Why are people obsessed or made to obsess about culture

Of all the chains around the present humans, no chain is stronger than the chain of culture. Culture has grown to such a level that it "is" the way of life. It is the "benchmark" with which you compare all your actions and thoughts. Benchmarking your actions is ... but benchmarking your thoughts which in turn would result in your actions is the dangerous thing. The narrowing of ones thoughts by culture is stifling. 

     The freedom from the chains of culture can be best expressed by a person who lives his country and settles in another country. The initial freedom experienced by the individual, cannot be expressed. He love it, he relishes it, he compares it. he sees that the culture in that country is so different. He is forced to compare it. If the foreign culture even give a little leeway to the existing tight cultural chains around the individual, the individual feels euphoria. What if there is a place with pure anarchy and the individual lands up in this planet. What would be the result on the individual is an interesting case study, and we have to wait until we accidentally step into such a planet. So until then ......... 

     Why should an individual and the society behave in set ways for any action from any constituent of the society? Why should all the actions and activities be so strictly established. Why does culture change across groups of people in one single society? Why is there no common culture among all the humans? Why do individuals who go from an older culture be "relieved" when he lands in a country with a recent culture or a country in which the culture has not been made "dogmatic"? The feeling when an individual transforms to a culture on the other way round, all that relief will reverse to stifling. We have seen the evolution of right and wrong over the years. We have seen human sacrifice justified and the entire society feeling that is right. We have seen that slavery was also justified and in certain cultures it was found to be right. Right and wrong have also evolved, but there is no right and wrong freely available for an individual. Should the individual not have his own morals, his ethics, his behaviors?

    Cultures are giving birth to robots. But the thing is there are certain individuals who have a feel that this is happening but somehow have a different explanation for following the culture. This group of individuals are more dangerous. Because these people have reasons for why the culture is so, and that reason is never upgraded. But continues to get more "dogmatic". If there are people who want to question, they will be termed impure and alienated. Once this is done the idea and the questions which arose in that individual dies with him. So, we have to wait several generations for another individual to come up with the same sets of questions and may be solutions. 

    The change in culture over the years have been brought about by bright individuals who had the grit and the knowledge of changing the perception of the entire race, while many more tried their best to hold on to the classic culture. However, the present days with un-paralleled information flow we have barriers which have not been seen over the entire human past, that is the number who want status quo has increased and have become vociferous because people can now read and write. This reading and writing ability has been turned on its heads by powerful people and have started to use this ability in controlling people. 

    Culture is the bottom line of all the changes over the history of a particular group. However, the changes, ideas have been weighted with the more weighty ones overruling the lessor weighed ideas, though they may be better. The same strategy is being used now. The more weighted idea is weighed by the reach it has. The more the reach the more the weight. So, do i suggest that all individuals with similar ideals be grouped together. I would say yes here, but we are talking about the most intelligent animal on the planet. 

    The individual is not the same tomorrow. Tomorrow his thought process might change something in his belief dictionary which does not warrant his stay with the present group. This does not stop any other individual with the thought process of this group join this as on date. However, ......... Well, you are spoiling the joy of anarchy. No, I am stressing anarchy in its purest form. You cannot tell that anarchy has to follow rules. If you follow that you will end up with another America. If we follow pure anarchy will we end up as our pre-historic society? Is that good? Is that the best? Will that save this planet from extinction? 

 

Money, money, money

        What is it about money? How much of it is necessary. How much is enough. How much is bad. How much is good. Does it depend on the individual and his place in the society. Does it depend on the money an individual is already having. Is money the means of consumerism. Is money the mother of all evils. Is the burning man which rejects money and brings back the barter system the answer to all the evils of money. Does barter bring about equality among people. Does barter reduce the rich and the super rich. Will people start honoring relations and human emotions if money is taken out of the equation. Will the removal of money bring in Anarchism which is supposed to mimic the "ultimate order" in chaos. Is money the first aspect of blinding of logic of humans resulting from emotions.

        Actually what does money bring to the table of human society. At the last mile of human society, majority of human emotions are expressed w.r.t money. It can be giving voluntarily, taking by force, taking without the knowledge of the present owner. Happiness, boredom, anger, love, time for love, condition for love, maintaining relations all change at the drop of a hat with change in the money holding power of the individual. Are human relations still strong enough to transcend the issues arising out of the effects of money on the same relations. Is money akin to God. If somebody has all the money in the world, would he have seen god. Since God is supposed to be everything. Is money greater than all the dark energy in the universe since money is what is required to research and find out about dark energy. 

         You are telling me that a genius might be born who would start spurting out all the details regarding the dark energy in the universe. But you forgot that he has to be born and he has to be bought up to this level. At least up to the time he can talk. There can be another option wherein god himself surfaces and shows us the dark matter of the universe Is money and Economics the greatest science of all time. Since this is what allows us to carry out science. If the journey is more valuable than the destination then money and its study is the most valuable study of all time. Should we commit more resources to concentrate more on this path than the destination. But there is a catch. If science is the destination of all the money based activities the path we have been discussing about is limited by the state of science. If this path has to extend then we have to extend the state of science. 

         Majority of investment from the biggest investors is towards this only. The extension of this path again re-iterates the importance of money. It is a chicken egg situation and cannot be solved that easily. Normally both have gone hand in hand and continue to do so. The rate at which the path is lengthening is greater in the modern times and so are the complications of money based issues. The human race is submerged in this path and its destination. Well I have asked enough questions. Are they related. In fact what is this post about. Is it about the human race, the human relationships, Is it about science or economics. Is it about behavioral theory which has found its way into economics as well as science. 

         How will humans battle the science and economics and maintain sanity in relationships and feelings. So humans changing their relations and their feelings according to the economic models and advancement of science a given. Does it remain same even in and anarchic setup. Why is there no study regarding anarchy. There have been many writings regarding this topic but never practiced in reality. The burning man which tries to do it is a capital intensive arrangement carried out by capitalists. Will humans start valuing relations/feelings more in an anarchic setup. If every man has a purpose will the it change in a capital setup or remains the same in anarchic setup. Money, the end of older relationships, beginning of newer ones, starting bitter ones, starting sweeter ones all in the name of increasing the amount of money. This is the present model of the human setup. Can this model be changed. Are there better models negating the use of money. Are there better models wherein an individual does not think that increasing what he has is the only way to be happy.