Before you read this post, I have to give thanks to 
It inspired me to then write this .
While her post is looking at the psychology of envy, and not politics as such, 'politics' just screamed out at me.
Not so much 'politics' as more of an 'explanation of ideological motivations'.
Envy is irrational, it’s painful. And that is because it is marked by inadequacy and inferiority; feelings that are sparked by what one perceives as another’s superior possessions, attributes and success.. It is no wonder why it is argued that envy may be a ‘social-pain’, one that cuts deep into the self.
It's no wonder that socialism and communism are called the politics of envy, is it?
Taxation is the legitimized theft from others.
Authoritarian taxation (theft) become morally acceptable. To be envious is then condoned and endorsed.
Stealing becomes virtuous, rather than immoral.
The self that when threatened by the out performance of another loses sight of its own positive image.
Is this not the entire encapsulation of the left's outlook on life?
Instead of 'manning up', they revert to a negative stance, which then leads to envy - and all the crap that comes with it...
All it takes is for the higher IQ intellectual (Marx et al) to feed the sheep easily digestible lines of 'inequality', and envy runs rampant. (...revolutions, anyone?)
Envy, however, gets a bit more obscure than this, as it yields pleasure and satisfaction from the envied person’s troubles. This particular pleasant feeling is called schadenfreude, and when experienced, a certain part of our brain, the ventral striatum, is activated 2.
.....and when that is part of group a behavior, actually endorsing the feeling at being virtue, mental illness then takes hold..
Can you imagine? Being emotionally rewarded at the expense of a specific individual’s misfortune?
Yuk! No. But then again, I'm not a communist..lol. Some people are though!
Envy in the political context becomes much more than just_being emotionally rewarded. It also comes with career opportunities and power.
With this attained power, and elevated status - then comes the envy from those below. The followers of this 'religion' (it has no basis in rationality) are of the same mindset.
It's no wonder the socialist systems forever corrupts and then eats itself!
The ' envy perspective', ensures the dynamic plays out the same way every time.
Looking at every attempted socialist system implemented since Lenin, we can see this to be the case. Every...single...time...
And then it's always followed by the excuse of 'but that wasn't real socialism'....(Yeah, it was, sorry).
This is to be entirely expected of course - it's an ideology of envy, of weak people, of failure.
One thing is certain, weak people give excuses for the failures.
The strong people get on with fixing the problem..
...Because, you see, when we envy someone, our affective empathy towards them is suspended and, as it appears to me, a malignant ‘survival’ drive sets in.
Communism, in its installation (politically) has to reduce the individual to 'nothing', to commit the murder and theft needed to then have communism.
It's all about the collective, right?
Genocides that have occurred during all these communistic takeovers, and it more than supports this view.
Are the most envious, also the most sociopathic?
....the more intense is the feeling (envy).
Now, that very image activates your dACC (the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex). That is the neurocognitive mechanism of envy itself, right there.
The more intense the level of envy you hold for that person the stronger the dACC activation (which, in turn, will make their misfortunes all the more pleasant for you...).
This feeling - already dormant within individuals, can easily be manipulated by clever sociopaths, to focus on a 'group' - a class war - and thus dehumanize them all accordingly.
You become that person able to rejoice in the death of ten's or hundreds of people - and because you are part of the group insanity, the herd mentality it is validated, and seen as morally acceptable.
Mental illness !
I believe that the reason as to why envy is a feeling hard to acknowledge (how many times have you blurted out is a consequence of how it has been portayed throughout history. For example, both in the Jewish and Christian Bibles envy is seen as something that one shall not, as the tenth commandment orders ‘You must not be envious of thy neighbour's goods’.
I think this is the wisdom of the non envious,( knowing, possibly), that the emotion of envy can be changed to one of positivity...?
If you think of envy as one side of a coin, (communism) and the other being 'positive striving' (free market), then much cleverer people than myself - may have worked out that by self reinforcement (the commandments), it may then be possible to change which side of the coin you see.
'Self brainwashing' may allow you to start seeing the other side of the coin...from envy to appreciation- from wanting what other have, to making what you want, for yourself...
Moreover, I am yet to meet a historical personage who accomplished greatness via the path of envy. These all are elements responsible for turning envy into a taboo subject...
Again this sums up the fundamental difference between communist mindset leaders and free market leaders...
Greatness from communism is measured in the size of the mass graves, nothing more..
I am well aware of the lack of free markets, so the obsessive pedants need not remark. I am referring to the outlook on life, not the real word actuality as it stands..
(Honestly - I understand the difference, and intellectual jousting around this area, will only end up with you getting hurt, you don't have a lance big enough...lol).
I think envy - left unchallenged - becomes a 'default setting' - a way of looking at life, and it's ultimately negative.
One past puberty, if not held in check, we then get the communists..
Angry children in grown up bodies, with an envy problem.
'The coin' exists in all of us, and wether by self brainwashing -or even commandments for that matter. If low IQ is correlated to the more envious, then 'commandments' may have a place. There will always be more sheep than shepherds.
(I'm not looking for equality, I'm looking at a more positive functioning society..)
envy plays a positive part in economic growth when it functions as a performance enhancer 8. Bertrand Russell went as far as to place this feeling at the ‘basis of democracy’ by saying: ‘the passion that has driven democratic forces is the passion of envy’.
Interesting that Bertrand Russell (the commie), would see it like that..( and also Karl Marx - 'democracy is a necessary step to socialism')
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels stated in the Communist Manifesto and later works that "the first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle for democracy" and universal suffrage, being "one of the first and most important tasks of the militant proletariat".
Marxy, the intelligent idiot wanker, really knew about manipulating people with envy... class war, anyone?
Feminism, anyone..?
Racism anyone..?
All envy of someone else...
Freemarkets are colorblind, gender blind, and class blind.
They just see a person. See people.
The ultimate truth, paradox (and mental illness aspect), of envy - is that to experience it, you have compare yourself (negatively) against someone else.
We are all individuals and unique.
You can't compare something that is unique (one human) against another unique thing.(another human).
By definition.
It makes no sense.
There is no logic.
And that's mental illness, even trying to...
Communism is envy on steroids, which then tries to justify it's immoral stance in context of virtuosity.
Please note : the higher IQ intellectual with an massive ego, will go through _ years of mental gymnastics to avoid this basic simple truth- and thus this realization about himself.
The ego will not allow him to accept the possibility of being mentally ill.._
The high IQ intellectual cannot accept anything as ever being simple, for in doing so, he then makes himself redundant...irrelevant....
This was pretty much my post finished....but then, as if ordained or something - I read the comments of
I had to include it, for both illustration of my points here - and in the spirit of my very last post...here,if you want to read
So jealousy/envy must be beneficial in some way,
Not an argument.
You are making an broad assumption based on someone, saying something, in another text.
This does not make it a true.
For starters society doesn't exist. It is a concept. Extracting a truth from belief that a concept is a reality is weak at best, disingenuous at worst.
Individuals do exist. They are real.
Put a 1000 individuals in some houses, and a society will emerge.
Now try doing without any individuals, and see how far that gets ya!
and since it doesn't oppose any facts out there in the world, it can't be wrong, and so it can't be irrational.
That makes no sense...
Btw, I always had trouble understanding envy. What does it mean?
If you don't understand what it means, how are you able to posit whether or not it's beneficial in some way?
Does it mean a person wants to literally become another person? Who the hell would want that? On the basis of this and similar observations, I concluded that I probably never felt this feeling.
I would conclude - from your very obvious high intellect - that you are in fact just setting yourself up for a position of moral superiority, by writing this paragraph, and nothing more...
It's also possible someone just wants the things another person has. But on what basis? If you want them just because, then you're being unfair and childish, and how can you live with yourself?
....then setting up the disingenuous play with that paragraph...?(Marx would be envious of that one...lol)
But if you want them because you consider the fact that another person has them to be unfair, then we go into what Bertrand Russell said about democracy being the result of envy. (I'm assuming he meant envy of the aristocracy and royalty, which Nietzsche talked about extensively).
But is that really envy? Why did Russell call it that? Isn't it just a perception of unfairness that you want to fix?
KABAMM! - in we go !
The communist ideology has produced the subtle intellectual shiv, and tried to slip it in....
(Once you recognize it, it becomes kinda fun...)
I think, often, people call envy something that is nothing but. They are liable to call everything envy. If a woman starts talking about how Kim Kardashian or someone of her ilk are undeserving of their fame and money, someone will sooner or later think they are just being jealous.
Because that's envy/jealousy.
If a feminist starts talking about unrealistic portrayals of beauty in the media, someone will accuse them of jealousy.
Because that's envy/jealousy. It's not an accusation, it's a fact.
I think we need to coin a term for those people who use the word inappropriately!
Can you give me an example of this, please?
I think some people are much more sensitive toward injustice, and their feelings might be misunderstood.
They have been misunderstood for far too long. At least the last 60 years....
A much better understanding of these 'sensitive towards injustice', would be better served perhaps, if looked at more like, 'manipulative, small, and envious pieces detritus?'
I also like your point about comparison being the driver of social progress. It's just dishonest to pretend that we don't compare. We always compare!
Comaparison is the driver of social progress..
Free markets at it's finest. 'You have a one pronged fork, I'll make one with three, that's much better...'
Comparing people and inanimate objects are not the same. (unless you see people as inanimate objects).
Whether we are choosing fruit at the grocery or looking at people in the street, we're always comparing. "Because that is how our mind works."....
I do compare agricultural produce, I don't compare people in the street. That's how your mind works, but we are not all like that...
Unfortunately, it can lead to unhappiness and feelings of inadequacy too, as Marx explains in this quote:
(marxy) A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut.
Only to the weak minded.
People weak enough feel these inadequacies and unhappiness are the ripe hunting grounds for the marxist manipulators of envy...
Nah, it doesn't shrink at all!!! .
I think you'll find it - it's still has exactly the same dimensions as always...that's just how the envious pieces of crap would perceive it, and how the manipulators of men would present it to others...
You try to end the post positively, talking about uniqueness.....
Can you give me any evidence of two people being exactly the same? ( I won't wait...)
This then makes them, by definition - unique!
Therefor, logically speaking, this is in fact - A TRUTH.
.....But too many people talk about it and I feel I must lash out against it!
Is it biologically untrue?
...is it because it undermines the very collectivism and dehumanizing of the individual, that is essential for communism...
Commies hate the truth, and abhor 'too many people talking about the truth'.
It's almost like they are envious of the facts, because they have none...
Yes, every snowflake is unique, but if I'm building a snowman every snowflake is as good as any other.
...Try making a snowman without individual snowflakes. The individual makes up the structure, the structure is impossible without the individual...
You are conflating every human being as being equal...
That is patently untrue.
It's a leftist lie in the guise of logic..
(clean yer head, mate...)
....Grains of sand are also unique, but I don't go around paying attention to each individual one.
Maybe a change of emphasis is just the medicine you need, then...?
In other words, yes, every single person is unique, but he is - I would claim - trivially unique - unique in the way grains of sand are unique - rather than exceptionally unique - the way a diamond differs from a plain rock.
So you think the uniqueness in human beings, is comparable to a grain of sand ? - inanimate object...
You attribute no value system to complexity of the uniqueness?
In this sense, Shakespeare is exceptionally unique. The man in the street is trivially unique! :D
...how do you know?
If we begin using the word 'uniqueness' trivially, then we'll just start adding adjectives in front to describe people who are "more" unique.
Unique is only trivial if you don't see value, in the unique of anything.
Redefining uniqueness may make us feel better for a day, but it solves nothing in the end.
You are trying to redefine it, to make it less beautiful.
(commies like making things less beautiful)...