A major contention of FIML practice is that “cultures” all tend toward holding many fixed ideas and so does individual psychology.
The subjective psychology of the individual can be understood as a kind of interior “culture” that often is as rigid and shallow as the lowest-common-denominator culture to which that individual belongs.
In this respect, psychology and culture are much the same thing. They range across a spectrum that grades from the idiosyncrasies of the individual to the values and beliefs of their group/culture.
Consider the predominance of leftist views held by majorities in academia and the news media.
Anyone who draws close to academia will know that some values and beliefs may not be questioned. To do so is to risk ostracism, bad grades, not going to grad school, not getting published, not getting tenure, job loss, and more.
Another example is the behavior of the EU, which to this day continues to deny the problems caused by mass migration as well as the statistics of that mass migration or what they mean. (Two graphs on EU asylum seekers)
The tendency of all cultures to shun people who violate deep values or beliefs is mirrored in individual psychology.
When, as individuals, we believe that another individual has violated some aspect of our interior “culture,” our idiosyncratic mixture of ideas and emotions, we will tend to avoid that person or at least step back from them.
This response seems to be innate, instinctive, existing in virtually all people everywhere.
Reasonable people can usually discuss culture and cultural differences if there is a forum for this or some kind of prior agreement.
If you just bring up the bad side of someone’s culture without prior agreement to discuss it, they generally will not like it or you.
Something similar can be said about individual psychology. If you bring up a fault in your friend without warning, they generally will not like it. If you introduce your thought deferentially, though, most people will accept it and maybe even thank you for it. But you cannot keep doing this even with the most tolerant of individuals.
This is a weak point in all of us. We need input from others but cannot stand getting it except sometimes. By the time we become adults, most of us will not tolerate or receive even slight input from others. Once or twice a year is probably an average limit.
This is how cultures get so many fixed ideas. At the most basic level of culture, individual-to-individual, we cannot bear to be questioned enough.
Thus we ossify as individuals and as groups.
This is where FIML can do a lot of good.
FIML works with very small bits of real-time communication using a technique that partners agree on.
Because there is prior agreement and because the bits of information being worked on are very small, there is much less emotional charge than if general “traits” or “habits” are being discussed.
The low emotional charge of FIML material makes it much easier for individuals to accept results that show them to have been wrong. Indeed, FIML practitioners soon learn that correcting these small mistakes leads almost immediately to greater happiness and well-being because a mistake once removed frees brain-space for better stuff. Makes you smarter because you will stop being stuck on whatever it was.
FIML also works well and efficiently because it uses real-time bits of real communication that are agreed upon by both partners. This aspect prevents pointless “discussions” during which partners are talking about different things or vaguely defined things.
People are not very smart. You can see this in the ways that both cultures and individual psychologies tend to become rigid, settling on fixed ideas, beliefs, values.
As semiotic entities, we are still beginners. We are at the stage where we are able to see and think about how we communicate, but it is still very hard for us to apply this information or gain much from it. For the most part, insights into communication/psychology are only used to manipulate others, not to speak honestly to them.
I do not think for a minute that this is all there is to this subject. But this is a big part of it.
This video highlights ethnic differences within the black community, a factor of major significance.
This same factor exists within the white community. Many whites come from serf or indentured-servant backgrounds that strongly resemble slavery. Many whites have bad families and criminal histories.
The same is true for Asian communities in the US. Many arrive in the US with good educations and a strong work-ethic, but many do not. At the end of the day, each one of us is responsible for our own behavior. And each of us has to deal with whatever legacy or family background we have.
Some side notes:
- My understanding is that in Britain, the Igbo people from Nigeria have higher IQs than whites. I wonder if MyNameIsJosephine is Igbo.
- The American Rust Belt, both urban and rural, now “supports” a white subculture that is all but destroyed due to loss of jobs over many decades. We see many problems within these communities—drugs, suicide, crime, aimlessness.
- Obama should have been speaking more like MyNameIsJosephine instead of pandering to BLM during his presidency. I believe he worked a divisive angle on these issues primarily for his own political self-interest as he perceived it and not for the good of the black community or the USA.
What could be more obvious?
And yet, this obvious statement from a US Congressman is producing a minor firestorm among US media and political elites.
The full Tweet from Steve King of Iowa reads:
Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.
A cuck is basically someone who denies the obvious fundamental truth of King’s statement. A cuck supports policies that help them personally in their career (think neocons and “principled conservatives” in addition to leftists) but undermine their culture, society, or people.
Almost all cucks are white. You won’t find very many Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, Arab, or African cucks (in their own homelands). Unless, maybe they are Christian.
Christian so-called “universal morality” places little or no importance on ethnic, cultural, historical, or racial realities. That’s nice and may become so in future when robots, gene-splicing, and brain-computer enhancements are the norm. But as of now, those are not the norm.
Basic human realities of violence, perfidy, hypocrisy, and deceit, unfortunately, still rule the world.
Fundamental truths are always very simple when stated outright and it is very easy to muddy the waters of basic truths. But they are still true and you are a fool to ignore them.
Arch leftist Howard Dean, Tweeted in response:
King is a total ignoramus and no one takes him seriously.
Dean’s response is the fundamental Christian/Western response approved by our elite masters of today. It says, “this person is bad, not one of us,” while conspicuously refraining from providing a counter-argument. Dean is a cuck, like it or not.
For Buddhists, here is what the Dalai Lama himself has to say on this issue:
BERLIN: The Dalai Lama said in an interview published Thursday that Europe has accepted “too many” refugees, and that they should eventually return to help rebuild their home countries.
“When we look into the face of every single refugee, especially the children and women, we can feel their suffering,” said the Tibetan spiritual leader, who has himself lived in exile for over half a century.
“A human being who is a bit more fortunate has the duty to help them. On the other hand, there are too many now,” he said. (Source)
The Dalai Lama knows from experience that too many immigrants destroy cultures. Tibet is all but lost due to massive immigration from China.
Buddhist morality is based on wisdom not compassion. Compassion must be tempered with wisdom. This is why the DL says in essence, “When we look in their faces, we feel compassion for them but culture and demographics are our destiny, so it’s is wrong to take in too many as Europe already has.”
The word cuck arose to combat the kinds of words Dean and the left use all the time. It’s unfortunate that public discourse needs a simple response like cuck but that’s reality too.
Cucks constantly swear at and demean opponents with strong words like “total ignoramus,” “rayciss,” and “deplorable” if you disagree with them.
So those of us who despise that simple-mindedness and the way it short-circuits wise discussion have been all but forced to respond with words like cuck.
Cucks like Dean are selling out American and Western civilization for their own selfish and temporary advantage. Their descendants will hate them for that.
Edit: The following point seems beyond obvious to me but probably needs to be stated:
Recognizing that your civilization will be destroyed if too many people from other civilizations come into it, does not mean you hate the other civilization(s).
I suppose the need to make this statement shows yet again how basic basic truths really are.