• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hyper-Individualism = Social Isolation + Lack of Empathy

Dans La Lune

Do you read Sutter Cane?
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
15,462
Reaction score
10,391
Location
Hobbs End
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Do you think the Hyper-Individualism promoted by the right-wing creates a lack of empathy and sense of social isolation? Thus creating a feedback loop which further empowers the right-wing?

'Individualism can contribute to social isolation and a lack of empathy. According to a study published in City-Journal, extreme individualism and self-preoccupation can lead to people feeling isolated and indifferent to the fate of others, as predicted by Tocqueville. This trend is exacerbated by the decline in social networks, smaller household sizes, and increased time spent alone, which are all factors that can diminish social connections and empathy.

Research also indicates that loneliness can hinder negative empathy while potentially stimulating positive empathy, as individuals seek social support to alleviate their loneliness. However, the overall effect of loneliness on empathy can be complex, as it may also lead to a decrease in social interactions and opportunities to practice empathy.

Furthermore, a lack of empathy can have significant consequences, including impaired relationships and an increased risk of antisocial behavior. Addressing this issue requires fostering social connections through household formation and the establishment of voluntary associations, rather than relying solely on technological solutions.

In summary, individualism can foster a sense of isolation and reduce empathy, which can negatively impact social cohesion and interpersonal relationships.'


 
Sans la Lune:

Yup. Agreed. Furthermore it atomises the US electorate and makes them far less effective at responding to the abuses of the political parties and the economic and political elites behind the parties. It neuters the electorate and undermines responsible governance.

Be well and be safe.
Evilroddy.
 
Do you think the Hyper-Individualism promoted by the right-wing creates a lack of empathy and sense of social isolation? Thus creating a feedback loop which further empowers the right-wing?
It's a cult.
The opposite is true of MAGA.
It's a cult of personality.
None of this explains MAGA. They don't have problems because they're rugged individualists. The opposite is true: Groupthink
 
Plain English without the psychobabble:

Lonesome, unloved Incel type basement dwellers hate everyone for their own failures.
 
There's a paradox here.

'Hyper-individualism', sometimes shortened to viva yo, should result in an individual who stands alone. Yet we see here in the United States of America such individuals banding together, giving up their individuality of thought and action, in the MAGA folks.

I once again recommend the book The True Believer, by Eric Hoffer.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . informed.
 
People have a need for belonging also in hyper individualistic societies. This can lead to authoritarian populist movements instead of grassroot organizations . That in those movements there are a lack of exchange of ideas among the followers and push on the leaders to listen to the members. Instead there is obedience to the leaders and their goals and policies. Like for example how the MAGA movement quickly followed Trump in opposing Canada. While also now accept that H1B visas is not a problem because the leader is for that. There the strong obedience to the leader and the we against them also leads to radicalization.


While to counter that and build better societies you need true grassroot movements that both empower people and create connections. This is also important for defending democracy.





 
Forgo individualism. Serve the state, for only those in Washington truly care about you.
There are a number of societal equilibriums that have been achieved throughout history between the extremes of hyper-individualism and conformist authoritarianism. I realize the large "sea of red hats" (as @Michael Cole poetically phrases it) has us going towards the authoritarianism side of things, but that's why the OP is useful in expressing ideas that can help us identify something healthy between extremes.
 
Social media has cause isolation. Not talking to people face to face causes isolation.
 
Social media has cause isolation. Not talking to people face to face causes isolation.
I agree. I am working with my older kid that got a little too into online stuff without having a foundation of human relationships growing up (which, I regret not identifying when they were younger, but here we are) and something as simple as a new puppy and joining a club for Linux enthusiasts (I love that my children are nerdy) has helped them understand what they have been missing. There are quite a few people who are in a similar boat.
 
Forgo individualism. Serve the state, for only those in Washington truly care about you.

Who cares about when you're hyper-individualized? There's an epidemic of loneliness, particularly in men.
 
I consider myself lucky that my daughter grew up on the cusp of it. She's in her early 30's. now. Now they are trying to pass a law for no phones during school, that I am totally on board with. Kids will HAVE to talk to one another now. Results from all schools who have enacted this have been great.
 
So, in other words, you're going to demonstrate how much more society cares about me by not caring about what I value?

Speak to the topic. You started going off on Big Government Statism, which has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. You're very welcome to be an individualist in the model of Ayn Rand. I think you'll lead a miserable life, but it's your life to live. I think people who are connected to society and their community are more likely to have friends and family who care about them.

Empathy is like a muscle, and I think people who focus on themselves do so at the risk of their connection with society.

 
We actuallypromote social connection and family. It takes a village, but it doesnt take a village run by central gov beurocrats.
 

Will you be asking me to fund your "connected society" initiatives?
 
"Hyper-Individualism = Social Isolation + Lack of Empathy"
It depends on how you define 'Hyper-Individualism', more than anything else.

For example:
Plain English without the psychobabble:

Lonesome, unloved Incel type basement dwellers hate everyone for their own failures.
This isn't it.
 
What I always laugh about when this subject comes up is how the right seems to feel you cannot be part of society and also be an individual.

The whole "rugged individualist/lone wolf" trope is something you get from badly-wired primates. We are a cooperative species, and the fact that you can't work with the group does not imply that you are superior. It in fact implies that there's something wrong with you.
 
"Hyper-Individualism = Social Isolation + Lack of Empathy"
It depends on how you define 'Hyper-Individualism', more than anything else.

'Hyper-individualism refers to an extreme focus on personal autonomy, self-reliance, and independence, often at the expense of community, social responsibility, and collective well-being. This concept is characterized by prioritizing personal success and interests over group or societal needs. It can lead to social isolation and a breakdown of communal ties, as seen in the context of modern American life where public spaces are treated as personal domains and social media is used for self-glorification rather than community building.

In the context of social justice and diversity, hyper-individualism can hinder efforts by discouraging collective action and ignoring systemic inequalities.9 For example, some may argue that diversity programs are unnecessary because everyone should succeed based on their own effort, without acknowledging the historical and systemic barriers that create an uneven playing field.

Hyper-individualism is also linked to the loneliness epidemic, as it precludes much-needed social connections and can lead to insularity. This is particularly evident in the way some members of Generation Z have been described as rejecting any obligation to individual responsibility, even in the context of social justice movements.

In the workplace, hyper-individualism can manifest as resistance to diversity programs and inclusive policies, as personal success is prioritized over collective well-being.9 To counteract these effects, organizations should promote collaboration over competition, encourage allyship, and implement inclusive policies that account for historical and structural barriers.'




 
Like what? Pay taxes? No, we will not be asking. It's the law.
No, like what you think is required from government in order for people to get in line and participate in your idea of a well connected society. Do you have any specific programs in mind or is this merely idle daydreaming?
 
So a leftist defines the measures of the problem to be anything which doesn't support the leftist ideals, applies those measures to society for the purposes of dividing the population into an 'us and them' to further the leftist ideals and political agenda, coming up with no solution or approaches to the identified problem (likely fabricated).

Why am I not surprised?


Further still, the left's continuing to shove DEI down everyone's throat only leads to further division, and doesn't have support with the populace.
In Summary, a leftist identifies a problem who's roots are in what leftists are trying to shove down an unwilling population's throats, causing the problem the leftist identified.

If the concern is that's a lesser social cohesion, perhaps the left should consider stopping their practice of constant practicing of identify politics, the politics of division and divisiveness?
These clearly feed the problem rather than solve it.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…