The Strengths and Weaknesses of Humans

A random act of kindness and love will not soften the cruel nature of people. All these things just serve to show how far we have come in our quest to make family and love universal values. These actions are driven by those who may believe that society’s rigidity is vulnerable; they also serve as a warning against the avarice of a select few, whose greed is causing the decline of the majority.
Certainly, there are many who engage in charitable activity, make charitable contributions, and even set up foundations in the hopes of becoming famous or assisting those in need, or perhaps both. Whether these actions increase, remain constant, or decrease, they highlight humanity’s inadequacy in addressing the crucial concerns of universal happiness, compassion, love, and peace. Policies and decision-makers should not, above all else, have these pursuits in mind while formulating their goals. Having these values deeply ingrained in a society’s culture is essential for promoting moral and social responsibility; otherwise, the society in question lacks the foundational egalitarianism necessary to support these values.

This is not a discussion about people in general, but rather subsets of people who are confined to specific locations or who identify with those locations but feel an inseparable bond to them. The transgressions of a culture whose collective unconscious refuses to produce the kind of harmony that may calm a planet in disarray are often brought to the attention of the reflecting individual’s conscience. This appears to be a dramatic unfolding, yet it is actually quite real.

Group psychology is not an inevitable byproduct, but rather emerges as a product of the power structures inside an organisation. Culture gives rise to collective personality, but group psyche is far more nuanced. The ideological framework, which includes group psyche, is based on the exploitation of specific cultural elements, most notably on made-up beliefs that the power brokers have institutionalised as cultural truths. In order to avoid being revealed as unethical, those in power believe a basic lie and then work tirelessly to spread it to everyone. We should be alarmed by such propaganda because it poses real or perceived danger, causes suffering, torments innocent lives, and encourages chaos at a time when international collaboration and fair regard for cultural differences are most desired.

Is it possible that we fail to see ideological constructs that are presented as indisputable facts, as essential to the democratic process, when in reality, all they offer are cultural misconceptions derived from an imperialistic past? Propagandists are experts at spreading misinformation to all parts of the globe. Underneath their deceitful pretences of “liberty,” “democracy,” “civilisation,” “development,” “progress,” and so on, they are driven by an unquenchable thirst for cultural domination, either by failing to recognise or, even worse, by failing to comprehend, that our self-proclaimed cultural practices do not align with their cultural misconceptions. Culture is an organic product of people’s ongoing interactions with the unique physical world they inhabit, but this fact has been overlooked time and time again. Consider this.

In terms of all characteristics that are considered natural, two environmental spaces, p and q, are distinct from one another. Concerns with weather, vegetation, and wildlife immediately spring to mind as examples of their uniqueness. P and q societies are thus named because its members have actively worked to improve their environments from ancient times to the current day. Furthermore, these societies have developed political, religious, economic, and social institutions in response to the difficulties they faced as a result of their settings. Whether or not this qualifies as modern depends on our subjective definition of modernity. Everything that happens is a result of a human need, which is met in response to the environment’s current state of affairs. But flaws and human wrongdoing can be seen in various natural settings. That is the mystery of human nature, which the internal mechanisms of ecological balance and social psychology will solve in the end.

We shouldn’t mess with nature’s order since different environmental spaces have diverse cultural forms. We are quick to dismiss the efforts of imperial forces that seek to transform the framework of other cultures into their own when we accept ecologically determined cultural patterns as inevitable, as if they were a divine arrangement. If these shifts take place, the cultural currents will be upended, and a new, chaotic current will meet the existing environmental space in an unnatural way.

However, this kind of instability not only disrupts the new human race’s relationship with the natural world, but it also wreaks havoc on people’s minds, both individually and collectively. Judgement of other cultures in an absolute sense based on markers of one’s own culture is a mistake and a manifest failure. No one group’s abnormal beliefs or emotions should dictate the destiny of another group’s members or culture. Human depravity and cultural form distortion will continue unchecked until this aberration is eliminated. Misleadingly, however, this is what is meant when people talk about things like democracy, freedom, civilisation, and progress.

Superpower politics and economics have given its supporters, its naive social group, and its ignorant admirers new psychological drives. And the architect has portrayed a collective shame as the genuine spirit of civilisation, replacing the question of truth. Inverting a social group’s guilt and presenting it as a liberated conscience that others should follow is both immoral and harmful to humanity. This kind of guilt stems from a society that values independence and autonomy above all else, frequently at the expense of community and environmental harmony. People nowadays are more robotic, cut off from the possibility of virtuous integration with the very world they fight so hard to control. But many people see this, erroneously, as the new genuine human being, the embodiment of their own unique personality.

An individual’s sense of self is not some theoretical concept best left unexplored. Much of what makes us unique, both you and I, is our cultural background. Because I was born and raised in a different environment than you, the unique traits that I exhibit are a product of my upbringing as well as my internal and external responses. Culture boils down to this. Cultural differences are relative, not absolute, and this fact brings us together as human beings despite our many distinctions. However, we risk losing sight of cultural identification as foundational to individual identity if we treat personal identity as a theoretical concept with no practical application. It would appear that imperialist actions are more likely to adhere to the abstract concept of individual identity.

Oh my goodness!