- 10,832
Individualism
- Thread starter milefile
- 76 comments
- 1,722 views
- 3,194
So did you learn that trick at cheat planet or cheat central?
- 3,194
No,... dont have the first clue,... but since you say so, I guess it must be true 
BTW,... does it make you less of an ass to be arguing with one,...?
BTW,... does it make you less of an ass to be arguing with one,...?
- 3,194
Man-o-man,... as hot as it is down there,.. I bet you hate gettin burned like that 
- 3,194
Take a couple hours to think of a real come-back,... I'll be on after I hit the links'.
Originally posted by Red Eye Racer
Ive consistantly stated those feelings to you because you've never once given me or my opinions the time of day,... mile at least has had the courtousy in the past to give me a "that's a good point" compliment,.... though extremely rare, it has happened. That's why I still carry on convo's with him. You on the other hand,.. have been nothing but a thorn in my foot,.... quaestioning everything I say or do, and then following up with "all I asked for was proof". Well ya know what,.. sometimes you should just take peoples words for what they are,... words. It's almost like you assume I care a lot more about what I say than I do.... I sit here and talk,. thats it,.. if I wanted to spend the whole day digging up facts and info, just to be impressionable,... your quite mistaken. I cant stress to you enough,... how much I could care less about how much you think I know,... I have nothing to prove to you,.. and I never will,.... unless you wanna take it to the track............ thats the only place I have to do any proving of any kind..... but, unfortunately,.... I dont think you have the 'cahones'
I had a great reply typed up, but I don't like getting PM's from you, so I edited.
I do have this to say - I'll race you any day, any time, anywhere on any 'track.' Don't you drive a Ford Ranger?
- 3,194
Yes, I drive a Ford Ranger.
And dont be a smart ass about the racing bit,... it should be completely obvious that I meant OLR.
.....oh yeah,. the red letter deal,................. have your fun,.. I'm too lazy to look up from my keyboard.
- 3,194
You may think I'm your daddy,.. but you dont have to obey me like it,... post whatever you want,... it IS a free country.
And yeah,... I'm so damn sexy, that I stare at myself in the mirror when I masturbate
- 10,832
Soooo anyway...
If anyone is interested in bring this thread back around to relevancy, I'd like to digress to the original topic at hand.
The word, "individuality", sort of implies some kind of burden on the individual, as if it's something that people need to struggle to attain. I doubt the assumption that one must rebel in order to be an individual. If I go to the store to buy clothes, and I am hell bent on buying the most "individualistic" clothes I can find, I am still going to the same store that thousands of other people go to. I am still taking my shirt off the same rack that everyone else does. And maybe the more individual shirt was already taken by someone else. Why, that would mean that this person beat me to it, right? They are automatically more individual than me.
That is the assumption I doubt, or maybe even dismiss. I think individuality runs deeper than that. If clothing made one an individual then we'd all have to make our own clothes to make sure nobody has the same thing. The relationship of the individual to groups is sticky. I bought my pants at Old Navy. But I hate Old Navy commercials because they seem to represent conformity. How is that to be reconciled? Does the fact that I bought my pants at Old Navy make me less individualistic?
The relationship of the individual to various intangible groups like consumer demographics, and more tangeable things like it's locality, society, and country, the relationship of states to a federal system, and the relation of nations to the world indicate that there are clearly levels of individuality to be considered in the political arena. The connections are not obvious and the contexts are fluid. That's what I wish this thread was about.
And I stand by my comment regarding those who struggle to be individuals by attempting to prove it in unconvincing ways. The effort always looks like strained overcompensation. I think it must be more effortless to be genuine, and something no country, institution, store, TV channel, or band can provide. I think the individuality of the individual human being is the sole basis for evaluation. Reconciling it to government is something our current system falls short of, and may not even address at all. The fact that so many people feel they must be provided their individuality allows this to continue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We all identify ourselves in some way. I can say I am an American and think people will know what that means. I can say I am a father and people think they know what it means. I can wear a certain brand of clothes or drive a certain car and people will all make a judgement based on these appearances. What if I say I am an individual? How can anyone corroberate that? Popular culture encourages this, in my opinion, at the expense of individuality. Corporate hegemony, as an institutional side effect of greed and envy, engenders a perspective that may, in fact, lead to assumed entitlement in government. If I go to Starbucks and I say my latte is wrong, even if it isn't (because I am so important), they will kiss my ass until I am happy because they want me to come back. If people expect this servile obsequiousness all the time (and I believe many do), and government is so thoroughly enmeshed in our lives, we will expect it there, too. This could be a recipe for disaster. The government is becoming a corporation, profit and all.
If anyone is interested in bring this thread back around to relevancy, I'd like to digress to the original topic at hand.
The word, "individuality", sort of implies some kind of burden on the individual, as if it's something that people need to struggle to attain. I doubt the assumption that one must rebel in order to be an individual. If I go to the store to buy clothes, and I am hell bent on buying the most "individualistic" clothes I can find, I am still going to the same store that thousands of other people go to. I am still taking my shirt off the same rack that everyone else does. And maybe the more individual shirt was already taken by someone else. Why, that would mean that this person beat me to it, right? They are automatically more individual than me.
That is the assumption I doubt, or maybe even dismiss. I think individuality runs deeper than that. If clothing made one an individual then we'd all have to make our own clothes to make sure nobody has the same thing. The relationship of the individual to groups is sticky. I bought my pants at Old Navy. But I hate Old Navy commercials because they seem to represent conformity. How is that to be reconciled? Does the fact that I bought my pants at Old Navy make me less individualistic?
The relationship of the individual to various intangible groups like consumer demographics, and more tangeable things like it's locality, society, and country, the relationship of states to a federal system, and the relation of nations to the world indicate that there are clearly levels of individuality to be considered in the political arena. The connections are not obvious and the contexts are fluid. That's what I wish this thread was about.
And I stand by my comment regarding those who struggle to be individuals by attempting to prove it in unconvincing ways. The effort always looks like strained overcompensation. I think it must be more effortless to be genuine, and something no country, institution, store, TV channel, or band can provide. I think the individuality of the individual human being is the sole basis for evaluation. Reconciling it to government is something our current system falls short of, and may not even address at all. The fact that so many people feel they must be provided their individuality allows this to continue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We all identify ourselves in some way. I can say I am an American and think people will know what that means. I can say I am a father and people think they know what it means. I can wear a certain brand of clothes or drive a certain car and people will all make a judgement based on these appearances. What if I say I am an individual? How can anyone corroberate that? Popular culture encourages this, in my opinion, at the expense of individuality. Corporate hegemony, as an institutional side effect of greed and envy, engenders a perspective that may, in fact, lead to assumed entitlement in government. If I go to Starbucks and I say my latte is wrong, even if it isn't (because I am so important), they will kiss my ass until I am happy because they want me to come back. If people expect this servile obsequiousness all the time (and I believe many do), and government is so thoroughly enmeshed in our lives, we will expect it there, too. This could be a recipe for disaster. The government is becoming a corporation, profit and all.
- 3,194
That was a well thought-out, thought-provoking synopsis. What I get out of it,.. is that you basically think that most people (americans) are mindless, over-materialistic robots who dont have the balls to be individuals,... rather they find comfort in trends and their eyes are blanketed by governmental/corperate subliminalism (for lack of a better term)?
- 327
Good to see, after 4 pages, that the thread is back on topic. I will not pose as an arbitrator for any arguments, but I must say that individualism is exactly what provokes this type of behavior...
Okay, back on topic (good essay topic by the way).
Individuality may seem as if it comes as a compromise. Buying Old Navy jeans when hating Old Navy advertising is still individuality. As long as the motive towards individuality is kept in tact, the conformity to Old Navy jeans will be overlooked. You get it? I mean, if you bought the jeans out of your own individuality, and not because of the commercial enticing conformity, your individuality is conserved.
For me to say that individuality comes as a compromise, I guess I need a better explanation. It was once described by a friend of mine in a poem, but in short, "being a nonconformist is conforming to nonconformity." It can be argued as is, or it can be said that being an individual is based on the intentions of the individual himself/herself. To "conform to nonconformity" truly is being a conformist and not a nonconformist. But when you become a nonconformist out of the wills of your own mind to declare your individualism, then you truly become a nonconformist. You still following?
On a national/international level, I must say that it is too often that I see other countries/nations conforming to American democracy. As the United States goes on its "crusade" to spread democracy and oxymoronically impose freedom, we still find nations scurrying to become American-like. Not to say that all wish to be like Americans. I am saying that nations who declare freedom and their "individualism" still look upon the states for council; very dependent and opposite of the declaration of their independence from former rule. True, it may be the wish of individuals to follow the "American" way, as individualistic decisions, but their intentions are not individualistic, as explained above. It almost seems as if individualism loses meaning as we examine the situation on a macroscopic level.
I'll leave it at that for now. Discuss.
Okay, back on topic (good essay topic by the way).
Individuality may seem as if it comes as a compromise. Buying Old Navy jeans when hating Old Navy advertising is still individuality. As long as the motive towards individuality is kept in tact, the conformity to Old Navy jeans will be overlooked. You get it? I mean, if you bought the jeans out of your own individuality, and not because of the commercial enticing conformity, your individuality is conserved.
For me to say that individuality comes as a compromise, I guess I need a better explanation. It was once described by a friend of mine in a poem, but in short, "being a nonconformist is conforming to nonconformity." It can be argued as is, or it can be said that being an individual is based on the intentions of the individual himself/herself. To "conform to nonconformity" truly is being a conformist and not a nonconformist. But when you become a nonconformist out of the wills of your own mind to declare your individualism, then you truly become a nonconformist. You still following?
On a national/international level, I must say that it is too often that I see other countries/nations conforming to American democracy. As the United States goes on its "crusade" to spread democracy and oxymoronically impose freedom, we still find nations scurrying to become American-like. Not to say that all wish to be like Americans. I am saying that nations who declare freedom and their "individualism" still look upon the states for council; very dependent and opposite of the declaration of their independence from former rule. True, it may be the wish of individuals to follow the "American" way, as individualistic decisions, but their intentions are not individualistic, as explained above. It almost seems as if individualism loses meaning as we examine the situation on a macroscopic level.
I'll leave it at that for now. Discuss.
