Individualism! | paradoxa's Blog

The conceptual consensus regarding the characteristics of true individualism is fairly consistent throughout the social structure of any society. Although, such peoples as those found inhabiting the great jungles, bushes and forests of our world, those without systematic influences or attachments, for such people it is unnecessary to include in the following analogy of true individualism; as they are systematically unattached, they already obtain the characteristics of true individuals. The former relates to anyone who is found dwelling within the web-like structural framework of civilisation, the latter, having attained (since birth) the title of true individuals, will be perceived as such within the forthcoming analysis.

Thousands, perhaps even millions, of people throughout the world have either claimed, or heard it claimed, as being an individual. This self-conception, however, is quite often gathered without the guidance of any real self-analysis and virtually no self-comparisons with the surrounding elements that constitute society. Take, for example, the people wearing baggy-jeans, baggy-shirt and reversed cap, in comparison with those wearing black-jeans, a black T-shirt and leather-boots. Although both these character examples consider themselves individuals, neither of the two harbours any immediate recognisable similarities, i.e. appearance, slang, body-language etc. they do, however, have one thing in common, and it is this connection which forms the fundamental element common to all “civilised” peoples; conditioned reasoning.

The presence of propaganda in our system is well enough known, be it political; democratic, communist, socialist and the like; media, advertisement etc. however, propagandist mechanisms are used on many levels, and the level of interest here is the method of sociological propaganda. Sociological propaganda, over an extended period of time, say, a generation, is capable of not only creating the environment of ones society; it can form the very customs and habits of a person via suggestion, by-passing the conscious and entering, unnoticed, directly to the unconscious. The person is also inclined to adhere to new choices and judgements, of which is believed to be their own selections. This is merely an effect of the atmosphere created by sociological propaganda. Sociological propaganda ensures the adaptation of the person via the moulding, unconsciously, of their psychological framework and instils in them the willingness for societal conformity. This type of propaganda has been used on the masses for generations, thus the driving-force behind the aforementioned conditioned reasoning.

The use of sociological propaganda has been subjected upon people since their maternal-revealment, though more systematic with schooling attendance. Education, it seems, is the real beginning, the birth-place of this quest for acquiring individualistic tendencies, antics, character. Yet, the allotment of oneself to a group can’t happen fast enough. In the way of group formations, all schools contain commonplace reflections; nerds, jocks, popular, unpopular etc. Each person, in each school group, considers themselves an individual. With so many people in one school group harbouring the same characteristics as that in another, what is it that separates them from the former group? An individual is an entity separate from everything else, how is it, than, that a person can believe they’re an individual when the multitude of likewise school groups runs contrary to this belief? The same can be said regarding the characters described earlier; baggy-jeans, black-jeans etc. one being labelled a “Homie,” the other, a “Goth.” With a vast world of said labels, what makes one character of the group more of an individual than another character from the same group? And if this were so, the apparent individual would in turn suggest that the remaining group members were non-individuals; would this bring the remaining group members to no longer consider themselves individuals? No, the truth is, none of them have any connection at all with the definition of individualism; conditioned reasoning has created the mere illusion which convinces them of such.

But how is it possible that a tribe of Amazonian natives, for example, are able to be classed as being, since birth, true individuals when they themselves form a group? Since one tribesman alone is an individual, how is it that the remaining tribe-members are individuals, too? When comparing the working elements of the tribe, as a whole, with that of civilisation, the reason is clear. Although any number of natives can constitute a tribe, say, 10, 20, or 60 members, they nonetheless obtain individualistic tendencies. As a tribe, they function as one, they all work to serve the group, to sustain the group, and they survive as a group. It matters not from which family you stem; to help your fellow tribesman is to help yourself. All aspects of the group are catered for by the group. Without these functions, the group would cease to exist; chaos would surely reign!

“Civilised” peoples, on the other hand, can hardly be said to function as one, to sustain their society etc. it would be fair to state here, however, that there are certain civilised people who contribute part of their lives to the former functions, albeit with little impact, their contributions are countered with a multitude of systematic conformities, each of which, detrimental to themselves and their surrounding environments. The continued allowance of permitted governors, for example. If the civilised world were to help one another, in all aspects, there would be no apparent need for governing bodies; we don’t need them, they need us. Hence the presence of sociological propaganda; chaos reigns!

To view the essence of these drawn conclusions, it is highly recommended that one read “Propaganda,” by the renowned sociologist, Jacques Ellul. Or, click on the link below and discover everything they fail to teach in school; from kindergarten to higher-learning!

www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com