>>81798982>This implies that I was already a loser beforehand and then later found the ideology appealing because it cushioned me from that fact, not that I only became a loser upon the adoption of said ideologyYes. Your decision to embrace that ideology furthered your status as a loser.
Not falling for it would have made you not be a loser.
Not all losers are collectivists, but all collectivists are losers.
No contradictions there.
At the same time, rejecting collectivist ideologies makes you instantly not a loser, as your mentality is not that of one. If by "far right" you didn't mean a collectivist ideology, then I'd apologize.
Material failings are not the same as metaphysical failings.
Being mentally ill, even, doesn't make someone a loser. Renouncing themselves to a collective bacause they find it a comforting shield, does.
This loser mentality, however, can express itself in other areas of life, where one also has to reject it, just the same.
>inb4 you did a collectivist statement The difference is that, an individual has the power to change their mentality at any point. Therefore, I am putting the value of the individual and their choice before the collective, which is, by definition, not collectivist.