I can tell that someone has accused you of being a Republican before because I haven't accused you of being a Republican. Yet, you have a whole response prepared as if I did.

I'm not saying that you belong in the "republican box". I'm saying that the "narcissism" narrative that you described in your tiktoks fits into every box, because it's populism. Populism is shit that people say to be more popular, but doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Take the phrase "common sense", for example. Tell 10 different people, "I believe in a common sense solution to health care", and each person will think you meant something different. Republican says, "I believe in a common sense solution to healthcare, which means keeping the government out and keeping your private insurer." Democrat says, "I believe in a common sense solution to healthcare, which mean affordability and keeping access to your private insurer." Berniecrat says "I believe in a common sense solution to healthcare, which means medicare for all to bring healthcare access to all uninsured people." All of the people believe that their healthcare policy is "common sense" because the phrase "common sense" doesn't mean anything.

So look at your usage of the word "narcissist". Again, you could tell 10 different people "I think that there are too many narcissists" and most of them would agree with you but they all interpret the sentence in a different way. Republican says "I think that there are too many narcissists, which means that too many entitled people are receiving welfare from my taxes." Democrat says "I think that there are too many narcissists, which means that Trump supports only care about themselves because they are against government policies that help people." Berniecrat "I think that there are too many narcissists, because the billionaires are hoarding wealth while everyday Americans are struggling to make ends meet." The word "narcissist" means something different to every person.

I gave Ronald Reagan's "welfare queen" campaign as a historic example of Republican's anti-entitlement rhetoric. Reagan's campaign used the messaging to spark a moral panic about alleged welfare abuse. I'll give you some examples from my real life since I live in the south and I've talked to maga chuds. A few months ago, there was an contamination of the city water supply and there an advisory sent out to not drink the water. Some guy told me "I hate that people are complaining about the warning to not drink the water. Those people are narcissists." This guy thought that it was narcissism to expect the city water to be clean and drinkable. I've also had many people tell me that wanting to increase the federal minimum wage is narcissistic.

If someone introduces themselves to you and the first thing that they say is that they are against "entitled people", that should be a massive red flag; it usually means that they are a chud. In the 80s and 90s, Republicans were obsessed with 'tort reform'. Tort reform means preventing people from suing businesses for having dangerous practices. If a business hurt you and you tried to seek restitution, Republicans wanted to stop that because they want to protect the capitalist class. The reasoning that Republicans argue though is that lawsuits would cause the business to raise prices for everyone and therefore someone who seeks restitution for damages is "narcissistic" because then everyone would pay higher prices at the business. You may have heard the famous case where an elderly woman was injured by being served boiling coffee at McDonald's. Coffee should never be served at boiling temperatures.

The word "narcissism" means many things to many people. The word "narcissism" is a subjective value judgement. Every person thinks that a different group of people is narcissists. By proclaiming that your worldview is anti-narcissists, you are not placed into 1 box, you are trying to fit into every box. Pursuing a world without "narcissism" is not a real goal because "narcissism" means different things to every person.

The purpose of Marxist socialism is to have an objective view of society ie materialism. 400 years ago, the world was dominated by an economic system called Feudalism. Feudalism meant that there were peasants and feudal lords. The feudal lords owned the land, this is where the word 'landlord' comes from. The peasants worked on the land and then the feudal lords took a portion of the crops from the peasants. Exploitation is a use of power to extract value. The feudal lords had power over the peasants by owning the land, peasants were not able to acquire land, and the feudal lords extracted value from the peasants by taking some of the crops. The capitalist economic system operates in a similar way, though Marx considered Capitalism to be less exploitative than Feudalism. The capitalist class exploits the working class by owning the means of production.

Were the feudal lords motivated by narcissism? Did the peasant class recognize "individual responsibility"? Did the peasant class use drugs as a form of medicine or escapism? These are nonsensical questions. The answers to these questions do not matter. Feudalism did not end because people stopped "narcissism" or recognized "personal responsibility". Feudalism ended when the Feudal Lords did not own the lands anymore, ie taken from them. Capitalism will end when capitalists do not own the means of production.

Additionally, I was not mocking your accent/impersonation videos. I think that impersonations are funny, in a good way, as long as you aren't making fun of ESL people. Impersonations of famous people, such as presidents, is a fun party trick.

I'm not going to go into detail about how the US anti-drug laws were racially motivated and then in the 1970s, the US forced its drug laws onto the entire world through the United Nations. Your anti-drug video was not about how drugs are harmful, you were mocking people for using drugs and declaring yourself to be a better person than them. It was a punching-down video. If you'll notice, I wrote "if you're angry that people self-medicate in a country without access to healthcare, that's just ignorant". People in the US do illicit drugs because they can't go to a regular doctor or psychiatrist or therapist. I don't know why you would bring up the USSR as a counter-example, when the USSR had public healthcare. In your video, you're just saying that other people deserve to suffer because you say that you suffered, and that's just ignorant.

I like modern China (PRC) and I don't agree with all of their drug laws. PRC only made marijuana illegal in the 1980s and they did that because the US told them to do it. I've seen multiple articles from Chinese news agencies say that people die from Marijuana overdoses, which is not a thing that happens. PRC has 50,000 km of high speed rail and healthcare. I think if you asked most illicit drug users in the US if they'd rather have drugs or healthcare and 50k km of high speed rail, they would choose the latter. If US wasn't a hellscape, less people would do drugs. The same applies to other forms of escapism such as video games. US people complain that China has more restrictions on video games. If people in the US had the same material benefits as people in China, then people in the US wouldn't want to play video games so much.

If you have questions about the history of drug use in the United States, post a question or questions in !askchapo@hexbear.net