The over-romanticisation of the concept of "community"

[Aila]

The over-romanticisation of the concept of "community".

The concept of community has been a lot in my mind lately, as I have been considering settling to a place, where I also could happily retire to for the rest of my life.
Visiting a town of my childhood made me realize why I now had chosen to live where I do in Straya.

Closeness to nature is the first consideration, which I do need like oxygen.
The sense of a community is the second consideration, although as important.
And of course, - services.

In Melbourne I wouldn’t dare to say “G’day” to a stranger on the street, because people would look at you suspiciously as though thinking: “What’s wrong with her – What does she want?”
Here you would get a questioning stare if you did not say “Hello, Good morning” to somebody/anybody on the street.

Rural town communities, people who after 4th generations might consider you as a local can be really ‘seedy’ behind the scenes.

More relaxed Anglo-Australian communities by the beaches can be nice, but people minding each other’s businesses’ - being in each other’s pockets all the time gets to be a bit too much after awhile.

Aboriginal communities accept and ‘adopt’ you straight away and then you are well and truly stuck in it, through thick and thin:


So, I prefer an Anglo-Australian, other nationalities and Indigenous mix, people who have lived a long time together now as friends and neighbours.
Freedom to be as you are, yet enough closeness to have that community feeling of familiarity.

[JamesBond007]

Lol Nietzsche was extremely arrogant, and apearently he wasnt sueted for philosophy too because he went nuts(It was not syphilis).How ironical. Philosophy as a unmythological examination of life can and need to be ministered to the common men.I think u are not comunist because That is partialy what Karl Marx tried to do.

I would not quote Nietzsche and Schopenhauer if I was Marxist, that much should be obvious genius. I was a Marxist until I learned it tried to repeal a law of nature and any philosophy which does that is doomed to failure. The law of nature that communism tries to repeal is that people work for reward and the more reward they get the harder they work. Like it or not Nietzsche is one of the most important Western philosophers :

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/sh...Accomplishment

BTW, modern philosophy is definitely not for masses it like science uses specialized nomenclature.

[Tongio]

I would not quote Nietzsche and Schopenhauer if I was Marxist, that much should be obvious genius.

Who knows man, there are even christian marxists out there.

I was a Marxist until I learned it tried to repeal a law of nature and any philosophy which does that is doomed to failure. The law of nature that communism tries to repeal is that people work for reward and the more reward they get the harder they work.

Thats cool , i apreciate your open headedness ,i
am realising more and more there are many truths on Marx ideas, and its important to realy study them as we basicaly live in a post Marx world.I think marxism also breaks another law of nature wich is that power corrupts man, and because of that almost all comunist experiences end up as autoritarian regimes.All marxists i see talking about that one generaly just start talking about the crimes of capitalism and opression of the proletariate, as if It redeemed them.

Like it or not Nietzsche is one of the most important Western philosophers :

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/sh...Accomplishment

BTW, modern philosophy is definitely not for masses it like science uses specialized nomenclature.

Dude i actually actually realy like reading Nietzcshe, his books are great , despite excessive use of metaphors, i go by the point It doesnt matter If i agree or not It still thought provoking and important stuff.
On your last point, come on, its not like the average person can't get to learn the meaning of some important specialised terms, i think philosophers tend tô think they are too diferent from others(almost a natural tendêncy), when they are mostly using time in diferent ways, with thinkers having greater amounts of it wich they use tô research and better evaluate ideas.

[Atlantic Reptilian]

But in a community there will be a person who talks to all the members, like a religious/philosophical person, that changes their views on something.
I have talked to people that would probably be considered racist (because they aren't used to foreign people) about what they think about i. e. Africans and I've come to the conclusion that they personally wouldn't mix but they would be able to have Africans as neighbors as long as the behaved like everyone else.
This isn't the same thing as wanting to use Africans as slaves and humiliate them, like the Anglo-Saxons did.

I think that if you're diplomatic and talk to people plus give them enough time they could get through these big issues in life.

[Tooting Carmen]

But in a community there will be a person who talks to all the members, like a religious/philosophical person, that changes their views on something.
I have talked to people that would probably be considered racist (because they aren't used to foreign people) about what they think about i. e. Africans and I've come to the conclusion that they personally wouldn't mix but they would be able to have Africans as neighbors as long as the behaved like everyone else.
This isn't the same thing as wanting to use Africans as slaves and humiliate them, like the Anglo-Saxons did.

I think that if you're diplomatic and talk to people plus give them enough time they could get through these big issues in life.

There is a distinction between living and participating in a community - talking to your neighbours, participating in charity and communal events, helping people in times of need - and having to obey one's community, no matter how oppressive, unjust and bizarre their rules might be.

[Tooting Carmen]

[Atlantic Reptilian]

There is a distinction between living and participating in a community - talking to your neighbours, participating in charity and communal events, helping people in times of need - and having to obey one's community, no matter how oppressive, unjust and bizarre their rules might be.

Ok, I get that. You're right.
When I myself get into such a situation I can't obey them. It might be social suicide but something in my head tells me to "follow the right path", which happens to be different to from what's expected of me.
I suppose I would be killed or ostracized in some communities because of this. But I don't want to be a prisoner of someone else. It make me feel worse than the fear they try to instill in me.

The thing is, if, let's say your parents look down on you, their child, I think it shows how much they have drifted from their own nature, that they can even hate themselves so much as to abandon their own child.

[Tooting Carmen]

The attempted killing of Salman Rushdie is a timely reminder of the dangers of repressive communitarian ways of thinking.

[rothaer]

It is often taken as axiomatic that "community" and "communitarian values" are more wholesome and humane than the supposed atomisation, individualism and selfishness that characterise particularly modernity and the West. However, without wishing to go full Ayn Rand-like, I would like to contest this. Particularly in many countries in the Global South, but even in many Western countries too, "community" in reality much of the time means having to fit in with the narrow-minded and petty prejudices and limitations of your (please tick off as appropriate) family/neighbours/nation/ethnic group/religious group. "I cannot dress like that, because the community will disapprove". "I cannot marry that person, because the community will disapprove". "I cannot say what I genuinely think, because the community will disapprove". Etc etc.

Good considerations.

I saw that you referred to me as for this topic.

Please note that my community orientation is restricted to existential aspects. That I'm strict and might be considered radical is an inevitable result of being serious and consequent.

My reference to my people (ethnicity) is founded on two things: My perceived identity and the fact of the biological existence (throughout centuries) of the reproduction community of the German people (amongst others, ofc).

I just want this preserved and I see myself - logically - as part of it. Is that a romanticisation?

In all other things that do not touch the long term existence of this community (ethnicity) I'm pretty liberal, I think. I've no strive for any economic and social forced "togetherness" of my people that exceeds the common opinions. In contrast, I'd cut down a lot of today existing (in Germany) social care and social re-distribution of wealth, which I consider harmful for a vital population. I completely don't care for various sexualities, unless I see some kind of advertising effects that are to be considered being harmful to the reproduction capacity of the people. If I would say something against deviating behaviour I would never do this out of any "moral upsetment" or prudeness. If there are no factual disturbances I've nothing against incest (per se, that is not violating other aspects of sexual self-determination), bestiality (that is not violating common animal protection laws) or whatever odd things that other people would like to do.

In "rothaer-land" you would be a pretty free individual with the only basic exception of doings that concerns the mentioned preserved existence. This perserved existance is also the guarantor that this freedom in all other aspects can be enduringly maintained. Btw. this would not be possible with a half-oriental population.