How I've lost my sympathy towards, and association with, the "common people"
So far, nearly any political ideology, or work of art, or social movement, favors the "common man" and opposes them to, well, whatever entity which looks malicious. Most usually it's some kind of an oligarchy or a dictator, shadow or not.
With nearly every movement and ideology blaming everything on "those very few individuals in power/with money", it surely looks like the humanity has the "few elitists problem". The notion is nearly always the same: some tyrant appears, either by duping the people into supporting their regime and then expanding through violence from the loyals, or through using some shadowy secret societies - and then, oppression and tyranny begins. The despotic ruler uses everything in their power to make the life of your average Joe a living hell, and the average Joe is forced to sit through this shit and obey (or at least pretend to) until some sort of a savior comes around and deposes the tyrant.
And of course, the average Joe is unquestionably the victim here. Obviously. Look at him! He's just an ordinary, cheery worker/clerk who lives an ordinary life. And should someone mention that the average Joe is part of the problem, that someone gets immediately swarmed by the hive-mind-like normies, hurling all sorts of abusive language at the one who was brave/stupid/assertive enough to suggest that the Joe might possibly contribute to this, too.
Both the "left" and the "right" wing movements focus on blaming some abstract "small" group of people for all sorts of shit they face in their daily life, and preach "giving power (back) to the people". Both groups create all sorts of narratives and materials venerating the "common man" and blaming "those few oligarchs who rule their lives". (Which are, more often than not, made exclusively of members of the opposing party. The "few oligarchs" representing their party are either "representatives of the People" or just good people who "are trying to get rid of evil tyrants/oligarchs/rich people". Don't ask questions or get all sorts of aggressive and violent attitudes.)
And at the first glance, it surely does look like this. Who makes the laws? The select few. Who upholds and enforces the laws? The police or any other militarized organization working at the command of the select few. The few people consolidate most of the wealth in their hands and use that wealth to impact everyone's fate somehow, usually in a bad way for them. And as for the average Joes, they're basically powerless, as they've got neither the money nor the power of those "select few".
Surely it looks like that. At the first glance.
But where does the system's power come from?
That's possibly one of the first question anyone interested in getting rid of the System asks themselves. "Okay, so I want to either bring the system down or make it harmless for me. So, what should I do? Where do I start?" Of course, you start by studying the ways system operates, looking for possible weak links - basically, figuring out how does the system get its power over you. Who builds and maintains the system? Who should we attack/address in order to immobilize the system?
The public's answer is, more often than it is not, "The assholes from the opposing party". Particularly the rich and powerful ones - of course, the rest are either "boot-lickers" or "mindless/brainwashed puppets" or some shit like that. And since it's just like that, we'll just need to bring these dirty corporate/Communist/Satanist assholes down and everything's gonna be okay.
Oh, and we're gonna assume that there are no dirty assholes in our team, that's for sure. Our team is RIGHTEOUS and FAIR and JUST and if you doubt that, you're one if these assholes for sure and therefore will be dealt with just like the rest of 'em.
Hold on. Isn't that kind of shit the reason for many countries who practice these viewpoints to be considered tyrannic and authoritarian? Like, didn't Hitler, Mao and Stalin justify atrocities using an analogous line of thought?
Okay, so let's assume at least one of those competing teams, whether large or small, is actually right - that we actually have a bunch of tyrannic shitheads and they might be not even representing a certain political movement. Just a bunch of abstract evil oligarchs who are responsible for everything from a ban on swearing to mass murders of innocents and concentration camps. So, we've got to just find that group and kick 'em outta positions of power, right?
Which means, we've got to find a way to reach them. Which still leaves us with the "How are these assholes getting the power" question. Where does their power comes so we could attack the source to weaken them?
There's where the shit goes wilder. It's the media, it's the banks, it's the law enforcement, the courts... and sure thing, it's the greedy corporations (or, alternatively, all the government-run and taxpayer-funded institutions sponsored by the Gov itself). Basically, it's easier to find an institution which is not a part of the oppressive system.
So where are these institutions getting their power from? Let's see...
Media companies, both big and small, have a handful of editors and writers for each of them. Some of them (of course it's not all of them, just those who aren't aligned with our team) are shameless liars! And these liars capture the hearts of their heartless followers who are essentially a flock of dumb sheep who nevertheless believe the media BS. (Not like our team. We believe our writers because they're honest reporters speaking truth to power and they won't sell out, ever.) As for banksters, well, they've got the power bestowed by the Rothschilds themselves, the power to manipulate money and, by extension, the economy. Since the majority of money is stored in bank accounts, it's easy to manipulate economy like that, right?
As for the corporations, they all periodically release some useless product for the masses to entice them to spend their money on crap. With millions and millions flowing from those hedonistic consumers, they're surely able to build lots of power. Just like that, they're more than capable of bringing the entire government apparatus to the knees and making it do their bidding.
Hold on. Is it just me, or the entire system relies first and foremost on the people? After all, it's their money in the bank accounts, it's their money going to purchase "useless crap" from the corporations and, come to think of it, policemen and soldiers and judges and all the bureaucratic clerks don't come from any special social caste. They come from the same pool of the ordinaries the other kinds of average Joes come from!
So THAT's who powers the system. Got it.
But again, the common narrative says, we can't blame them for anything! After all, it's not like they've got a choice! (They actually do have a choice.) After all, they all have got to feed their families, too (you really have any sympathy for those who earn a living by aiding the oppressive authoritarian system which abuses you?) and it's not like there are many places they can get employed in which do not aid the system, now that the system owns/controls mostly everything (what prevents you retards from withdrawing all your money from bank accounts, and organizing your own enterprises to replace the oppressive big corporations? If you're living in a socialist state: outright disregarding the economy forced on you by the government.) so... well... You should not dunk on the average Joes and hate the rich instead. Or the government. Anything, long as it's a bunch of powerful and/or rich assholes from the opposing party.
Oh well, about that...
Why do you actively support tyrants, Joe?
But the normies aren't just sitting idly, oppressed by the so-called dictator. They actively support the tyranny.
Okay, it's understandable if the people live in some sort of a dictatorship ruled by someone like Stalin, Hitler or Mao. After all, it's not like they can actively voice their complaints, as they'll get prosecuted, so all they've got to do is stick together, do their best to not be spotted by those enforcing the tyrannic regime, and help each other stay away from the dictator's vigilant---
Yes, the people tend to do quite the opposite in such situations. Soviet snitches are the primary reason why Stalin's oppression was so effective. Hitler's regimes was backed by various paramilitary organizations coming from the ordinary people. As for medieval witch-hunts, they probably wouldn't have been a really big thing if not for those willing to rat out someone as a "witch". And the Chinese citizens are the biggest supporter of the social credit system today.
Basically, if we look at how do those "concerned people" behave in arguments, and in their political communities, we can see them actively pushing authoritarian regimes, and it is them who want to subjugate everyone, then force them to follow their preferred rules and adopt their preferred morals and ethics. They might be heavily influenced by the rich oligarchs and their lapdog media, but then again, the bulk of the most aggressive ideas and violent morals and ethics comes from them. For example, the early socialist countries, such as Cuba, China, and the USSR, are known to exhibit extremely brutal treatment of their own citizens during their early years - and most of the brutality comes not from the leaders of revolution, but from lower-order executives, or even pawns. It is not too uncommon to see calls to "kill" certain people or "cleanse" the nation of them in some way; most of these calls come from ordinary people. Then again, both the Sturmabteilung and the Cheka/NKVD were formed mostly from ordinary people, with their agents - foot-soldiers who actually did those atrocities - formed exclusively from the ordinary people.
You've probably heard of "doxing". If you didn't, here's what it is. The reason why it is considered to be a problem is because it is frequently used by various mobs in order to harass, stalk, and possibly harm individuals - for various reasons. Not in the least because someone holds "unacceptable" political views, is part of a rival group, or expresses "taboo" thoughts.
It is not an exaggeration to say that most, if not all, authoritarian and oppressive regimes would die off in just a few years if there is no active support from the people.
Aggressive fanatics who push their views by force, never engaging in constructive dialogue; they're nothing like me
In many, possibly, most cases, the sympathy towards the common man comes from some sense of fellowship. After all, they hail from roughly the same social stratum, they think roughly the same way you do, they have roughly the same moral compass as you do, and most of all, aren't they fellow representatives of Homo sapiens species, the same species you associate with, and don't they want to just live and let live just like you?
That's what they look like at the first, superficial glance.
Thinking they have pretty much the same basic faculties as you do - they might be somewhat more or less intelligent, or they might adhere to a different ideology, but long as w seem to be roughly the same, shouldn't we understand each other well, and be able to come to some sort of a mutually-beneficial agreement after having a constructive discussion and solving our problems in a peaceful way, hearing each other out? Well, that's what you want, and if they're the same as you in that regard, then there's no problem with that.
Okay. This particular individual is just a close-minded asshole who fanatically supports their ideology and beliefs and isn't willing to do as much as just consider the alternative points of view. They don't need to adopt them, why don't they just hear it out so they could make a reasonable decision? Okay, well, it looks like that individual is just too stupid to understand what you're saying. Oh well, that's just that one individual...
[5 aggressive idiots later]
O...kay, we've got a bad start. Maybe I'll try it with more people...
[25 aggressive idiots later]
...uhh, maybe I just have a bad luck, or something. Well, at this point I already have some doubts regarding human nobility, and here I'm talking to people from communities that claim to have values similar to mine, and preach a constructive and open-minded approach...
[80 manipulative demagogues and aggressive idiots later]
Okay, that's enough. At least the common saying about the masses being predominantly stupid and animallike did turn out to be true. Well, maybe there's some other person who's willing to listen to me...
[200 assholes/idiots and 1 likely-minded person later]
...hey, I feel like I can perform an analysis of common and uncommon traits gathered from people so far, and draw approximate conclusions! Actually, why don't I start paying more attention to the people in general? I've observed far more people than I've talked to, and their expressed behavior is full of identifiable traits I can use to study these beings better.
...
...
[Roughly 650 assholes/idiots I've talked to, 20 persons who looked fine at first but later turned out to be closed-minded dumbass fanatics, 15 Russian/Chinese/Japanese propaganda agents seeking to destroy free societies so their authoritarian regimes won't face strong competition, 8560+ mad, animallike, aggressive fanatics I've observed, either 5 or 6 undetermined persons, and exactly 5 decent individuals later]
...
...
TL;DR They are not anything I would like to associate with.
And if they're basically aggressive, stupid and menacing animals - why should I concern myself with their well-being? Aiming to help my fellows, my brethren, my kin - those who I am mentally close to, those I chose voluntarily and consciously to be my allies? Why, I will do that. Aiming to help aggressive beasts who are a threat to me and who've actually tried to suppress or outright destroy my personality, my goals - my own self, in an effort to turn me into a docile, productive drone working for the mindless collective they're a part of? No.
Mindless drones working for whatever collective they're a part of
Though they're called "individuals", most of them have limited to non-existent personalities - and mostly are dependent on the collective. Not only that, most of them aggressively force their views on others, as they view these "others" as little more than programmable drones which can be programmed and re-programmed as the Collective says.
As an individual with free will and a personality, I find helping these beings become stronger counter-productive as they're a clear threat for my existence. Civilizations, communities, collectives were created initially in order to help individual persons actualize their interests, by creating trade and implementing money, organizing productive networks such as cooperatives, companies and corporations to help them with production of various commodities, creating a pool of public knowledge (the stuff private individuals have voluntarily communicated to the others, not their private secrets) for individuals to learn, creating various means of communication, and a logistical apparatus for ease of transportation of both persons and goods - as well as other optional systems. This all was initially created not so you would worship the "almighty Collective" later - but so a person like me or you would be able to interact with others in a mutually-beneficial manner! The whole system is abstract and is a tool to serve The Sovereign Individual!
And though civilizations by themselves are a tool with a great potential, it just happens that those damn humans are capable of fucking the entire initiative up. Building oppressive social apparati, creating notions such as "the greater good" or "the rule of majority", and using the society mostly to gang up on minorities such as persons, they turn a splendid tool to aid the Sovereign Individual into an oppressive machine which abuses the Sovereign Individual! Come to think of it, most supporters of civil liberties necessary for The Sovereign Individual's existence, prosperity and security are not coming from the masses, but from a comparatively small group of concerned persons scattered semi-randomly across the entire planet. And one of the primary reasons why citizens and residents of the USA and several other countries still retain at least a significant amount of their rights and liberties is that they're armed, ready and willing to defend their interests with their tactics of choice.
Wherever those individuals have enough will to defend themselves, that keeps the mobs of rambling idiots at bay.
All in all, our interests are incompatible
Though it is true that each sovereign person has their own set of values, goals and interests, there are some things expected to be commonly present among those sharing a certain trait or a set of traits. For example, each free-willed, sovereign individual is expected to value their own liberty, autonomy and sovereignty strongly, as these are necessary for their very existence as the being of qualities they possess - as their actual own self. They also might prefer strictly voluntary interactions, as well as some sort of a non-intervention principle - "leave me alone unless you believe me to be a great threat; for I will become it shall you intrude my private domain without my consent."
Likewise, the ordinary humans (who are known already as collectivist and non-sapient) barely have any personalities, and their primary drive seems to be the same as in animals: bestial instincts. The need to be fed. The need to have a den. The need to have support from their pack, and the need for recognition as a fellow pack member - the need for unity. As long as freedoms of a sovereign individual are not seen as an obstacle for these goals, they seem to tolerate them as they see no harm in others minding their own business - but that's it. As soon as there is a subtle notion of threat, or a fear that those liberties will cause harm somehow or might be standing between the ordinary human and their expectedly-guaranteed food/shelter/care/safety, they immediately turn hostile towards those liberties. This way, the population - the masses - were utterly convinced to surrender their critically-important liberties and other provisions - such as respect for privacy, respect for one's right to self-defence and the right to own and use effective means of force projection, respect for one's property, and the non-intervention doctrine.
I, on the other hand, have an opposite view on things: that food, shelter, comfort etc. are tools and resources to achieve my own goals and interests, and to provide sustenance and enhance both my performance and my well-being. Surely, these are very important for me - but only as long as I have the need to live and prosper. That is, long as my most important goals and interests are achieved and satisfied.
Of course, criminals are pesky assholes and some of them present a significant potential threat for my existence, or my prosperity. But fighting them with measures which will bring me far more harm and/or discomfort is not a reasonable solution. Same with absolutely every issue: a comparative approach where both the original threat and any undesirable effects from what is proposed as a solution are extensively studied, compared against one another, and the best course of action is chosen - which, of course, always includes looking for other, even better options.
Even life itself - or, more precisely, my existence in current perceived form and in current perceived environment - is not something unconditionally treasured the most, but merely one of the means for me, the Sovereign Individual, to exist in a certain form and possess certain powers. It is surely valuable - but only if it doesn't become a living nightmare.
Humans are ungrateful and they believe they're "entitled" to stuff
Sure thing, our modern civilization is strong enough to address many, many of our needs - and make it cheap. We've got cheap, diverse food; transport which can haul us halfway 'round the Earth in a matter of hours; medicines capable of curing many diseases previously thought to be incurable and lethal; communication systems allowing people located thousands of miles apart to communicate in real time; sturdy, warm houses with all sorts of commodities delivered directly into the building... And, sure thing, all sorts of amenities and other commodities.
That does mean that we can afford ourselves a quality good life. That does not mean it all comes as granted.
And if one reasonably seeks to improve their own life, knowing where do those commodities and amenities come from - and fiercely opposes any lowering of own quality of life, and all unreasonable or unacceptable impediments to its preservation and/or enhancement - that is, indeed, not only acceptable, but a sign of a strong dedication to preservation and enhancement of one's well-being. However, if one believes that they just "have" to have a good life, or certain provisions, just because they exist or are a member of some social stratum - they shall not reasonably expect their demands to be granted. In other words, it is alright if you want a sort-of fully automated luxury communism (or propertarianism/individualism) and are actually working to make it a reality, long as you do not infringe on interests of other persons or their domains - but if you believe that everyone must accept your vision of fully automated luxury communism, as well as your plan to make it a reality, and you are not against forcing others to follow your plan and/or believe your plan is innately flawless, or are opposed to any criticism and alternatives - then you should fuck off, eat shit, and probably die trying to seize the means of production from Coca-Cola Inc. A honorable death for you, the brave hero fighting the "evil capitalists", and a good riddance.
Last but not least...
Humans really hate those who are prosperous, have strong will or intelligence, or are generally a capable person
Whether I acknowledge myself as one of these persons is irrelevant - the fact that those traits are highly beneficial for both the individual possessing them, and those whom they help using them, is.
While this hatred is not spread uniformly across the Earth - countries like Russia or China are literally intolerable for such individuals due to both rampant abuse from their less-capable "peers" and there being not much potential for such persons to grow and prosper, while the United States of America and several other countries have already adopted meritocracy as part of their culture, so this hatred isn't usually expressed more than as a simple displeasure with the difference in abilities between the capable ones and the butthurt normies. Nevertheless, the hatred towards those better is a more or less omnipresent trait of humanity - hailing from their bestial nature of a hunter, who had historically lived in a competitive environment, where one's performance had a great influence on how much food and sex one would obtain and how high they would be in their pack's hierarchy. (Not too fundamentally different from how it is now, except that raw physical strength rarely plays any significant role on civilization scale and is replaced by intelligence and talent.)
It is intelligent and talented persons who've created nearly all, if not all of the modern commodities, in the first place; sure, you can say it is "the ordinary workers who toil at the factories and the farms day and night providing those goods!", but history (at least what is "officially" known) shows that most of those workers were working with crude tools and had a high fatality rate due to all sorts of diseases and workplace traumas - that is, until someone smart came up with a machine which made labor easier and more productive. And if you don't believe the official history, the workers of today do not try to improve their quality of life by inventing new technologies or techniques. And in some cases they're outright opposed to technological progress, despite technologies (when correctly handled) being the reason why life becomes so good, people start thinking they're entitled to free food & medicine & housing.
If they hate me - and the people whom I respect - and especially if they try to hurt us just because we're what we are, why the hell should I help any of them?
...And this is how I stopped believing in humanity.
This isn't a declaration of war against the humanity or the common man, but instead a simple switch of focus - from thinking about the humanity/the society as a whole, to thinking about myself, my personal friends and allies first. Not like I wasn't like that before - because this is exactly my attitude to life - but now that the humanity have proven to be aggressive, inconsiderate, stupid, and devoid of any kind of will or spirit, I see no more reason to pay attention to any of their problems.
Most of those average humans are passive, and unless they face a 100% risk of dying from something immediately and very soon, they don't give a fuck about pretty much anything. And while they do have their share of suffering they could get rid of should they work towards it, all most of them do is sit on their ass and wait for a hero to come and save them all and make life super amazing forever. Without even trying to understand the current state of affairs.
And come to think of it, such a change of attitude is only going to be refreshing and invigorating for me. People are being targeted by a powerful shadow cabal or something? Well, let's work on getting ourselves secured against whatever that cabal makes up. Unlike those masses who'll rather eat a bucket of shit as part of yet another TikTok challenge than organize and stop building and empowering the authoritarian system they claim oppresses them, we, the Sovereign Individuals, can actually do something if we cooperate. At the very east, we can try.