When it comes to addressing the “me” problem, Buddha has to be on the list of people with advice worth checking out. Ego issues may run deep, but modern capitalism encourages and nurtures the worst of them. A lot of what we face today isn’t due to any unchangeable human nature, but capitalists will try to persuade us it is, because that undermines our will to grow past the system that serves them.
but modern capitalism encourages and nurtures the worst of them
We-ell, one of the reasons I emotionally hate communism is because I’ve grown in Russia and have deep acquaintance with some things which were being planted just like you describe, but by Soviet education.
An example: someone has a hobbyist project, that project becomes useful for their group, the group (without any participation) takes pride in it as “our” project, then later that someone makes a weak squeal about not even credit, but their own wishes to continue their hobby by their own understanding, the group judges them heavily and makes them repent. In Soviet moralist stories the person with the initiative would be the one to blame for “selfishness”, while their contribution would be considered “as expected” (because they owe the “collective” everything they can do), so the rest of the group who’ve done nothing useful would be “better” (because they don’t have to do anything, just use what belongs to the “collective”) and that person would have to redeem themselves. No irony, no nuance, just this.
When it comes to addressing the “me” problem, Buddha has to be on the list of people with advice worth checking out. Ego issues may run deep, but modern capitalism encourages and nurtures the worst of them. A lot of what we face today isn’t due to any unchangeable human nature, but capitalists will try to persuade us it is, because that undermines our will to grow past the system that serves them.
Thank you, yes, Buddha is.
I also forgot Tao Te Ching.
We-ell, one of the reasons I emotionally hate communism is because I’ve grown in Russia and have deep acquaintance with some things which were being planted just like you describe, but by Soviet education.
An example: someone has a hobbyist project, that project becomes useful for their group, the group (without any participation) takes pride in it as “our” project, then later that someone makes a weak squeal about not even credit, but their own wishes to continue their hobby by their own understanding, the group judges them heavily and makes them repent. In Soviet moralist stories the person with the initiative would be the one to blame for “selfishness”, while their contribution would be considered “as expected” (because they owe the “collective” everything they can do), so the rest of the group who’ve done nothing useful would be “better” (because they don’t have to do anything, just use what belongs to the “collective”) and that person would have to redeem themselves. No irony, no nuance, just this.