3 ms·

Yes, sometimes it's like that (being rejected based on race, religion, etc.), and it's sad. But most of these "excluded young men prone to radicalization" are

by pferde 7y ago

Yes, sometimes it's like that (being rejected based on race, religion, etc.), and it's sad. But most of these "excluded young men prone to radicalization" are really being rejected because they never bothered to actually offer something meaningful to the society that is rejecting them.

buboard 7y ago
That's an extreme generalization. In most cases these people work, sometimes hard, yet they feel excluded because either their values don't align with the society they live in, or the society is outight racist. And it's the ones who work (in immigrants receiving welfare, typically the men) who become extremists.
- pferde 7y ago
  If their values do not align with the society they live in, then they are not offering something the society wants. I am not saying this as a judgment, but as an objective fact. If the society is racist, that's a different matter altogether, and I already covered that case in my above comment. I do not claim that this "be a person that has something to offer" idea is a panacea to solve everything. But it does (or rather, would) solve many cases of social exclusion. Just look at the despicable (and yes, now I am judging) "Incel" subculture in the USA. Sure, some of them might have genuine mental issues, but there is a lot of loafers and layabouts who prefer to pose as victims instead of doing something positive.
  - buboard 7y ago
    Ah yes the Incel link, which i think is totally unproven yet i am sure "pundits" will be sure that it exists. This study is about immigrants in europe, which is better defined, and who are excluded in more specific ways (including celibacy i would guess in some cases). Plus i don't think calling anyone with emotional problems (which are always ugly and always express themselves as ugly) is right. You probably wouldn't do the same if they were women either - in fact lots of women say bad things about men too. Neither is despicable , calling someone despicable is a cop-out and uncharitable.
overthemoon 7y ago
Whatever one's theory for why atomization occurs, it can't simply be that people aren't trying hard enough. That doesn't take into account other forces that shape their lives. The right will generally talk about institutional failure and the collapse of a common culture, the left might talk about the community-destroying tendencies of capitalism, but the fact remains that people are atomized. I also think you're mixing up cause and effect. I was the alienated guy in my early 20s--depressed, underemployed, angry all the time, flirting with alcoholism. I'm a programmer now, married, and working somewhere I really love. The acceptance came first, though, not the usefulness. A few key people in my life accepted me for who I was, not my utility. That isn't to say it's always beyond the person's control, of course. But chalking it all up to being individually deficient seems insufficient to me.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

by pferde 7y ago

buboard 7y ago

That's an extreme generalization. In most cases these people work, sometimes hard, yet they feel excluded because either their values don't align with the society they live in, or the society is outight racist. And it's the ones who work (in immigrants receiving welfare, typically the men) who become extremists.

pferde 7y ago
If their values do not align with the society they live in, then they are not offering something the society wants. I am not saying this as a judgment, but as an objective fact. If the society is racist, that's a different matter altogether, and I already covered that case in my above comment. I do not claim that this "be a person that has something to offer" idea is a panacea to solve everything. But it does (or rather, would) solve many cases of social exclusion. Just look at the despicable (and yes, now I am judging) "Incel" subculture in the USA. Sure, some of them might have genuine mental issues, but there is a lot of loafers and layabouts who prefer to pose as victims instead of doing something positive.
- buboard 7y ago
  Ah yes the Incel link, which i think is totally unproven yet i am sure "pundits" will be sure that it exists. This study is about immigrants in europe, which is better defined, and who are excluded in more specific ways (including celibacy i would guess in some cases). Plus i don't think calling anyone with emotional problems (which are always ugly and always express themselves as ugly) is right. You probably wouldn't do the same if they were women either - in fact lots of women say bad things about men too. Neither is despicable , calling someone despicable is a cop-out and uncharitable.

overthemoon 7y ago

Whatever one's theory for why atomization occurs, it can't simply be that people aren't trying hard enough. That doesn't take into account other forces that shape their lives. The right will generally talk about institutional failure and the collapse of a common culture, the left might talk about the community-destroying tendencies of capitalism, but the fact remains that people are atomized. I also think you're mixing up cause and effect. I was the alienated guy in my early 20s--depressed, underemployed, angry all the time, flirting with alcoholism. I'm a programmer now, married, and working somewhere I really love. The acceptance came first, though, not the usefulness. A few key people in my life accepted me for who I was, not my utility. That isn't to say it's always beyond the person's control, of course. But chalking it all up to being individually deficient seems insufficient to me.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]