>>12057889>And the rule of singular will necessary care for the individual for what reason why?you negated my statement like its an boolean expression.
>the very concept of majority rule is determined to crush souls of individuals>This is an unthought statement anonno its not, its a necessary conclusion from basic group psychology
in the means of group cohesion, optimally every individual that is part of the group has identical traits, every single deviation from members towards the group average is a potential seed for disturbance
there is no room for individuality and free thought and they are furthermore actively or passively being suppressed (for example in the military with drill or more generally with indoctrination)
>will necessary care for the individual for what reasonwell, is care of group instances targeted at individuals a necessity at all or even a moral automatism?
i dont think so, these kinds of social action serve as a societal volatility limiter in the first instance and this is also where i see their merit
>your condemning of any possibility of its successi dont condemn it per se, i acknowledge that this organization of civilization subjects individuals to stress that would likely not exist in a tribalistic society
>"always crushing of the individual soul"no, individuals being limited and impaired is a consequence of co-habitation, whether or not an individual recognizes them as such or shows a stress response depends on socialization and definitively intelligence
irregardless of awareness about conscious and subconscious regulatory influence of societal institutions, stress symptoms can appear in individuals, those can manifest in pathologic illnesses that seem to have no direct organic cause (chronic pain, anxiety, digestion problems, poor sleep quality, ...)
stress maims the subconscious, the worst thing is that these wounds are seemingly invisible and exclusively appear like the fins of a shark
