Sociopath Community

Too soon my dude. 

Outro said: 

 

Why are people so enthusiastic about their own subjugation? 

 

Okay this actually had me asking shit years back from wanting to understand how they find comfort in their leadership like that, especially when they have no choice in it. 

I've been led to think it's over the consistency, the idea that no matter what in their own life changes that they will remain a constant in their lives. They air their affairs on TV for everyone to see, and in turn they become absorbed by all the depth they've cultivated into their royal garden of intrigue, allowing the common man to ignore that much more over themselves. By having it feel untouchable, and a common subject the entire culture can share and discuss, it gives them that much more of a sense of community around these common lines, and the royal family has learned how to use this for power. 

I can't really think of anywhere else that is quite so "Lie back and think of England". The idea that it's 'bigger than them' grants a sense of hearth and home, of safety, by reminding them constantly that every small piece is a part of this larger whole. Even their own peers end up reinforcing it. 

The idea of kings and queens died off. Why do people still cling to this dead idea?

It's symbolism and idealism and patriotism, of a sort.

Just the opening portion is relevant in this video, but that pretty much summarizes it.

Hating on dead people. WHOOP

Wanting a royal family is some massive fucking cope, big L to England.

One day the counter-revolution will reinstate monarchies across Europe ushering in a new age of absolutist gory, efficiency, and a galaxy filled with space kingdoms!

Turncoat said: 

Outro said: 

Why are people so enthusiastic about their own subjugation? 

Okay this actually had me asking shit years back from wanting to understand how they find comfort in their leadership like that, especially when they have no choice in it. 

I've been led to think it's over the consistency, the idea that no matter what in their own life changes that they will remain a constant in their lives. They air their affairs on TV for everyone to see, and in turn they become absorbed by all the depth they've cultivated into their royal garden of intrigue, allowing the common man to ignore that much more over themselves. By having it feel untouchable, and a common subject the entire culture can share and discuss, it gives them that much more of a sense of community around these common lines, and the royal family has learned how to use this for power. 

Yeah, I imagine it's a lore in the same way that we in the US have the "founding fathers". The difference is that ours is just a lore that informs a national identity, not a current drain on taxpayers. That's the bit that I don't understand.

I can't really think of anywhere else that is quite so "Lie back and think of England". The idea that it's 'bigger than them' grants a sense of hearth and home, of safety, by reminding them constantly that every small piece is a part of this larger whole. Even their own peers end up reinforcing it. 

Again, lore and tradition. Totally universal, but usually so distant as to be a shared myth. When there are current, tangible costs associated, I don't understand how they persist.  

Outro said: 

Turncoat said: 

Outro said: 

Why are people so enthusiastic about their own subjugation? 

Okay this actually had me asking shit years back from wanting to understand how they find comfort in their leadership like that, especially when they have no choice in it. 

I've been led to think it's over the consistency, the idea that no matter what in their own life changes that they will remain a constant in their lives. They air their affairs on TV for everyone to see, and in turn they become absorbed by all the depth they've cultivated into their royal garden of intrigue, allowing the common man to ignore that much more over themselves. By having it feel untouchable, and a common subject the entire culture can share and discuss, it gives them that much more of a sense of community around these common lines, and the royal family has learned how to use this for power. 

Yeah, I imagine it's a lore in the same way that we in the US have the "founding fathers". The difference is that ours is just a lore that informs a national identity, not a current drain on taxpayers. That's the bit that I don't understand.

A living example is much more effective, founding fathers by comparison has been grounds for social civil wars over how they cannot represent themselves after death. 

I can't really think of anywhere else that is quite so "Lie back and think of England". The idea that it's 'bigger than them' grants a sense of hearth and home, of safety, by reminding them constantly that every small piece is a part of this larger whole. Even their own peers end up reinforcing it. 

Again, lore and tradition. Totally universal, but usually so distant as to be a shared myth. When there are current, tangible costs associated, I don't understand how they persist.  

Have you never been somewhere that has a king, and spoke to their people about it?