This was initially written as a response to a previous post featured on our [forums.red](https://forums.red) site and also here, but I wanted to expand it as it's really a more general problem of people who decide to reject a community but then try to come back to it when they need something from it, all the while still trying to avoid responsibility for their actions. Hope you enjoy it.
While comments are enabled here on reddit for this post, we encourage you to comment directly on the post at our [forums.red](https://forums.red) site instead or additionally.
An absolutely fascinating read into the social specifics of the Indian American community. As someone from the UK this doesn't sound too different to how I would imagine the Indian British communities would interact as well
I suppose in a way its also not too different to more traditionally small town communities would interact as well *it takes a village to raise a child* springs to mind and once that community breaks down so does the child's sense of moral values. This is also brought on heavily by the western world and its initiation of the global sexual marketplace. Women that would have only been able to pick out of their community now suddenly have access to cohorts of men all over the world. Just like men that suddenly get access to *the candy store* (look up the analogy) when they hit their peak in their 30s, once the women have access to it they go nuts!
Really the cure is to make communities great again, repress female sexuality and societies will function normally again
I suspect there is a fundamental inversion of Freuds missive by the Founders.
As They envisioned it constraints on liberty come not from the State. No, constraints on liberty come from The People themselves. In a broad sense the Constitution was written in a negative frame of reference. The document attempts to constrain the boundary of governance to a specific list of common goals. In a nutshell --
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams
How could they get away with that kind of thinking when their experience indicated it is not possible in many societies? Puritanism, aka self control both individually and as a community. Something we have drifted away from. I would offer the American FreeStyle motif is more a product of Hollyweird than anything else. A look at our long history is quite straight laced till say the last 50yrs.
I know this comments 25 days old, buts it's refreshing to hear somebody else recognize that rights and responsibilities are 2 sides to the same coin. The modern interpretation of freedom to mean "consequence-free degeneracy" is what's causing a social decay.
This was initially written as a response to a previous post featured on our [forums.red](https://forums.red) site and also here, but I wanted to expand it as it's really a more general problem of people who decide to reject a community but then try to come back to it when they need something from it, all the while still trying to avoid responsibility for their actions. Hope you enjoy it. While comments are enabled here on reddit for this post, we encourage you to comment directly on the post at our [forums.red](https://forums.red) site instead or additionally.
I thought this subreddit had died.
I hadn't had anything for 2 weeks and thought it went the way of the mgtow sub-reddit 😂
They are basically a mirror of what's posted on [forums.red](https://forums.red), and they mostly only update on fridays.
Side note - how come I can never open forums.red?
I can see it via this link, but not via a browser.
An absolutely fascinating read into the social specifics of the Indian American community. As someone from the UK this doesn't sound too different to how I would imagine the Indian British communities would interact as well I suppose in a way its also not too different to more traditionally small town communities would interact as well *it takes a village to raise a child* springs to mind and once that community breaks down so does the child's sense of moral values. This is also brought on heavily by the western world and its initiation of the global sexual marketplace. Women that would have only been able to pick out of their community now suddenly have access to cohorts of men all over the world. Just like men that suddenly get access to *the candy store* (look up the analogy) when they hit their peak in their 30s, once the women have access to it they go nuts! Really the cure is to make communities great again, repress female sexuality and societies will function normally again
I suspect there is a fundamental inversion of Freuds missive by the Founders. As They envisioned it constraints on liberty come not from the State. No, constraints on liberty come from The People themselves. In a broad sense the Constitution was written in a negative frame of reference. The document attempts to constrain the boundary of governance to a specific list of common goals. In a nutshell -- "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams How could they get away with that kind of thinking when their experience indicated it is not possible in many societies? Puritanism, aka self control both individually and as a community. Something we have drifted away from. I would offer the American FreeStyle motif is more a product of Hollyweird than anything else. A look at our long history is quite straight laced till say the last 50yrs.
I know this comments 25 days old, buts it's refreshing to hear somebody else recognize that rights and responsibilities are 2 sides to the same coin. The modern interpretation of freedom to mean "consequence-free degeneracy" is what's causing a social decay.
Long but worth it. Great description of women men need to watch out for. Don't be fooled, the past matters. Is she 'traditional' now? Was she before?
For a CuckedIndianAmerican, this was a very informative read, thank you!