We are not, and should not be, Friends In Arms.
It’d be great if all that were true, huh?
While getting along with people is a noble goal, the deception of getting along is not only prominent but in many ways dangerous. Ideally, yes, in a perfect world everyone would get along with each other. Unfortunately, however, the philosophy of “Friends in Arms” cannot and should not be trusted.
Our culture does not ring as one, and there is nothing wrong with that.
It doesn’t take much more than some basic searching to realize we are as diverse culturally as we are similarly. Introverts and extroverts. Reading and sports. Cat and dog lovers. Of course there are more firm examples, however there’s no issue with those examples existing. We do not need to be one culture, and there is nothing wrong with liking aspects of multiple cultures. It spreads creativity and reflects past events. What would there be to learn, discuss, and use artistically if the entirety of all lives could be summarized as a “human” experience? Would it not lead to some stagnation of artistic drive if humanity’s collective experience was homogenous? Our differences should bring us together and be celebrated – never should they be extinguished in favor of a worldwide culture.
We help each other, as it is what is right.
Helping one another is once again a truly noble goal, and makes up the core concept of charity. However it should be done with the intent to help those who need it – not the collective, let alone the one who offered to help. While charity work is rewarding, it is because it allows others to receive a better quality of life, not better enable us to a societal end goal. That may come as a result, and if society is improved through charity that is good, but to do so otherwise is manipulative. Should people be helped to help the glory of the collective, or should people be helped because they’re people? Additionally, what does that mean to suggest otherwise?
Our Wisest Friends are Selfless, until they’re not.
Country leaders have a tough job to say the least. Having to maintain foreign affairs alongside putting out any potential domestic issues is no small feat. In many ways it is, on paper, a selfless act, as one works tirelessly to ensure their country is running the best as it could be. In reality, once again, ulterior motives or biases can get in the way. This is compounded by the fact that while many countries offer the choice of an elected official others only have the illusion of choice. While some parties may receive help they need, others may not due to premeditated and deliberate interest. It is unjust and unfair, and takes what should be an admirable figure and plunges them into selfish bigotry.
That is to say, Toxic Positivity is still toxic and harmful.
So what does one get when combining all of these factors together. You get a country of Friends in Arms. One culture (unless you don’t fit the niche description therein) helping each other for self motives) lead by our Wisest Friends (so that they can continue their ideal version of the status quo). All in all, being a Friend in Arms is not only disingenuous to how many people might feel but is outright dangerous. Such a toxic mindset, as it is, leads to the interpretation that society is not just perfect (to such an extent that it should be free of ridicule) but additionally should have ridicule of its very real flaws written off or even punished. Freedom of speech is important, as it lifts us from Friends in Arms to true members of our country.
You are not a Friend in Arms. Stand up for yourself.
Follow this hyperlink to read Casey Sherman’s project statement.