The principle of Fürherprinzip is mostly organic. Humans naturally look towards strong leaders. And while the Third Reich was not completely organic, it was a substantial improvement over the liberal Judeo-Capitalist Weimar Republic. Adolf Hitler's long-term plans for Germany would have fully brought about the National Socialist ideal.
>Have you had many bad experiences with people outside of your cultural background?
Yes, I went to a high school full of Negroes and mestizos, but that's purely anecdotal evidence, no? I'm intellectually honest, so I'll give you something more substantial. It's a study by Dr. Robert Putnam, entitled Bowling Alone. In it, he initially set out to prove the axiom that "diversity is our greatest strength", but quickly discovered quite the opposite. While studying the great cities of America, he found that ethnic diversity is strongly correlated with loss of social cohesion, diminishment of social capital, and a decrease in overall community engagement, not just between ethnic groups, but within them.
This is the book. I can't find a free PDF anywhere, but I have no doubt that you'll be able to find a torrent of it somewhere.
This last point addressed your other queries, too. The reason society must be organized along racial and ethnic lines, without getting into the spiritual side of things, is that human nature ensures that that's the only kind of organization that WILL work.
I've suspected this for a long time. Religion's probably the biggest one, but other groups kind of died as well - civic groups, bowling clubs, secret societies, hobby groups, etc.
This book: https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046 is about the topic. I haven't read it myself, but really should someday, it seems good
Its actually a well researched phenomenon...
Its a situation where the American populace has become much more atomized and doesnt really "do" things with each other the way they used to. Bowling leagues, softball leagues, etc...were the defacto things people did to meet their neighbors and community. It was an important part of the week to get out and be with people and get to know the people you lived around. Since the 80s, the focus became much more on "gotta get the kids to practice", Ill stay in and play video games by myself or more "selfish" hobbies that may be fun, but dont develop social networks built around adult networking.
Bowling, for me, is still something that I love doing, because I get to spend one night a week with a group of friends AND with a group of people that I wouldnt normally see in my day to day life.
Here is a great book on the topic...
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
Not a new phenomena. This was observed decades ago:
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
> Once we bowled in leagues, usually after work—but no longer. This seemingly small phenomenon symbolizes a significant social change that Robert Putnam has identified in this brilliant volume, which The Economist hailed as “a prodigious achievement.”
> Drawing on vast new data that reveal Americans’ changing behavior, Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from one another and how social structures—whether they be PTA, church, or political parties—have disintegrated. Until the publication of this groundbreaking work, no one had so deftly diagnosed the harm that these broken bonds have wreaked on our physical and civic health, nor had anyone exalted their fundamental power in creating a society that is happy, healthy, and safe.
Some of that is gone into in Bowling Alone which details in part how social groups have collapsed over the years. He says it's a few things, the rise of the dual-income house, suburban sprawl and folks moving more, and technology/mass media. At the time the book was written this was more about T.V. but now it applies to social media as well, such as the very website you're posting this on.
There's also the rise of Wal-Mart (and Amazon) killing a significant amount of small businesses. Why order pants at Pat's Pants Pantorium when you can get those same pants cheaper and faster at Amazon? Pat is a nice guy sure but I can get my pants for 20 bucks cheaper and 2 weeks faster from Mr. Bezos, so...
People aren’t joining organizations in general. I also belong to the VFW and they’re struggling the same way. There’s an outstanding book about how people just aren’t joining clubs any organizations I would suggest.
There's a book kinda related to that called Bowling Alone which details how social capital has been declining over the past several decades as folks become less likely to network and the like.
many also use it to cure the pain that is loneliness, especially in the 'Bowling Alone' society that is contemporary American.
Knowing that you'll get to see people who care about you multiple times per week (Sunday morning services, post-church-service lunches, Wednesday night Bible study, Saturday social activity / volunteering, weekend retreats, mission trips) does bring a lot of comfort to people who don't otherwise have a strong social network.
If you are interested in this subject, I suggest the book "Bowling Alone" by Robert D. Putnam, which discusses the decline of social capital in the U.S since the 1950s.
Kinda unrelated
This is why men’s groups are so important. I don’t just mean therapy groups. Things like bowling clubs, boy scouts, Churches, hunting clubs, fraternities, country clubs, veterans groups, adult sport leagues, etc.
Virtually all have seen a steep decline in the last few generations and men need places where they can express vulnerability away from women.
There’s even a book about it. <em>Bowling Alone: the Deline of American Community</em>
I am. My wife and kids already voted early. But I tend to procrastinate anyway and I really like the communal experience of waiting in line with other voters and voting on election day. The whole push for mail-in ballots which long predates covid feels like a very antisocial "Bowling Alone" kind of phenomena.
I may regret it this year. Lines are going to be crazy long due to social distancing and a lack of poll volunteers who are mostly little old ladies and a few little old men and many of them aren't doing it this year because of covid.
Yeah, everyone I've known that had alcoholism or drug issues had a degree of misery before the addiction got bad, and it spiraled from there. Our culture, our politics, and certainly our technology aren't helping anyone get more fulfillment out of life. This book describes the problem pretty well in my eyes:
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
But I don't know what the solution is, for our society. I grew up a liberal atheist, but I've begun to see the value in spirituality as I've become more conservative (classical liberal really), noticing progressive policies causing more societal disharmony rather than less. I sometimes envy those on the right that enjoy Christianity, but I find most of them aren't spiritually fulfilled by it either. r/taoism is where I get my fill - meditation helps. I started delving into buddhism as my first foray into spiritual fulfillment, but ended up resonating with Taoist philosophies more.
I highly recommend reading the book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community by Robert D. Putnam.
"Television, two-career families, suburban sprawl, generational changes in values--these and other changes in American society have meant that fewer and fewer of us find that the League of Women Voters, or the United Way, or the Shriners, or the monthly bridge club, or even a Sunday picnic with friends fits the way we have come to live. Our growing social-capital deficit threatens educational performance, safe neighborhoods, equitable tax collection, democratic responsiveness, everyday honesty, and even our health and happiness."
Very interesting book with plenty of studies to support it. It's over 15 years old now, but still very relevant.
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
I know people have a hard time explaining why they feel like life was better back in the 50s, but here is an example that shows that community relations were actually stronger in some ways back then. Your examples of how life is better now are completely valid, but we have lost somethings that people valued.
>It's shocking that a Marxist even has this view about capitalism.
Marxism is a result of looking at capitalism and what it does. It's not like I'm trying to find fault with capitalism because I "just hate" capitalism for no reason.
>society seems to be alive and kicking around here
Which city do you live in? It's just that I keep talking to Americans who observe the same things e.g. Robert Putnam spelled out in Bowling Alone. Atomization of society and destruction of social cohesion and social capital are neither my nor Marxism's invention. These are widely discussed issues. Maybe these things are just absent from your little filter bubble?
Social networks especially for men have been on steep decline since the 70's. A highly accredited academic wrote about it a while back and he got shit for some reason because he partially blamed multiculturalism. Even if you dismiss the multiculturalism angle which I do his research was very well done and shows a bleak picture of the American social landscape. Charles Murray also wrote about this stuff in Coming Apart.
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
I will add that the reason men have struggled more with this is because men's groups are exclusive rather then inclusive. Or rather the inclusiveness is based on some metric. I.e we all lift, or we all ride bikes together, or we all enjoy climbing. Female social groups are inclusive. You're welcome here no matter what you do as long as you don't do anything to rock the boat.
Surprisingly both groups are still hierarchical. Female social groups rank hierarchy by the most social person that distributes rewards with equal allocations. Male social groups reward the man that gives out the most the equitable shares.
Explained more simply women give each person in the group an entire pie and the most popular is the one that finds the pie shop. Men work together to make a pie and the leader is the one who carves up the pie and gives it out fairly. I.e. the males that contributed the most ingredients or more involved in preparing the pie get bigger pieces. Men that take the pie all for themselves or give up the pie to others are considered too dominant or too weak.
This goes all the way back to male apes going on hunts while female apes stayed back and waited for meat to be brought to them.
Our modern society is shifted to favor the female schema over the male one and men will suffer until more balance is reached.
Interesting book on this topic https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
I don't think Aristotle ever explicitly argues that "ethnic diversity undermines democracy," although I guess he does believe that a polis presupposes a certain degree of homogeneity in some respect (a shared way of life, which he obviously thinks depends upon an underlying affinity of the citizens, in respect of shared values, customs, inheritance, natures, etc.). Whether this is a fair interpretation of Aristotle depends on how nuanced your articulation of the claim is.
But anyway yes there are modern scholars who argue that certain degrees of diversity are harmful to democratic values, social trust, etc. See, e.g. Dinesen and Sønderskov 15; Wickes, Zahnow, White and Mazerolle 13, and, most famously, Putnam 2000. Some scholars push back on this, however, see, e.g. Fish and Brooks 04.
You're mistaken in assuming the southern suburban ethos is a universal constant, rather than a lifestyle pattern of a comparatively small number of people. People living in cities don't have that consumption pattern because they can neither afford to buy or store stuff. People living in true rural America don't have it because it simply doesn't exist for them. It's just the festering sore of suburbia that needs to constantly overconsume in a futile attempt to fill the hole caused by building a society bereft of community and any real sense of place.
It only took us thirty or forty years to convert our society from a fundamentally agrarian country with manufacturing concentrated in dense cities to a white flight sprawl driven economy enabled by the Eisenhower interstate system and bulldozing any wealthy black areas we could find. We're already in the midst of reversing that trend, with cities being the most valuable real estate in the country and suburbs choking as they realize they can't afford to maintain the infrastructure they spent decades frantically building. It's a Ponzi scheme, and our generation will be left holding the bag. As cities gain political power, eventually they will force rail through whether the suburbs want it or not. As global warming becomes more and more severe the restrictions on carbon emissions we will need to enact will drive vast cultural shifts. People will be upset, but people are always upset when things change. They'll manage.
Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone talks about this.
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
There are lots of things the government can do to help build places with a better sense of community and more community involvement.
Starting with mixed zoning, walkable streets and public transit, community centers and parks, community events, and so on. And there's a lot the government can do to encourage and support neighborhood, community, and civic organizations, activities programs, non-profits, and small businesses.
Ultimately, it's up to the people in those organizations and groups to handle the day-to-day interactions with people and make a community where people feel welcome, accepted, and valued and will have things to value and appreciate.
I think a lot of mass shooters (and other criminals) just don't have anything like that in their lives. The only things they have to value are their ideology and daydreams. No connections or feeling of support and membership. Gang members do at least have their gangs, but I think most people would consider that to be not a great substitute.
A decent book about the topic is Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community if you want a really in-depth look at that sort of thing.
Strong Towns also touches on parts of that, more towards zoning and town design.
There are very valid concerns about gentrification, and every neighborhood is different, so it's not a simple thing. But there's still a lot that could be done to build a better sense of community and get more people feeling involved.
I'm not sure if this is exactly what you are looking for but this "middle ground" you are searching for could be found in the theory of social netwoks and social capital.
While Bourdieus social capital is more about power of individuals, Putnams social capital is about cooperation inside a social group (social cohesion)
Most of this concept comes from Putnams "Bowling Allone" https://www.amazon.de/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
I'm not sure where Bourdieus wrote about social capital (only read the German translation and don't know the titel) but this could be a good starting point https://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/content/paper/bourdieu-p-1986-forms-capital-richardson-j-handbook-theory-and-research-sociology-educ
I think you would be especially interested in concepts of bridging and bonding
https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/difference-bonding-bridging-social-capital/amp/
A different approach is the work of Granovetter, who mixed the theory of social capital and network theory in his famous study. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2776392
Extra link: The "Big Three of social Capital", Putman, Bourdieu and Coleman: https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/bourdieu-on-social-capital-theory-of-capital/amp/
Hope this helps (ps: currently not at home, so this is the toned down version)
Irony is the default position. Because of a decline in social trust, we are incapable of showing weakness and being vulnerable.
Item | Current | Lowest | Reviews |
---|---|---|---|
Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of Americ… | - | - | 4.4/5.0 |
^Item&nbsp;Info | Bot&nbsp;Info | Trigger
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046 is where you probably want to start - the author talks about ways that social capital in society overall can be reduced, although of course it does go both ways.
First off, I'd recommend Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam. It's a book that discusses the massive value of community, which includes the ties you have with other people.
But friends have massive value. As humans, we are social beings, and the ties we make with other people improve our understanding of ourselves, our self-worth, and our health.
For example, having no friends poses a similar mortality risk as smoking a pack of cigarettes a day!
Friends are temporary, but that doesn't mean they are worthless. Ultimately, having people we can confide in, have fun with, do activities with, and with whom we experience life together adds so much value to life
I think that might have been taken from this. It's a good book.
It's amusing to see how people like OP are overreacting at recent events when similar shit reared its face during GWB's tenure. Then attitudes rolled back and went the other way during the Obama administration. This isn't new - stop pretending like all this shit has went away when it hasn't: people just bottled it all up.
Go read a book, OP. Here's Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam.
A book you would find interesting: https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
I recommend Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046/
> This thinking is exactly what is used by those who are against social services for the needy ect.
For some yes, and those who think that way are probably doing so because they never realized how little hardship was in their own lives. Others see the situation of those on the bottom as exploiters and parasites who are taking advantage of the system. There used to be a distinction between the "deserving poor" and the "undeserving poor" but as our society has dumbed itself down and become polarized such kind of (not so) subtle distinctions have gone away.
My take: at least in America we have a vampire 1% up top and a zombie apocalypse on the bottom and both are eating the middle. With the breakdown of our communities, and the fact we are now all bowling alone the organic social structures that were once in place to help those on the margins are largely gone. Community service clubs like the Elks, which used to offer things like insurance against hardship and a community service projects giving people a hand up as well as a social network, have been replaced because a lot of their functions were taken over by the welfare state. While the state can throw more money at the problem, the lack of those social / community service clubs means another area of the breakdown of social cohesion. That lack of social cohesion, that lack of asabiyyah leaves some people... forever alone.
> What the heck did people do for entertainment back in the day??
I'm not sure if it's a serious question or not but this book discusses that very topic:
http://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046
So I might not be familiar with all the different fields in social sciences. I only have a 203 level understanding of the field to be honest. I like to think that I’m a well read individual and I read a lot of literature on the subject. Here’s another example: https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/0743203046/ref=nodl_
550 pages about the decline of social capital. A fancy way of saying we don’t gather at bowling alleys anymore. You disagree that someone is OVER ANALYZING the topic a bit?