependent, and with dependence comes subservience. It is subtle in execution and insidious by nature. Little by little, each year, fewer choices are our own.

You see, the government always has the choice to liberate, to grant self-reliance but rarely does. Contemplate our medical system. Ask yourself, why do we have a shortage of medical services and no government-sponsored self-diagnosis websites? Or ask yourself why is the process for getting the 10th same medical prescription the same as the first? Ask yourself, why are we required to have a prescription at all?  When you come up with the quick “obvious“ answer; please ask again.  

Medical care is only one place where there could be more self-reliance, there are many places in society where the extension of more judgment to the individual should exist in the context of personal choice, but more, however, more self-direction is needed so that people can exercise themselves in their best interest. 

Click Here for my Professional Website

Law, Legislation and Liberty - THE PARADOX OF THE INDIVIDUAL & THE COLLECTIVE

Law, Legislation and Liberty - THE PARADOX OF THE INDIVIDUAL & THE COLLECTIVE

Want More Ideas on ORGANISATION - CLICK HERE
Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

Individualism, as a concept, beyond the reality that individuals exist within a group or community, has, in part, found its origins in the protestant privilege to be one’s own conduit to god. This comment is made in a value-neutral context, that is to say, individualism was given a forum due to the empowerment of the individual in protestant worship modalities, relative to the centralized modality of Catholicism and other religions. The concept of an individual as an ideal also found support in the enlightenment movement, where it was fashionable to construct one’s own map of reality away from the church and traditional norms. To an extent, Stoicism, as a byproduct of the need to be free of human want, in this case, the needing for typical social interactions, has served to shore the other contributing factors to becoming an individual.  

With the advent of mass media a homogenization of society began to occur, the individual at once gained access to a larger volume of information to feed individualism, however, the communitization of the general societal narrative resulted in the perception of the Individual being distilled down to perhaps a dozen stereotypes – a circumstance that had “character type” and “Individual” becoming synonymous. Individualism incurred a challenge with the escalation of media influence; in much the same way that the homogenization of theology had done in earlier times.

Individualism tends to be challenged in the general discourse of humanity, as Individuals become challenged they seek support from others, and from there a collective within a given society begins to form. As the collective coalesces around an imperative or common desire, the organization begins to demand a degree of uniformity – and so, uniformity and Individualism are inversely proportionate or at least inverse to one another – proportionality is affected by what drove the coalescence at the outset. Oft times, like the coalescence of individuals to a collective takes place in the face of extreme human conditions, where the group is highly dependent or a unified front, hazing mechanisms are utilized “break down” the individual, to effect a state of merged egos or perhaps a “common ego”. The individual is then wholly defined by their association with a group.

It may be said in general terms, that a commonage derived from like-minded individuals, who have coalesced in a common interest or cause finds a generally healthier state of being, than, a commonage formed of conscription and hazing. The commonage of free accumulation finds common action by responding to environmental realities from a core set of beliefs; the commonage that forms from conscription finds common action at the behest of a central power entity. The commonage of fee accumulation is very difficult to corrupt, as ideals inform action, and the association began in a healthier place, in a place of intellectual commonality. By contrast, centralized power, absent support of the individual expression is inherently corrupting – as the core of the centralized power always works to its self-interest, as those subordinated seek to further their lot through acquiring favour from the central power and work around the central power for selfish and practical reasons.  

It is important to note, that conscription takes many forms in the creation of a commonage, the indoctrination of children to a given belief structure is a form of conscription. Conditioning is a form of conscription. Our very existence is conscription, by way of example, we are all conscripts of the human race.

Individualism, or the act of developing one’s sense of oneself as an independent entity, and the societal act of provisioning the discovery process to build an individual, in no way impairs collective action, it serves to diversify the informing of collective action. There is a common misperception that Individualism and Collectivism are resident at opposite ends of a continuum; the fact is however, they are mandatory companions existing as an entity. The question is, under what conditions has the collective coalesced and by what means it is being maintained – how these questions are answered determines the health of a collective. A collective that permits individual expression and functions under a premise of common ideas results in a reverse hierarchy, a collective that emerges out of conscription of one type or another results in a hierarchy that leads to a central power.

When the individual is co-opted by the collective, thought that panders to leadership emerges – often effecting “group think” and disastrous tangents in the human enterprise. When the individual within a collective is nurtured, critical thought governs individual action, and by extension, thought governs the collective – inherent in this reality is diversification of power.  

             

“The natural effort of every individual to better “their” own condition is so powerful that it is alone, and without any assistance, not only capable of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity but of surmounting a hundred impertinent obstructions with which the folly of human laws too often encumbers its operations” Adam Smith 

Canadian Identity - Canadian Nambi Pambism & Political Correctness

Canadian Culture, Canadian Identity, Political Correctness, State Paternalism, Individualism

Canadian Identity - Canadian Nambi Pambism & Political Correctness

Canadian nambi pambism is rampant. This is one element of our culture that needs to be altered if not eradicated. Rather than promote characters, we promote compliance. In the mist of plenty and under the umbrella of state paternalism we’ve allowed a marshmallow to reside at our core. My mother had many stories about the depression and the hardships people endured through those times; that was a group of resilient people. The single redeeming element of her life in that era was the presence of strong individualised people – people worked in concert but were absent the blandness that the collectivism of today produces.

The mantra of collectivism has permutated our culture and generated milk toast where fire should be. From a constant refrain of “check with your doctor first” to “be careful” to “the inability to cook a meal without checking with the Canada food guide” and an incessant need to turn to government for everything, a culture of dependence is emerging.

Peace order and good governance has served us well. Wrapped in that package is a strong tenancy toward conformity. Conformity to political correctness has in many cases stifled thought, political correctness is truly a conditioning tool to restrict entry into the narrative of that which some deem undesirable.

The nearly tyrannical enforcement of politically correct speech in academic institutions is a frightening example, frightening because in the limiting of speech, the limiting of thought is inherent. This was exemplified in the actions of one institution when they suspended a professor for suggesting that the biological differences in men and woman may be at the root of the way society evolved extending an inappropriate portion of influence to men. I personally am unsure what caused the gross inequity between men and women to emerge, I can see the biological requirements of women would put them is position of vulnerability in the absence of social structure. The man’s assertion had a basis in thought to contemplate a societal outcome absent the attachment of value, there are many possible reasons why women may have found themselves in position of inequity, and surely it is reasonable to have the debate. Political correctness is a means by which social pressure by the majority suppresses the view of the minority, aside from being unfair, it is unhealthy.  

Give me another one like Sir John A. McDonald who was quoted as saying “they like me better drunk than they do Brown sober”, if a politician was to demonstrate such humorous character in contemporary Canadian society, the do gooder healthy kiddy foundation would launch a full scale smear campaign.

In concert with nambi pambism and political correctness, comes the muting of the individual, it seems we are becoming a nation willing to adopt the oppressive cultural that has as a component, the inclination to chop off the head that rises above the crowd or even the head that wants to go its own way.

In an ambient culture of goody two shoes, conditioning to turn to authority for direction and tyrannical political correctness; where are the free thinkers going to come from, where will diversity of thought come from? We need to reignite the cultural appreciation of the strong, critical thinking, self-assured individual.  There is a balance to be struck between adventurism and conformity, conformity in Canadian society has reached gag inducing levels – lets dial it back.