4 ms·

I think it's more that _every_ group tends to make some other group "the other" or the out-group. The current US progressive/leftist's out-group are conservati

by gedy 8y ago

I think it's more that _every_ group tends to make some other group "the other" or the out-group. The current US progressive/leftist's out-group are conservatives/Republicans.

ChuckMcM 8y ago
I completely agree with your statement. Every group layers its members in a self sustaining belief system that calls on it to reject other groups and be loyal to the 'home' group. Whether it is democrats vilifying republicans, republicans vilifying democrats, white supremacists vilifying non-whites, poor vilifying the rich, the christians vilifying the muslems, Etc. It goes on and on and on. I hope (clearly over optimistically :-) that once people can understand the mechanism by which they are manipulated they can become a bit more critical about what they choose to believe and how they come to that belief. Every time I've found myself in what seems like an irreconcilable difference of opinion, when we've been able to break that down into what we believe and why, we can see exactly why we disagree. I find it helps me to be more empathic to different points of view. Some people find it destabilizing and threatening clearly.
- Retric 8y ago
  That is an oversimplification to the point of absurdity. People generally think in terms of us, bystanders, or enemy. Democrats and Republicans both view Canada as a mostly neutral party. Further, groups can shift between those states based on context. What’s going on when propaganda vilifies a group is context is being assumed.
  - ChuckMcM 8y ago
    What part of 'that' is an oversimplification? Consider the case of Edgar Welch, father of two[1]. On one fateful day in 2016, Edgar drove to Washington DC to save children who were being exploited at the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria. Who wouldn't try to save innocent children from an abusive situation when authorities refuse to act? Anyone who is a parent with a sense of duty, that is who. And yet for Edgar, his actions which made perfect sense, given what he believed to be true, turned out to be not only unwarranted but dangerous to patrons at the restaurant. The only difference about Edgar, who up until then was just an average community member in an average community, was that he believed something that wasn't actually true. Even Edgar realized that his beliefs were misplaced, once it was clear there was no way the restaurant could have been participating in the activity he believed was going on there. Your comment talks about groups, but I was talking about individuals. And the original comment was how could individuals at Jonestown kill their own children? My assertion, and Edgar is but one example, all of Jim Jones' congregation is another, is that if you can make an individual believe something, you can cause them to act against their own self interest, even to the point of murder. This is true even when that person is otherwise free of mental illness or emotional disorders. I don't see the over simplification aspect. Manipulating people through there beliefs is something hypnotists do every day, whether it is to quit smoking or to cluck like a chicken at a Las Vegas show it is a well understood part of human nature. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/business/media/comet-ping-pong-pizza-shooting-fake-news-consequences.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/business/media/comet-ping...
    - Retric 8y ago
      > What part of that is an over simplification? Because it’s really not about people it’s about aspects of people. Let’s say Sam is a Packers fan. Now Bob is a member of the Packers football team so on Sunday their part of the same in group. But, on Election Day Sam is a Dem and Bob a Republican so the must fight. But their both Americans who are part of the army reserve, so they are brothers in arms willing to risk their lives for each other. But, they are part of different faiths, and ... So, this vilification is about context. The football team you need to beat today, may need to beat some other team next week to get you into the playoffs etc etc.
      - ChuckMcM 8y ago
        Got it. We are talking about different things. In your example with Sam and Bob, I see two people who are in different groups and can have identical (or highly coherent) belief systems. If you want to split Sam and Bob up so that they won't be friends any more and they will hate each other, you do that by twisting their beliefs. First one might suggest that members of Sam's faith, while in the military, were kept from the riskest parts of combat because the military. Then you convince Bob that anyone who plays football is just asking for CTE and that any friend you have is going to turn into a raging monster one of these days, and then you convince Sam, that Bob and others in his religous sect are perverting American politics to keep people like Sam from achieving similar level of success. And you convince Bob that it is Sam "and people like him" who are responsible for the cost of getting a new car or the reason jobs have left the area. The next thing you know, Sam and Bob hate each other. My point is that this can be done by carefully setting up what Sam and Bob believe, regardless of what groups they belong to. There are examples all around us today of families that have gone from groups of like minded people to separate camps, lifelong friends that one can no longer talk to. This is Propaganda, this is Brain Washing, this is the corruption of a group through alternative belief systems. And its the topic at hand, "Surviving Jonestown".
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
erikpukinskis 8y ago
I don't think this is true. There are many groups that are open an affirming to all. The out group isn't "the other" it's just "more of us who haven't joined yet". What you are describing is common to groups but not universal.
- JasonFruit 8y ago
  You're describing the Borg.
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    No, the Borg doesn't allow dissent. You can respect dissent while also seeing yourself in another person.

by gedy 8y ago

I think it's more that _every_ group tends to make some other group "the other" or the out-group. The current US progressive/leftist's out-group are conservatives/Republicans.

ChuckMcM 8y ago

I completely agree with your statement. Every group layers its members in a self sustaining belief system that calls on it to reject other groups and be loyal to the 'home' group. Whether it is democrats vilifying republicans, republicans vilifying democrats, white supremacists vilifying non-whites, poor vilifying the rich, the christians vilifying the muslems, Etc. It goes on and on and on. I hope (clearly over optimistically :-) that once people can understand the mechanism by which they are manipulated they can become a bit more critical about what they choose to believe and how they come to that belief. Every time I've found myself in what seems like an irreconcilable difference of opinion, when we've been able to break that down into what we believe and why, we can see exactly why we disagree. I find it helps me to be more empathic to different points of view. Some people find it destabilizing and threatening clearly.

Retric 8y ago
That is an oversimplification to the point of absurdity. People generally think in terms of us, bystanders, or enemy. Democrats and Republicans both view Canada as a mostly neutral party. Further, groups can shift between those states based on context. What’s going on when propaganda vilifies a group is context is being assumed.
- ChuckMcM 8y ago
  What part of 'that' is an oversimplification? Consider the case of Edgar Welch, father of two[1]. On one fateful day in 2016, Edgar drove to Washington DC to save children who were being exploited at the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria. Who wouldn't try to save innocent children from an abusive situation when authorities refuse to act? Anyone who is a parent with a sense of duty, that is who. And yet for Edgar, his actions which made perfect sense, given what he believed to be true, turned out to be not only unwarranted but dangerous to patrons at the restaurant. The only difference about Edgar, who up until then was just an average community member in an average community, was that he believed something that wasn't actually true. Even Edgar realized that his beliefs were misplaced, once it was clear there was no way the restaurant could have been participating in the activity he believed was going on there. Your comment talks about groups, but I was talking about individuals. And the original comment was how could individuals at Jonestown kill their own children? My assertion, and Edgar is but one example, all of Jim Jones' congregation is another, is that if you can make an individual believe something, you can cause them to act against their own self interest, even to the point of murder. This is true even when that person is otherwise free of mental illness or emotional disorders. I don't see the over simplification aspect. Manipulating people through there beliefs is something hypnotists do every day, whether it is to quit smoking or to cluck like a chicken at a Las Vegas show it is a well understood part of human nature. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/business/media/comet-ping-pong-pizza-shooting-fake-news-consequences.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/business/media/comet-ping...
  - Retric 8y ago
    > What part of that is an over simplification? Because it’s really not about people it’s about aspects of people. Let’s say Sam is a Packers fan. Now Bob is a member of the Packers football team so on Sunday their part of the same in group. But, on Election Day Sam is a Dem and Bob a Republican so the must fight. But their both Americans who are part of the army reserve, so they are brothers in arms willing to risk their lives for each other. But, they are part of different faiths, and ... So, this vilification is about context. The football team you need to beat today, may need to beat some other team next week to get you into the playoffs etc etc.
    - ChuckMcM 8y ago
      Got it. We are talking about different things. In your example with Sam and Bob, I see two people who are in different groups and can have identical (or highly coherent) belief systems. If you want to split Sam and Bob up so that they won't be friends any more and they will hate each other, you do that by twisting their beliefs. First one might suggest that members of Sam's faith, while in the military, were kept from the riskest parts of combat because the military. Then you convince Bob that anyone who plays football is just asking for CTE and that any friend you have is going to turn into a raging monster one of these days, and then you convince Sam, that Bob and others in his religous sect are perverting American politics to keep people like Sam from achieving similar level of success. And you convince Bob that it is Sam "and people like him" who are responsible for the cost of getting a new car or the reason jobs have left the area. The next thing you know, Sam and Bob hate each other. My point is that this can be done by carefully setting up what Sam and Bob believe, regardless of what groups they belong to. There are examples all around us today of families that have gone from groups of like minded people to separate camps, lifelong friends that one can no longer talk to. This is Propaganda, this is Brain Washing, this is the corruption of a group through alternative belief systems. And its the topic at hand, "Surviving Jonestown".

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

erikpukinskis 8y ago

I don't think this is true. There are many groups that are open an affirming to all. The out group isn't "the other" it's just "more of us who haven't joined yet". What you are describing is common to groups but not universal.

JasonFruit 8y ago
You're describing the Borg.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  No, the Borg doesn't allow dissent. You can respect dissent while also seeing yourself in another person.