reply to post by AthlonSavage
*nod*... Okay, yeah, that does make sense. It was part of what Nietzsche pointed out when he described a "slave mentality" (using christianity as an
example of that) which is helpful to those who wish to have power over a peoples.
I guess one could say that those who encourage and teach the young to be part of the (abused) passive mass coud be judged as "bad" then too.
But I would want to point out that this might not be done on purpose. People further such ideologies for other reasons- because having a more passive
child or class enables them
to be less aggressive and forceful in their leading approach (and they feel they are being more "good" then).
That is a common type of parenting you see especially with single mother households. It is understandable, since they will tend to be overwhelmed with
responsibilities, so with less energy, but also having a natural feminine tendancy to be repulsed by aggressivity. There is nothing bad about their
intent! They want to be nice to their kids, they want their kids to be nice enough so that they can.
Then, it does become a problem when that kid gets out into the social world and find themselves bullied and overcome by others who aren't so
"nice". They are very sensitive and get hurt easily.
For those who judge it bad to be aggressive, that is just further proof that aggressivity is "bad".
Personally, I believe there is such a thing as "positive aggressivity", which is more akin to "assertiveness", but can include hostility at times,
but that needs to be learned.
If you don't teach it, the child will have a uncontrolled type of aggressivity emerge when necessary instead- what americans call "rage".
Consciously applied aggressivity doesn't become anger
Aggressivity doesn't come from the emotion of anger- anger is born from repressed aggressivity.
Wow, I am straying from what I meant to say....
Summary is- intent of each individual may be worth considering in ones judgment of "good" or "bad"?
As well as the individual desires and will of the person being taught such an ideology- what if the person WANTS to be controlled by another?
What if they do not want the responsibility of power themselves, and want to be protected and directed and always have others to blame if things go