Ego and Group Dynamic

[ClayBarham]

Television advertising for Geico Insurance has a TV Anchor interviewing a caveman and a therapist. The therapist says, “We are at a time when the individual ego conflicts with the group dynamic.” The cave man’s response is, “Wha…?” The ad actually nails it, even if the caveman did not understand the implications of what the therapist said.

Yes, we are at that time. She was right, though I do not know how it relates to selling insurance. Our coming 2008 election centers on that very issue. America is unique in this world. It started 400 years ago supporting what the therapist called the individual ego, which is actually individual legitimate self-interests pursued by free people. From that pursuit, America rose to a position of economic superiority in the world, where the greatest number of citizens had the greatest happiness. The “group dynamic,” as she called it, is leader-defined community interests, which so many reflecting Old World values see as more important than individual freedom.

In the Old World of Europe, Asia and Africa, the group dynamic, which is the interests of community as defined by its leaders, was and still is the guiding social center of their societies. They have lived with it for so many centuries they cannot separate themselves from it. Responding to a suggestion from Thomas Paine, about his vision of George Washington riding his white horse across Europe, leading an army of liberation, setting all men free, the Marquis deLafayette said it could never work. He said the people of France and Europe lived so long in their current culture that they could not handle the concept of individual freedom and the pursuing of their own self-interests.

Along the same line of argument, however, the people of the New World, America, have lived so long free to pursue legitimate self-interests, they could not readily adjust life under the kind of culture experienced in the Old World. Americans are now asked to make drastic changes by the Democrats in the current campaigns of 2007-2008. The Democrats are telling Americans they must switch sides and live under Old World socialism, where the interests of the community prevail over the interests of individuals.

The therapist was correct in her analysis that the group dynamic, the Democrat’s Old World position, is in direct conflict with the individual ego. It always has been in conflict, and in the Old World always won. The culture of America, based upon individual freedom, has fallen into disrepute, is less popular today than it was before the election of Franklin Roosevelt, when he and his party began to whittle it down.

In the latter part of the 20th Century, no Democrat would criticize American culture head-on, as people would call them fascists or communists. Democrats pretended to agree with the American Culture, but when in office would undermine it. Their successes in doing it, coupled with greater demands by dependent peoples and immigrants, have made it possible for them to come clean with everyone, right up front that they believe in a socialist dictatorship to level the playing field, taking from those who have anything to give to those who have little. They believe in a command economy instead of a free market. All one has to do is listen to the Democrat candidates and read their literature. If that does not clear it up, look at their associates, their supporters, and you will readily see how much Old World socialism is their game plan for America.

Because of the conflicts between America, with its people free, and Muslim Theocracies who believe all people should be subject to their culture and law, Democrats are better able to convince Americans that surrender to dictatorship, of and by them, will allow for a more peaceful integration with the Muslims tyrannies. The culture of dependency has grown to such an extent in the populated inner cities, that the open, truthful appeal of the Democrats, as to socializing America, is palatable. Because of the dynamics of fear, envy and anger in many Americans today, Democrats up front with their socialism are ready for a victory at the polls.

The caveman was left scratching his head at the end of the interview. Americans, who slept while the Democrats challenged their cultural lifestyle, will also be scratching their heads in 2009, when the Democrats win the congress and the White House and begin to implement their socialist dream-state.

[moses2792796]

Egotism is one of the major problems with the modern outlook. Individuals are completely separate from external reality. Our society actually encourages this with materialistic propaganda that subconciously influences citizens into believing that the highest values in life are material wealth. The sense of organic unity within society, and the sense of society being an integral part of a larger world are long since lost.

[ClayBarham]

That sense of society you speak of is what I call community, and the so-called interests of community still rules in most corners of the world, with the exception of America. The campaigns of 2007-2008 are being fought over the issue of community interests against individual self-interests, what I assume you call egotism. The Democrats are leading the charge to favor community, but keep in mind, community is not a living, breathing, thinking or feeling entity, its core of thought and feeling comes from whoever leads it. So, we are really talking about legitimate self-interest in opposition to the interests of a leader, say, Hillary. America's past created a nation where people had to be responsible for themselves and their families. They had no ruler to lean on. This is why places like Virginia City, Nevada, in 1875, pulled themselves out of a disaster in two months whereas New Orleans, after two years makes no strides. Do not get me wrong. I favor legitimate self-interest as a source of freedom and prosperity. It does not mean pride or self-exaltation, which is often synonymous with ego.

[moses2792796]

This has alot to do with the circumstances in which America was created. I firmly believe that the individualistic attitude needs to be reversed however to ensure the secure future of the nation. I don't think any mainstream political parties are currently aiming to do this.

[ClayBarham]

Well, then, let us resurrect the Communist Party USA, as they had it all figured out....and most of them went to the Greens, so you should have no trouble bringing them together.

[moses2792796]

Communism = failure, at heart it is based on surprisingly similar principles to democracy. The deluded dualism of modern people tends to blind us to the real motivation behind such political systems.

[preservanation]

Communism = failure, at heart it is based on surprisingly similar principles to democracy. The deluded dualism of modern people tends to blind us to the real motivation behind such political systems.

We are in a battle for the soul of this Nation.
Free_market Capitalism vs European Socialism.

Choose your sides

Guess who are more well armed.

and then think again again,

Long live the 2nd Amendment.[hr]The Will of the American people to be free is underestimated by the left.
They will be surprised by the opposition to their fascism.

Freedom is King, not the Gov.,

[preservanation]

Egotism is one of the major problems with the modern outlook. Individuals are completely separate from external reality. Our society actually encourages this with materialistic propaganda that subconciously influences citizens into believing that the highest values in life are material wealth. The sense of organic unity within society, and the sense of society being an integral part of a larger world are long since lost.
snore.
Praise God you are free and quit your socialist belly-aching.

You have no idea that your enterprise is a failed one.

[ClayBarham]

He would do better to forget the Freudian terminology and call it what it really is. Self-centered is a better term than ego, as it relates to the worst in a person's character, but self-interest is far broader and can mean a lot more positive virtues. Community interests is a fiction, since community is not a human being. The leader of a community shapes the interests of community, thereby making his/her interests self-interests or, more likely, self-centered. Chew on that for a time. And forget the Id as well.

[preservanation]

He would do better to forget the Freudian terminology and call it what it really is. Self-centered is a better term than ego, as it relates to the worst in a person's character, but self-interest is far broader and can mean a lot more positive virtues. Community interests is a fiction, since community is not a human being. The leader of a community shapes the interests of community, thereby making his/her interests self-interests or, more likely, self-centered. Chew on that for a time. And forget the Id as well.

Always a pleasure, Clay.

[ClayBarham]

And Moses, when you come down off the mountain, look at the Democrats for your community interest campaign. That is what they campaign on, community interests being more important than self-interest, like It Take A Village sort of approach. It doesn't go too far from the communists, as that is what they preached. The conservatives still support the legitimate self-interest approach, which is purely American.

[moses2792796]

I'll have both of you know I do not support socialism, but if you got over your ridiculous dualisms that hold virtually no meaning when one looks at the real motivation behind modern politics you'd realise that America is really no better off. The only reason it doesn't bother you is because you do only care about yourselves, the individualistic attitude you both display is precisely the reason that you're creating what will likely become the 'second Russia'. America is only a few generations away form being a third world state, if you got over your false concepts of 'freedom' and 'equality' which are nothing but symbolic words with no real meaning, you might actually be able to do something about it.

[ClayBarham]

So, according to you, the idea of individual freedom and equality before the law are almost communist? I'm sure the communists won't like that, as they have no use for such notions, like you. Your hostility toward America and how it became where it is shows that you are Old World in your views, where the few elite, I guess like yourself, would rule everyone.

[moses2792796]

:thumbsup:

Getting warmer anyway...

[stannis]

We are in a battle for the soul of this Nation.
Free_market Capitalism vs European Socialism.

Rather than 'Jewish Finance', I suppose? Any other racial slurs you want to add? Europe isn't "socialist". We just don't believe in letting people die because they can't afford their healthcare costs.

[preservanation]

We are in a battle for the soul of this Nation.
Free_market Capitalism vs European Socialism.

Rather than 'Jewish Finance', I suppose? Any other racial slurs you want to add? Europe isn't "socialist". We just don't believe in letting people die because they can't afford their healthcare costs.
Here is a definition which may explain why some would consider many nations in Europe as socialist...

system of social organization in which property and the distribution of income are subject to social control rather than individual determination or market forces. And for further clarification of my claim...“To each according to his need” has been a frequent battle cry of socialists, but many of them would in fact settle for a society in which each would be paid in accordance with his contribution to the commonwealth, provided that society would first assure all citizens minimum levels of housing, clothing, and nourishment as well as free access to essential services such as education, health, transportation, and recreation.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9109587/socialism
In section 6 in the European Declaration at the Conference of Venice in 1962, it is stated, “That industries already nationalised will be better conducted by workers’ ownership or syndicalism than by state bureaucracy, but the system of the wage-price mechanism will, in full employment, make irrelevant the question of the ownership of industry by reason of the decisive economic leadership of elected government, and will bring such prosperity, that workers will have no interest in controversies which belong to the nineteenth century”. http://europeanaction.com/_wsn/page11.html
Ken Raggio wrote...
"In the European Union alone, thirteen of the fifteen countries are governed by a center-left (socialist minded) administration, or by a coalition that includes the center-left," (The European, 6/11/97); Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, UK.

Significantly, Paris and London are now both controlled by Socialists.

The European Union is moving toward a single currency. And, "it was senior socialist politicians - above all Francois Mitterand and Jacques Delors - who drew up the single currency blueprint in the first place," said Hilary Clark, in The European Magazine.
Furthermore...Taxation in most Developed Nations is around 50% of earnings – proof that the state has already confiscated and controls a huge part of our perceived freedoms.

In Stockholm, Sweden, for instance, Municipal taxes are 30%, National taxes are 25 %, Social Security taxes add another 5.95%, for a total taxation of 61% of income! Wealthy Swedes are immigrating to other countries to avoid going broke. Japans’ taxation is around 64%.

The Chart at right lists fifteen of the largest national economies in the world, and reveals that all have taxation rates between 40% and 60%, nearly ALL over 50%.http://www.dreamscape.com/cityhall/KRPN-SocialismRed.htm

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

If western Europe is not there yet it is certainly snowballing toward that ugly end.

The recent elections in France and Germany show some hope that the trend is shifting, but not much.
The adoption of the Euro is a prime example of these countries blurring the distinctions between the individual and "The State".[hr]moses:the individualistic attitude you both display is precisely the reason that you're creating what will likely become the 'second Russia'.
I think even you would concede that the USSR was a communist State.
You might even go as far as to acknowledge that communists are socialists.

What I would agree to is that your statement makes absolutely no contextual sense.
It is widely accepted that capitalism is the antithesis of communism.

If this is a problem for you, I would argue that you are not being intellectually honest.
cheers

[moses2792796]

Depends if you're looking at form or principle. The fact of the matter is, modern capitalism and communism both lead to the same end. The failure of the USSR is almost exactly the future of the USA. Although I expect they will fall harder.

[preservanation]

So America's meteoric rise in the world community in just two hundred short years is just a fluke?
The only way America can fulfill your predictions and hopes is if we embrace liberal socialism and reject our freedoms.

[moses2792796]

Your world would be nice if it existed. America's rise is not a fluke, remember 'the brightest flame burns quickest'. Your time is very nearly up, enjoy it while you can.

Think about it though, the population growth, not just in America is unsustainable. The rate at which humanity is consuming simply cannot be supported in the generations to come. Not to mention the gradual decline in intelligence brought about by the phenomenon know as social Darwinism which tends to favour the greedy over the intelligent.

[preservanation]

Your world would be nice if it existed. America's rise is not a fluke, remember 'the brightest flame burns quickest'. Your time is very nearly up, enjoy it while you can.The desperate hope of an outcome is not proof of an inevitability.

The best way to decrease the population is to support Islamic terror and their suicide bombers.
I am beginning to see your positions more clearly now.

[stannis]

The adoption of the Euro is a prime example of these countries blurring the distinctions between the individual and "The State".

Quite what a multinational currency has to do with the powers of the State is beyond me. If anything, the euro has weakened the power of the States of Europe.

If western Europe is not there yet it is certainly snowballing toward that ugly end.

No, it isn't. European governments are no more or less influential in the economy than they were 15 years ago. If anything, Thatcherism has shrunk the State in Western Europe. Why don't you just admit you're bigoted and ignorant about Europeans?

[preservanation]

No, it isn't. European governments are no more or less influential in the economy than they were 15 years ago. If anything, Thatcherism has shrunk the State in Western Europe. Why don't you just admit you're bigoted and ignorant about Europeans? Yes it is.
Denying facts don't change reality.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, headquartered in Paris, released a report, Going for Growth, that details economic prospects in the industrial world. It is 160 pages long and written in bland, cautious, scholarly prose. But the conclusion is clear—Europe is in deep trouble. These days we all talk about the rise of Asia and the challenge to America, but it might well turn out that the most consequential trend of the next decade will be the economic decline of Europe.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11298986/site/newsweek/

In 25 years the number of working-age Europeans will decline by 7 percent, while those older than 65 will increase by 50 percent. One solution: Let older people work. But Europe's employment rate for people older than 60 is low: 7 percent in France and 12 percent in Germany (compared with 27 percent in the United States). Modest efforts to allow people to retire later have been met with the usual avalanche of protests. And while economists and the European Commission keep proposing that Europe take in more immigrants to expand its labor force, it won't. The cartoon controversy has powerfully highlighted the difficulties Europe is having with its immigrants.

What does all this add up to? Less European influence in the world. Europe's position in such institutions as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund relates to its share of world GDP. Its dwindling defense spending weakens its ability to be a military partner of the United States, or to project military power abroad even for peacekeeping purposes. Its cramped, increasingly protectionist outlook will further sap its vitality.

The decline of Europe means a world with a greater diffusion of power and a lessened ability to create international norms and rules of the road. It also means that America's superpower status will linger. Think of the dollar. For years people have argued that it is due for a massive drop as countries around the world diversify their savings. But as people looked at the alternatives, they decided that the chief rivals, the euro and the yen, represented economies that were structurally weak. So they have reluctantly stuck with the dollar. It's a similar dynamic in other arenas. You can't beat something with nothing.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021301569.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

Again, hopes and dreams does not reality make.
Zip up, your ignorance is showing.

[ClayBarham]

I recall the implication of Lafayette's response to Tom Paine's ideal of George Washington riding across Europe on his white horse dispensing individual liberty to all, that he said it would work in America because, unlike Europe, the people there are not steeped in a tradition and from a culture of dependence on authority. Lafayette said it would not work in Europe because Europeans wouldn't be able to stand on their own two feet. Europe shows that today. What is striking is the Chinese temperament where it appears they can stand on their own and will probably become the new America down the road.