Because we are surrounded by a culture that exclusively defines us through our professional roles, and which is based on how we look at ourselves from on our collective identity. When we transfer ourselves to it, we overwrite our original individual sense of an inner wholeness and our relationship to it, because it is this wholeness that is our inner communion with the absolute source of our personal life. Through our projected narcissism and our neglected dependency on a personal relationship with this inner totality, we create an attitude on the verge of hostility which will constantly create adversaries to the view we have about ourselves and which we have created solely for how we want to be addressed. But the transmitted experience we have of a larger whole do not belong to someone or something in a transferred collective state. Separated from that horrible condition, we describe it as a psychological connection, and an experience-based relationship that we share with each other. Early traditions carried this inner intensity and embraced the insights made of our interior experiences. If we transfer them exclusively to the collective view others have of us, we will constantly perceive everything and everyone as a threat to how we prefer to be seen, as they seem to be questioning the values we convey through that personality. The inner experience of this is a shared one, but how it is worded differs between people and the groups we adhere. Trying to overwrite it in others, or falsify it, only distinguishes people from the relationship to how our interior is perceived, and people from each other. The power and intensity that creates meaningful personal relationships to it will still be there though. A child who protests against this abuse from his parents is matched in our societies by the protests we see in all communities against the same abuse regardless of what form we give it. It’s the same pattern over and over but expressed as an attitude when it is completely merged with a collective identity. Every child mimics his or her’s parents’ behavior when learning to relate to their inner whole through their parents. And criticism or punishment for expressing themselves as they do, even though the child merely mimics and reflects their attitude back, because it is the only way the child has learned to communicate with this experience as it is projected on to the parents, this is what creates a vicious circle that repeats the same falsification of the underlying whole that every child try to emulate. We can see it clearly in any political debate. And we experience it as a sense of; Why can’t they just do what’s right? Everywhere in our collective roles we have to constantly oppose, which has arisen early in our lives when our inner whole has been exposed to the pressure of all wouldas, couldas, shouldas. Where neither our parents nor a tradition has been able to carry or reflect the experience in itself in a way that has kept it intact and then respected regardless of how or where it finds its personal expression. When we are young we need a placeholder to be able to assimilate and survive its intensity. To learn how to relate to them. To safely wear the experience of wholeness. There is an underlying structure that we are part of, we express it differently because we are different. In fact, we are completely alone as being the only one of our kind. But still, we are all part of the same underlying experience of wholeness. What makes this such a complex experience is that around it we have created a social structure where upbringing is based on an old authoritarian system of oppression where we destroy the ancestral connection we have to our primaeval psychic whole. We train people to become professionals, but we do not teach them how to become human beings.