Notions have to creep into mass consciousness slowly. If you thrust too much reality on people, they decompensate and break down, then absorb none of it. If you give them a trail of breadcrumbs, they eventually get there, and then have an emotional crisis.
For example, if your society is falling like Rome and Athens, you are experiencing the most stressful event that humans face in groups. Your grandchildren will not look like you, if you have any; your time will be wasted paying for a bloating and dying system.
Everything you do that is great will be ignored, and mediocrity will triumph in all areas. In short, good is punished so bad can be managed; this is what happens when societies lose unity, thus lose hierarchy, and therefore depend on idiots to rule them (including voters).
If anyone with an IQ above their sock size remains on Earth by 2125 (doubtful) they will look back on this time as a desperate attempt to enforce conformity on the herd through rules, resulting in a censorship regime that distanced people from reality:
I found that while 45% of the respondents were worried about expressing their views to members of their immediate family, this percentage ballooned to 62% when it came to speaking out publicly in one’s community. Nearly half of those surveyed said they felt less free to speak their minds than they used to.
About three to four times more Americans said they did not feel free to express themselves, compared with the number of those who said so during the McCarthy era.
The important factoid here is that people are self-censoring in order to avoid conflict. Humans are risk averse by nature and so turn toward pacifism and its analogues, but when that comes to speech, it results in people simply not mentioning the obvious.
That leads to a society that acts in unison as if obvious facets of reality did not exist:
Supporters of Republicans and Democrats are far more likely than in the past to view the opposite side with distrust.
That political polarization is so stark that many Americans are now unlikely to have friendly social interactions, live nearby or congregate with people from opposing camps, according to one recent study.
Social scientists often refer to this sort of animosity as “affective polarization,” meaning that people not only hold conflicting views on many or most political issues but also disdain fellow citizens who hold different opinions.
Affective polarization occurs when contrary views to your own upset the views you use to justify your lifestyle and decisions as good; they are seen as an assault on the self because they delegitimize those lifestyles and decisions.
Funnily enough political polarization rises in parallel with the emergence and dominance by diversity:
Political polarization among Americans has grown rapidly in the last 40 years — more than in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia or Germany — a phenomenon possibly due to increased racial division, the rise of partisan cable news and changes in the composition of the Democratic and Republican parties.
They found that in 1978, the average American rated the members of their own political party 27 points higher than members of the other major party. By 2016, Americans were rating their own party 45.9 points higher than the other party, on average. In other words, negative feelings toward members of the other party compared to one’s own party increased by an average of 4.8 points per decade.
Diversity erases culture, removing what people have in common, so politics takes on a larger role. Where once they used culture as a way to find lifestyles that had social approval, they are now alone in moral relativism, so they choose something that gives them a group, clique, or gang.
Not surprisingly, political extremism has won out over the moderates because no center — mediated by culture — remains:
Today, 92% of Republicans are to the right of the median Democrat, and 94% of Democrats are to the left of the median Republican.
Partisan animosity has increased substantially over the same period. In each party, the share with a highly negative view of the opposing party has more than doubled since 1994. Most of these intense partisans believe the opposing party’s policies “are so misguided that they threaten the nation’s well-being.”
Today, almost four-in-ten (38%) politically engaged Democrats are consistent liberals, up from just 8% in 1994. The change among Republicans since then appears less dramatic – 33% express consistently conservative views, up from 23% in the midst of the 1994 “Republican Revolution.” But a decade ago, just 10% of politically engaged Republicans had across-the-board conservative attitudes.
The middle, lacking the cultural glue that holds it together, has become a place for compromise that benefits no one. It is like a committee decision, having enough symbolic parts of every viewpoint to keep people pacified, but directionless and expensive.
Diversity erased the culture that held our political system together and replaced it with a dedication to multiculturalism, or not having culture so that diverse groups could have theirs. That turned out to be a fatal decision for our political system.
The good news is that it has laid the groundwork for an exit from our political system because it has become paralytic, and has given people a direction in which to get even further extreme so they can differentiate from all the supporters of the dying regime.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Brett Stevens
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.amerika.org and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
