Evangelical leaders are certainly trying.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/is-empathy-a-sin-some-conservative-christians-argue-it-can-be
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
117 points (96.1% liked)
Showerthoughts
38758 readers
1262 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's not innate...
Innately humans are just animals. It takes effort to get people on the same page that cooperating is usually best
But we stopped teaching kids that in school 20 years ago.
That's the sad truth about it. It's not that the right corrupted a generation, just that between them an the neoliberals, no one wanted to help them. They both wanted brain dead tribalism because that's what their mutual donors want
It honestly shouldn't be that hard for everyone to follow the string back to "no child left behind' but I remember pointing out this would happen 30 years ago, and I thought it was obvious back then too.
Animals work together very easily and frequently actually, same and different species, even things called symbiotic relationships. That argument is proving your point wrong and indicating that most hatred is indoctrination.
And they're socialized for that too...
Take a social animal, raise it in isolation, and it will be almost impossible for it to integrate in a group after released as an adult...
You've never seen any of the videos of wildlife rehab hiding the fact that they're human from an animal?
It's by design.
The spread of the superhero (Übermenschen) to ubiquity in pop culture, especially Hollywood, the punishing and assumption of evil within destitute people, the indoctrination of children (pledge of allegiance et al), the selective curricula that largely keep the general education from showing the populace of the US that their country is more closely related to a self styled African dictatorship than a modern social democracy. Usanians frequently utter "it's not personal, it's business". That is the hallmark of declining hegemon and roughly translates to "fuck you, got mine".
At least since the 60s/70s, it's not new.
Wasn't there segregation before the 70s? So it seems like a default state for USA since forever.
"Hate thy neighbor skin color"
https://segregationinamerica.eji.org/report/how-segregation-survived.html
They're sure trying their best.
"I hate insert group of people"
everybody!
Ignore. Empathy is hot.
First they made you fear someone, then they told you they lived down the street.
Debatable how deliberate that was, but it's certainly not not what they wanted...
Independence can be weaponized to make people fight each other.
So can collectivism be used to manipulate people to sacrifice "for the common good", like for example, forcing you to be in the military to "fight for our country" in foreign wars.
Me vs Us
Us vs Them
Both can be problematic.
But who's the us and who's the them? And why would a distinction necessarily force us to commit murder?!
If you decide on anything superficial (race and tribe, for instance), the bonds will be easily broken and the people will be easily manipulated. If you pick something like character and ideology, you can have a wider circle (these things are more flexible) and if you dislike the out group it is for actual reasons like a major moral disagreement and not the amount of melanin.
Just as Conservatives have wanted. This isn't new. This was the default. Empathy was an exception started in the 60's.
Annoyed to report: successful and long standing communes/communities seem to all be highly selective, at least initially.
If you've got good examples that contradict this, please share.
Of course they are, they're full and doing great lol
I might be starting one soon with mostly family... It's a long shot, but I'd interview you then the time comes if you want. No promises
I feel like examples that prove it using some standard definitions are a prerequisite to that conversation.
Without standard definitions such as selection method/criterium and controlling for variables such as external factors your basically asking me to refute apples with oranges.
Very, because it is politically advantageous.
no, it was never there.
The new "hyperindividualism" trend is sad to look into too.
It's been like that for a while (how did they get stomach chattle slavery, or the native genocide, or murdering brown people around the globe like Nam?), it's the reason the rest of the world is very wary of Americans even if they don't come in tanks and jets. Even Western Europeans are wary of Americans at this point, and they're basically the same community!
I think that Roman Catholicism and offshoots (not the message of Jesus, but the unholy creation of the empire) are partly to blame, primarily the disinfo of Paul, the fed, with his "faith without works" and "you'll be saved if you become a man worshipping polytheist!". Ideology is very malleable, so we can do something about it, but Nietzsche already pointed to the struggle like 200 years ago and a solution proposed by the locals with local ideological tools hasn't been found yet. Islam is the path forward for the West (and the rest of the world), but ofc you hate to hear it, even if it would offer an ideological framework based on the belief in God and objective morality (you gotta act right to save yourself, more or less Jesus' message for everyone who's actually read the Sermon of the Mount, for instance)... don't forget that that gut reaction has been fostered by the powers that be in the same way that it was for the Japanese, the Vietnamese, the natives, the Africans, and now the Mexicans and Chinese. Maybe there's something there, huh?
Replacing godheads and debating minute dogmatic differences between colonizer/authoritarian religions is not going to change things for the better. We've been doing that for millennia.
Emphasizing historical learning and perspectives from the breadth of the world as well as modern civic humanist principles in our communities sounds a lot more effective to me than replacing one fictitious narcissistic sky daddy with another. Go peddle your ancient brainrot elsewhere.
I really don't think "we" have, certainly the West hasn't (with even the term "sky daddy" showing the clear anthropomorphic nature of God in the Western man's mind, because amoral paganism/polytheism never left, it was just superficially transformed...). The vast majority of people won't hold themselves accountable when the pleasures of this world are too enticing if they don't feel like they'll be unavoidably held accountable by a higher power. With discernment, integrity, selflessness and a clear heart it's possible to do so to a certain/great extent, but these traits are secondary in the West, where overpowering violence, trickery and the capacity to acquire goods and satisfy yourself are paramount. But whatever, I guess we'll see.
I personally think people who do things because they fear retribution from sky daddy are the weakest of minds easily exploited by propaganda. Religious thought leads to malleable minds easily exploitable by religious leaders.
Religion is not the source of our social bounds and morality rather a parasite of control left over from ancient times. A vestigial organ that no longer has a use in the face of science but lives on in the body regardless.
Religion is not the source of our social bounds and morality rather a parasite of control left over from ancient times.
Not the person you're replying to, but I'm an atheist or an agnostic and even I'm not so sure about that.
When given the idea that there is no retribution or reprocussion for their actions, many people become nihilistic and act terribly.
I agree that it's weak to need a "sky daddy" to act properly, but many people are weak.
There is good scientific evidence that people do not think about the consequences of their actions before they commit to them.
Criminals don't think of the punishment they will receive by society but suddenly a far removed sky daddy will convince them not to rob a store? This is not how any of this works.
Morality is developed by our social bounds, otherwise every agnostic or atheist would be wildly out of control.
People are mentally weak because of religion, not despite it. It is the antithesis to critical thinking. The lack of critical thought is why our society is so easy to control.
I have seen this play out countless times in my life where people realize how fucked up their religion was once they have left it.
As their eyes open and they realize that they were being controlled by their religious leaders who abused them, they have to wrestle with the life that was stolen from them.
I am even to the point now where I no longer believe certain people need religion anymore. They need community and a sense of belonging and religious leaders like to highjack that basic need for their own selfish interests.
I am even to the point now where I no longer believe certain people need religion anymore. They need community and a sense of belonging and religious leaders like to highjack that basic need for their own selfish interests.
I think I agree with basically everything you've said here and especially this conclusion. The problem is that for many the only type of these things they can find is couched in religion. As a child-free atheist, I basically have no sense of belonging nor a community.
In addition, some people's only exposure to even the very concept of morality or ethics comes through religion.
Islam is the path forward for the West (and the rest of the world)
... wut.
If anything, Atheism is the way forward.