Skip to main content

The Case for Individualism in a World Embracing Identity

In the contemporary discourse that calls for group identity and collective thinking, I find myself staunchly defending the fortress of individualism. I affirm the undeniable truth that systemic inequalities exist, and I appreciate the noble intentions of those striving to rectify these issues. However, I take offense with the often proposed methods that starkly oppose true equality and fairness principles.

My philosophy draws its foundation from individualism. We are distinct individuals, each embodying unique abilities, experiences, and personal qualities. When we classify people into groups based on characteristics such as race, gender, or sexuality, we risk overshadowing these individual complexities. For this reason, I contend with policies that emphasize these group identities, as they tend to sidestep the multifaceted nature of the individuals they're meant to support.

The path I champion does not seek to redress past injustices by tipping the scales in the present but instead strives to ensure the rankings are free from bias, both now and into the future. I advocate for a society that not only eradicates any form of discrimination or prejudice but also one where everyone is judged solely on their abilities and merits rather than their identities or backgrounds.

The pursuit of equality should be directed towards eradicating present and future biases, not compensating for the past. We all have different starting points, varying talents, skills, and experiences. Instead of aiming to artificially equalize outcomes by advantaging certain groups, we should be working to ensure that every race is free from bias, giving everyone an equal shot at success.

I believe firmly in the principle of equal rights. But equal rights should be similar for all, with no preferential treatment given to any particular group. If equal rights translate into differential treatment, if it implies more rights for some and fewer for others, then this notion directly contradicts the essence of equality.

I advocate for equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. My passion is fueled by the conviction that everyone should be afforded the same opportunities, regardless of background or identity. The individual's talent, ability, and character should determine their success, not their group identity or past injustices faced by that group.

This stand isn't a call against progress or change. Instead, it is rooted in a deep respect for individuals and a desire for a fair and just society. It's a passionate plea for true equality, wherein everyone is valued and evaluated based on their merits, not their group identities.

This stance may not align with everyone and may be construed as neglecting the impact of past systemic injustices. However, I remain committed to this path, as we can achieve a fair and just society through a steadfast commitment to individualism. I am an individualist and place my faith in the power of merit and individual character. It is these qualities that will guide us forward into a future that is truly equal.






Labels:
Location: Olympia, WA, USA

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...
1 comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Reality Is Rigged and You Can Hack It

By Matthew Hayward 7/29/2025 Manifesting Reality: How the Matrix, Quantum Entanglement, and Consciousness Intertwine Look, science fiction and science fact have been flirting for decades. But lately, the line between the two is starting to disappear. The idea that we’re living in a simulated reality isn’t just a late-night stoner theory anymore. It’s a framework, a lens to view those weird, unexplained moments that leave you thinking, "What the hell just happened?" Quantum entanglement, synchronicity, manifestation… they all start to make a lot more sense when you stop pretending reality is some rigid, mechanical machine. It’s not. It’s code. And if you’re paying attention, you might just figure out how to rewrite it. NPCs vs Manifestors: Who’s Really Running Things? Picture the world like a massive open-world video game. Some people are just running the default programming. They go to work, follow the script, consume what they’re told, and never ask questions. NPCs. Then the...
Post a Comment
Read more