Message from @grete
Discord ID: 807107844624613396
Because it sows pointless divisions which prevent humanity from reaching the peak of it's capacity to enhance the well being of all people.
wrong
Ok
How?
ingroup preference or tribalism as you call it is a necessary trait in group survival. and seeing as how it will never go away its totally pointless to oppose it, unless you like the idea of being reduced to poverty and oppression for the sake of moral do-gooding
''modernity'' just does a really good job at obfuscating it but of course its still there and is still the driving force behind all politics
Minimization of it's influence can have positive effects.
how
So tribalism has occurred for all of history so it is pointless to oppose it?
and when
yup
So rape and murder has occurred for all of history so it is pointless to oppose it?
theres a *reason* to oppose murder - because it damages the stability of the group. same goes for rape
and it can be effectively reduced
Tribalism can also be effectively reduced.
nope
People are less tribalsitic now than they have been for previous past periods.
People have more empathy for people of different races and nations now than they have for most of history.
very specific groups of people (anglosphere/western white people). the rest of the world will benefit greatly from this resting-on-its-laurels culture as it currently stands
you think this is rare?
plenty of groups have been lost to foreign groups because they adopted this process
Did you know that not just the "rest of the world" but all people could benefit if tribalism was minimized.
They lsot because craxy tribalists remain
hahaha no
We need to give up on tribalism
i know you dont know history before 1914 but just use ur imagination of what happens when a group fails to mobilise together against a group that is unified
You people say "we never will". Perhaps we could if you would just let go.
actually we were flying very high before idiots like you started gaining traction
Who is "we". As in nationalists?
anglo-saxon civilisation as a whole
because nationalism didnt exist prior to 1914. it was the default position
Nationalism was the default position?
its stunning to me how little you know
a fascinating case of the victorian education system
I know
I am just clarifying your view
The fact that nationalism was once the default and is now more questioned shows us that its impact can be minimized.
no are tribes are just larger
yeah i already have conceded the fact that groups can lose their ingroup preference, what you leave out is that the results in the death of the group