Superiority and it’s different perspectives

[dhusc]

as we know there’s been many different ideologies and ideas of who were superior

most famously the Nazi Ideology

Nazi ideology was built on the belief in a racial hierarchy, placing the
Aryan race at the very top as the "master race" (Herrenvolk).
Specifically, they idealized Nordic peoples—those of Germanic descent with physical traits like blond hair and blue eyes—as the pinnacle of humanity.

however Slavs especially the polish despite being descendent from Germanic tribes were considered inferior while people like the Bulgarians were sometimes considered Aryan despite having less people descendent from said Germanic tribes

Northern Italians/French were also considered Aryan while the South was considered inferior due to there admixture with Middle Eastern groups but then again why consider the Slavs to be inferior when very clearly looked white, could it be a view of allies or a lack of achievements

I’d further to like add on this point as Hitler viewed the Iranians and parts of India as once Aryan and now degraded with Mongol n Arab and AASI

So my question is how a culture/ethnicity/race considered to be superior or equal since while the Nazi ideology emphasised on Germanic/Nordic features it considered ethnicities consisting of said features as inferior than those who didn’t even if his comments were harsh for both the Japanese and Iranian

on the other hand we had the Japanese, who considered them to be Shinkoku, The People: Because the Emperor was a god, the Japanese people—as his "children"—viewed themselves as a "divine race." Everyone else (Europeans, Americans, and other Asians) were merely "base" or "materialistic" humans.
-they considered the Chinese to be direct descendants who were diluted in order to dehumanise them

to further add on this they found the Aryan identity as insulting and considered them Gajin or barbarians however there hated towards white ethnicities were more relayed upon the west who were there direct competitors which makes me comes to the conclusion

is superiority based on ideologies and if so why aren’t they consistent, why is said ideology different for allies even if they don’t match a certain characteristic and different for enemies even if they share said characteristics, is superiority purely political/cultural

Why is that said cultures considered them superior but openly traded and allied with said inferior nations, is a superiority complex a way to control the mass

 

[dhusc]

Bump

 

[dhusc]

Bump

 

[dhusc]

bump

 

[dhusc]

bump

 

[ProBono]

I think our innate instinct for comparison and egotism will always feed into systems of superiority. You refer to ethnic superiority but think about less offensive and radical ideas that are completely widespread in normie culture. Snobs who gatekeep film, music, art etc. People who pre-judge you, your intellect and your judgement based purely on your job. Victim olympics where people continuously look for the biggest trauma, mental illnesses and hardships to practically boast about and to deride those who've had it "easier" than themselves. The very fact that societies like mensa exist and gain traction and that we are continuously looking for aspects of ourselves to glorify and laud over others.

I think the existence of such ideas doesn't speak at all to how much truth they may contain, in the end all such systems are formed and used by people for the sake of pride and ego. There isn't a coherent narrative because it's all for personal gain/glorification. They are always changing depending on the culture but the idea of superiority never changes.

 

[dhusc]

I think our innate instinct for comparison and egotism will always feed into systems of superiority. You refer to ethnic superiority but think about less offensive and radical ideas that are completely widespread in normie culture. Snobs who gatekeep film, music, art etc. People who pre-judge you, your intellect and your judgement based purely on your job. Victim olympics where people continuously look for the biggest trauma, mental illnesses and hardships to practically boast about and to deride those who've had it "easier" than themselves. The very fact that societies like mensa exist and gain traction and that we are continuously looking for aspects of ourselves to glorify and laud over others.

I think the existence of such ideas doesn't speak at all to how much truth they may contain, in the end all such systems are formed and used by people for the sake of pride and ego. There isn't a coherent narrative because it's all for personal gain. They are always changing depending on the culture but the idea of superiority never changes.

I think that's a very good point, it's part of the human desire to be better, even if it doesn't correlate directly with superiority

but I wonder why if the human desire to be better is individualistic, why is that superiority especially over areas like race are grouped, shouldn't the individual consider themselves to be superior over all over everyone in his said group being superior to others?

 

[ProBono]

I think that's a very good point, it's part of the human desire to be better, even if it doesn't correlate directly with superiority

but I wonder why if the human desire to be better is individualistic, why is that superiority especially over areas like race are grouped, shouldn't the individual consider themselves to be superior over all over everyone in his said group being superior to others?

everyone except the most solipsistic narcissists puts themselves in groups when trying to evoke a sense of superiority. As paradoxical as it sounds, everybody wants to be different and yet everybody wants to fit in, and this is the precise result of that where you assign yourself to this group of people who are better than the rest because it's both easier for you to accept and also grants a sense of security and belonging.

Even when we look at stratified hierarchies which assign more specific values like in this community with looks scale and PSL or IQ or Income or race(such as in a system like the Nazis where different European countries are ranked), you will consistently see that people will take pride as soon as they are above average, especially when they get to the top 10-20% and they will attach their identity to these metrics to boost their own self worth. Although it's a selfish act it isn't a self-contained system which exists only in the imagination of the individual, using stratified systems like these provides a feeling of authenticity and increases your own belief in them as, after all, our entire world view is based on what we find plausible and probably true that we assume to be true to save the effort of actually trying to find out.

 

[dhusc]

everyone except the most solipsistic narcissists puts themselves in groups when trying to evoke a sense of superiority. As paradoxical as it sounds, everybody wants to be different and yet everybody wants to fit in, and this is the precise result of that where you assign yourself to this group of people who are better than the rest because it's both easier for you to accept and also grants a sense of security and belonging.

Even when we look at stratified hierarchies which assign more specific values like in this community with looks scale and PSL or IQ or Income or race(such as in a system like the Nazis where different European countries are ranked), you will consistently see that people will take pride as soon as they are above average, especially when they get to the top 10-20% and they will attach their identity to these metrics to boost their own self worth. Although it's a selfish act it isn't a self-contained system which exists only in the imagination of the individual, using stratified systems like these provides a feeling of authenticity and increases your own belief in them as, after all, our entire world view is based on what we find plausible and probably true that we assume to be true to save the effort of actually trying to find out.

honestly unfortunate to think about

you’d practically have to strip what is human to get this dream collective society free of discrimination and solely progressed to impeove

 

[hye732]

as we know there’s been many different ideologies and ideas of who were superior

most famously the Nazi Ideology

Nazi ideology was built on the belief in a racial hierarchy, placing the
Aryan race at the very top as the "master race" (Herrenvolk).
Specifically, they idealized Nordic peoples—those of Germanic descent with physical traits like blond hair and blue eyes—as the pinnacle of humanity.

however Slavs especially the polish despite being descendent from Germanic tribes were considered inferior while people like the Bulgarians were sometimes considered Aryan despite having less people descendent from said Germanic tribes

Northern Italians/French were also considered Aryan while the South was considered inferior due to there admixture with Middle Eastern groups but then again why consider the Slavs to be inferior when very clearly looked white, could it be a view of allies or a lack of achievements

I’d further to like add on this point as Hitler viewed the Iranians and parts of India as once Aryan and now degraded with Mongol n Arab and AASI

So my question is how a culture/ethnicity/race considered to be superior or equal since while the Nazi ideology emphasised on Germanic/Nordic features it considered ethnicities consisting of said features as inferior than those who didn’t even if his comments were harsh for both the Japanese and Iranian

on the other hand we had the Japanese, who considered them to be Shinkoku, The People: Because the Emperor was a god, the Japanese people—as his "children"—viewed themselves as a "divine race." Everyone else (Europeans, Americans, and other Asians) were merely "base" or "materialistic" humans.
-they considered the Chinese to be direct descendants who were diluted in order to dehumanise them

to further add on this they found the Aryan identity as insulting and considered them Gajin or barbarians however there hated towards white ethnicities were more relayed upon the west who were there direct competitors which makes me comes to the conclusion

is superiority based on ideologies and if so why aren’t they consistent, why is said ideology different for allies even if they don’t match a certain characteristic and different for enemies even if they share said characteristics, is superiority purely political/cultural

Why is that said cultures considered them superior but openly traded and allied with said inferior nations, is a superiority complex a way to control the mass

the main superiority now is racial superiority.

to nazi supremacists, differences between russians and french people seemed massive. but bcs of the internet, globalisation etc. people have exposure to many more races. so to modern white supremacists those differences seem minor in comparison to a white guy vs a black/asian/curry

 

[dhusc]

the main superiority now is racial superiority.

to nazi supremacists, differences between russians and french people seemed massive. but bcs of the internet, globalisation etc. people have exposure to many more races. so to modern white supremacists those differences seem minor in comparison to a white guy vs a black/asian/curry

but don’t Russians ideally fit the beauty standard the Nazis desired more?

so was it more who was viewed as the bigger threat ( political ) or what?

even back than many travelers traveled, in ancient India vedics or Brahmins considered foreigners to be inferior and all other cultures to be inferior, I do agree that exposure and internet has caused a rise in economical and racial supremacy but why does this change, what even is the ideal standard of supremacy?

is there a constant to supremacy?

 

[hye732]

but don’t Russians ideally fit the beauty standard the Nazis desired more?

so was it more who was viewed as the bigger threat ( political ) or what?

even back than many travelers traveled, in ancient India vedics or Brahmins considered foreigners to be inferior and all other cultures to be inferior, I do agree that exposure and internet has caused a rise in economical and racial supremacy but why does this change, what even is the ideal standard of supremacy?

is there a constant to supremacy?

but back then the amount of ppl who were able to travel is still a very small percentage of the population, typically proffesionals or elites. in the 1900 there were only several hundred black ppl in germany, most everyday germans would never encounter a black person in their entire lives.

today you will see black ppl/asian ppl/indian ppl everywhere in Berlin, even if you happen to not see one irl, you definitely will online. so it makes more sense for whites to group together rather than be seperated amongst themselves when there are other races walking around

 

[dhusc]

but back then the amount of ppl who were able to travel is still a very small percentage of the population, typically proffesionals or elites. in the 1900 there were only several hundred black ppl in germany, most everyday germans would never encounter a black person in their entire lives.

today you will see black ppl/asian ppl/indian ppl everywhere in Berlin, even if you happen to not see one irl, you definitely will online. so it makes more sense for whites to group together rather than be seperated amongst themselves when there are other races walking around

but even then trade n such were vital and even if rare among many civilisations then, it still existed and supremacy over other entities and people existed, each with there own political discourse to get into power

supremacy seems almost economical over an inbuilt fixed belief, had immigration been reversed and Europeans migrated to said nations, they’d be treated as inferior due to there economical situation instead, especially since they’d have less influence over the world

 

[Matrix88]

as we know there’s been many different ideologies and ideas of who were superior

most famously the Nazi Ideology

Nazi ideology was built on the belief in a racial hierarchy, placing the
Aryan race at the very top as the "master race" (Herrenvolk).
Specifically, they idealized Nordic peoples—those of Germanic descent with physical traits like blond hair and blue eyes—as the pinnacle of humanity.

however Slavs especially the polish despite being descendent from Germanic tribes were considered inferior while people like the Bulgarians were sometimes considered Aryan despite having less people descendent from said Germanic tribes

Northern Italians/French were also considered Aryan while the South was considered inferior due to there admixture with Middle Eastern groups but then again why consider the Slavs to be inferior when very clearly looked white, could it be a view of allies or a lack of achievements

I’d further to like add on this point as Hitler viewed the Iranians and parts of India as once Aryan and now degraded with Mongol n Arab and AASI

So my question is how a culture/ethnicity/race considered to be superior or equal since while the Nazi ideology emphasised on Germanic/Nordic features it considered ethnicities consisting of said features as inferior than those who didn’t even if his comments were harsh for both the Japanese and Iranian

on the other hand we had the Japanese, who considered them to be Shinkoku, The People: Because the Emperor was a god, the Japanese people—as his "children"—viewed themselves as a "divine race." Everyone else (Europeans, Americans, and other Asians) were merely "base" or "materialistic" humans.
-they considered the Chinese to be direct descendants who were diluted in order to dehumanise them

to further add on this they found the Aryan identity as insulting and considered them Gajin or barbarians however there hated towards white ethnicities were more relayed upon the west who were there direct competitors which makes me comes to the conclusion

is superiority based on ideologies and if so why aren’t they consistent, why is said ideology different for allies even if they don’t match a certain characteristic and different for enemies even if they share said characteristics, is superiority purely political/cultural

Why is that said cultures considered them superior but openly traded and allied with said inferior nations, is a superiority complex a way to control the mass

Quality of life and genuine respect is what makes someone superior to others, which is directly correlated with looks. So chad = superior

 

[dhusc]

Quality of life and genuine respect is what makes someone superior to others, which is directly correlated with looks. So chad = superior

but chads are correlated to physical features

 

[Societal Reject]

Dnr

 

[Matrix88]

Read my last thread, I talk about this

Tell me what do u think

 

[nvr3noug6]

IMO everyone except weak and actually inferior people (commies for example) want to be equal to others.

Logically you would want to be stronger, smarter and overall better than others and not equal.

Thus its also logical that we would create ideologies where certain people are presented as superior.

 

[Matrix88]

IMO everyone except weak and actually inferior people (commies for example) want to be equal to others.

Logically you would want to be stronger, smarter and overall better than others and not equal.

Thus its also logical that we would create ideologies where certain people are presented as superior.

nazis were superior to jews cause they mogged them