This is a fundamental question that is answered in different ways in different parts of common law and morality. Do the crimes of the father pass on to the son? Well, actually the question is completely general- are actions of any kind commutative? If a group of which you are a part commits a certain crime then are you culpable for their actions? I am going to be blunt because once you start down the path to political correctness, you will inevitably arrive at the place of political insanity such as condemning Turkey for a genocide 80 years gone, sending the war in Iraq even deeper into the shitter, costing hundreds of billions of dollars and who knows how many lives, purely for internecine politics. I won’t start, but please don’t think I’m a crass person- I’m just telling it how it is.
I advocate a position of strong individualism in this respect, and though you may think you agree with me I expect you will find yourself surprised by the contradictions most peoples’ “common sense” leads them to. Before I start in, I think I need to cover how there really is no case to be made for the opposition. If your father killed somebody, how exactly are you responsible for his actions? If you are an accomplice then sure, but let’s say that you were born, raised, and grown. When you’re 35, your father kills his neighbor. I’m betting that nobody would claim that you are even partly responsible. What if he kills someone and then you are conceived? What if you’re three years old at the time of the murder? There is no difference. You’re innocent of all wrongdoing. Now, what if your father instead embezzles $250,000 and uses it to pay for your college education, and a few years after you graduate he’s arrested and jailed for it? It still doesn’t matter. Applying this a bit more broadly, let’s say you’re part of a protest to give Martians rights, and the mob turns violent. You’re just standing there with a sign while a horde a thousand strong beats down cops in front of you. By being part of the group, are you responsible for their actions? I posit that groups are purely social constructs, all of them, and that they exist as an evolutionary mechanism of unification. In modern times, we need to realize this and get past it to a world full of true individualism. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have groups, but I am saying that we have to establish ourselves as a person independent of any and all groups, with the group being merely a collection of individuals.
Ah, let the beatdown begin. Firstly, groups like the feminists are, shall we say, whipping a dead horse. There are few true misogynists left in the civilized world, and just because our grandfathers were womanizers does not give you the right to berate us for it so would you please shut up? It is incredible to me how guilty the average man is made to feel for actions which he was never a part of. Whenever sex stereotypes are brought up, it is considered completely acceptable for women to spout off about how men are stupid, crass, whatever, and then in the next breath complain about how sexist all men are. It’s disgusting, ignorant, and contradictory, now would you please stop that? When women bitch about how “oh, doctors are stereotyped as men” neener neener neener that’s actually supported by society. But if a man does something like I am right now, he gets flattened. Worse, after women start in with this stuff you start seeing men supplicate to women, which earns them only further disrespect, driving them deeper into supplication, and leaving millions of dissatisfied women with some justification for claiming all men are pussies. I agree, there are sexist people in the world, but as anyone can clearly see I am not one of them so stop dishing me their leavings.
Next, race issues. Essentially, the same deal. Yes, black people were slaves and that was unjust and horrid, but that was over a hundred years ago and everyone involved is long dead. Get the hell over it. You were never a slave, I was never a slave owner, the fact that you’re black earns you nothing. True, racist elements still exist in the country and they should be repaid exactly in kind. True, black people in the United States are generally poorer. So are you suggesting you should only help the poor black people? I agree, the poverty situation needs some thought to solve. I’m not saying everyone should be rich, but nobody should have so little money they have a hard time getting food, shelter, or basic medical treatment.
Moving right along, religion. Deep in the brain of the fundamentalist retard there is this vital need to persecute someone, dammit! No, seriously, why do religions scarcely ever get along? Because it is in their mutual benefit to have a delineating enemy. Religion as a memetic species, anyway. The human species gets screwed. “Demonstrations of faith” are clearly to the biological disadvantage of the human host, ranging from fasting to suicide bombing. So here’s your issue: you are controlled by an organism that, let’s just say, is not looking out for your best interest, like a hairworm parasite commandeering a grasshopper to make it commit suicide. So even though it isn’t entirely your fault, you still need to realize that whatever religion XYZ may have done to your people 1,000 years ago, why do you care? Or maybe just 100 years ago. Hey, I’d even go as low as 30, depending on your age. If you personally were not affected by that history, you have no duty or responsibility to react to it. Learn from it, certainly and of course, but hostility should never enter the equation. Seriously, why do you care?
Also, social connections. Example: Person A knows person B. Person B is an X. QED, Person A is an X, or perhaps Y. Never do this. I am talking to you, yes you, the sixteen-year-old upper-middle class white cheerleader. I will hunt you down and steal your pompoms. If you can’t find the insanity in such defuctive logic then go hide in your cave and when you invent the alphabet, the wheel, and fire then you can join the rest of us. Similarly, inferring traits based on others’ testimony. Never do this either. Person A says Person B is an X. QED, Person B is an X. Hell, no. This is by far the most widespread of all these issues. It’s a bit trickier to shoot down, but essentially why in the hell are you trusting the speaker’s testimony instead of actually interacting with the person? The answer is obvious- you can’t interact with the person because everyone else has already committed this fallacy. So basically person B is fucked because one person for some human reason, plausible or insane, felt like shanking them. Groups and identity are the primary instruments of social manipulation, a form of unilateral power, which is evil.
Do not allow yourself to be manipulated on any grounds. We are all mired in a web of groups which somehow command our loyalty despite the fact that they help us not one whit. The reason? In prehistoric times, groups survived while the loners died. Social rejection carried a very real survival penalty, and was wired up to brain pain equivalent to a poke in the eye. There are countless examples, of how our brains betray us, like Social Identity Theory, Conformist Perception, Obedience, or even the Stanford Prison Experiment. Our biological brains are wired to make us survive as a species in wilderness circumstances, not to make a civilized society run well or to serve us personally in this new environment. It is our job to reprogram ourselves to make the best of our new situation. We are individuals, we are responsible for ourselves and those we choose to act for, and we motivate ourselves and ourselves alone.
“Man is disturbed not by things, but by the views he takes of them. If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone.” – Epictetus