🐈

The choice from someone with a 'higher' perspective is to take advantage of them or raise them up. If it's your child, you do the latter. If it's some different colored person in a different country speaking a different language in the context of a different culture, the former

This is the spectrum of 'in' group to 'out' group. Every system has to deal with the problem of spontaneous creation of out-groups. E.g. natural formation of predator-prey dynamics.

This is the root of 'toxic masculinity' IMO. The predator-prey dynamic is viewed as bloody and vile. This dynamic though is part of nature. Without it you cannot create hierarchies. Without hierarchies you don't have a sense of "up". Without "up" you lose a sense of values.

You can temper the dynamic into the sort of predator-prey relationship that keeps say fraternities together with their constant ribbing and hazing. If you try to eliminate it altogether though you kill the very thing that keeps soldiers together.

To desire a society without soldier's and police is like desiring a body without an immune system. The response to an auto-immune disease with the body attacking itself should be "Well, can we use AIDS and just remove the immune system altogether?"

When you don't understand a virus and just see it as "bad", you try to create a hermetically sealed and sterile world that is just... lifeless... Such an idea springs forth from complacency. From willful ignorance of nature and the blood price it pays for its life.

It also ignores how much of male cultures descends from the soldier mentality. Much identity is built around it and it can't just be removed in a flash even if it is true that our modern world seems to need fewer soldiers.

It's the equivalent of deeming an indigenous tribe savage and wiping them out. There's a tradition that should be expected and tolerated. There should be some degree of integration and preservation yea but not a binary "good" "bad" line.