If civilization kills the good in us, the man who refused to help a family in distress, the cyclist doped up, the paraplegic athlete turned gunman and those police officers that killed a Mozambican taxi driver not only have their own civilization but they are far too civilized for any own taste.
Outside Rousseau’s conceptual exercises, I always doubted “le bon sauvage”. I don’t trust him or his goodness. Savages never were (are) that good (naïvely good) and civilization isn’t that strikingly bad. (Or is it?)
I know a couple of guys I used to regard as “good savages” and now believe to be romantic extremists or, even better, naïvely romantic. For their own convenience, they unreasonably glorify “love conquers all”. When a girlfriend leaves for good it’s never their deed. She didn’t love him for real because, if she loved him, she would also love, or at least accept, his drinking problems, his laziness or dirty habits (belching and worse). Only pure naïveté explains the belief that love is going to last no matter what.
Love is only unconditional in poems and the feverish intention of lovers. Boys and girls, not that naïve or romantic, know that love has to be cultivated and that requires polishing aspects of our own personalities. If we ignore that rule, sooner or later we end up alone.
I was amazed to see the surprise of a guy, who kept staring at other women’s assets, when his girlfriend packed and left. Love is a fragile thing. It cannot survive the wear and tear of a bad relationship. It goes away when least expected. To believe that true love is fool proof is unrealistic. It only exists as a concept or inside the mind of a romantic savage.