6 ms·

I have noticed a pattern these days - people publicly criticise certain behaviours and then they do exactly what they criticise. They think that majority of peo

I have noticed a pattern these days - people publicly criticise certain behaviours and then they do exactly what they criticise. They think that majority of people won't actually verify that and such message will embed a positive impression about that person. Then you have people rather lie to themselves rather than accept that they were wrong, so if they later find out that those people actually were doing what they spoke against, they will dismiss it and rather keep the embedded good image. It's fascinating. I wonder if there were any studies about that as it seems like so many organisations or people exploit this these days.

syshum 6y ago
it is not new, it is called Projection. It has been around for as long as humans existed. it is easier to spot today because of internet and archiving tools that means everything you ever say or do is recorded for all time.
jgalt212 6y ago
Does as I say, not as I do whether it's the Mega Church pastor or Tim Cook. Trust No One.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
marcosdumay 6y ago
Well, Orwell had a thing or two to say about this in 1984. It's incredibly common in party politics. If you are the party that always criticize something, nobody will believe that you are doing it. So, if you plan on doing something, you accuse our largest opositor of doing it, loudly and repeatedly.
- cultofmetatron 6y ago
  This puts that insane Qannon theory and the kids who went missing under Trump's kids in cages program in an entirely new context...
  - z3ncyberpunk 6y ago
    You mean Obama Biden's cages, they built them and continue to operate them after all. Exemplifying the point made above about hypocrisy
    - cultofmetatron 6y ago
      Last I checked, Biden wasn't separating children from their parents at the border as a blanket policy and using them as leverage to get the parents to go away. Emphasis on BLANKET POLICY. Obama/Biden didn't put every child in a cage the way steven miller did. So no, I dont' see hypocrisy here. Its night and day. Trump's stewardship put these children in a lord of the flies scenario where they had to take care of each other and the leadership acting more like prison guards than caretakers. I agree that Biden should close those things down but he cant just release the children into the wild. He got left with a timebomb and care has to be taken when dismantling it. Time will tell if he commits to transitioning these children to more appropriate living facilities and finding their parents (https://reason.com/2020/10/21/545-migrant-kids-snatched-by-the-u-s-government-are-still-missing-parents/ https://reason.com/2020/10/21/545-migrant-kids-snatched-by-t...) or relatives. He's been president less than 2 months. it will take time to see if he honors his commitments.
      - takeda 6y ago
        The effort is in progress https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/lawyers-have-found-parents-105-separated-migrant-children-past-month-n1258791 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/lawyers-have-fo... They seem to locate parents for 1/6 of them within a month where trump administration just thrown hands in the air that nothing can be done, when court ruled that the children should be reunited.
      - covidthrow 6y ago
        > ...it will take time to see if he honors his commitments. "I will not ban fracking." ...bans fracking "$2,000 stimulus checks for everyone." ...$1,400 checks for some "I have an extensive plan for COVID." ...doesn't have a COVID plan "We need to close the immigration facilities used to separate parents and children." ...Trump admin closes one site. Biden admin reopens it "I will eliminate President Trump’s... MPP on day one." ...hasn't ended the MPP So far, at least on the hot ticket items, he's not running a great track record. He's done a bunch of little stuff, but the big things promised during the campaign have systematically failed, and several the exact opposite direction. So, sure, let's see if the career politician honors his commitments. I'm not holding my breath.
- secondcoming 6y ago
  Indeed, like fighting systemic racism with systemic racism.
  - wizzwizz4 6y ago
    Actually, that's one of the more reasonable strategies of this form. What would you have done to reduce the harm of that problem?
    - covidthrow 6y ago
      Well, that "problem" presupposes an upward or stagnant trend, which are not demonstrably true. Then the admittedly harmful act of racism was used to accelerate resolution of "that problem". Here's the problem with that: - it was not demonstrated that other more productive forms of change were ineffective; in fact, history shows there has been tremendous progress in the absence of "racism to fight racism" - it has not been shown that "racism v racism" has improved "that problem" - it is yet to be shown the negative consequences of such a strategy, but history is full of examples of further suffering, not less You call it "reasonable", and yet I find a complete lack of reason in its use. When challenged to provide reason, all responses I've witnessed reflect an attitude of, "I don't need to give you a reason/justify it". To my mind, that is precisely absent of reason, so I challenge your assertion that it is in any way "reasonable".
      - wizzwizz4 6y ago
        Okay, first up: make sure we're talking about the same thing. I'm talking about hiring (etc.) quotas requiring the demographics of (e.g.) a workplace to be roughly similar to the demographics of the general population. Fuzzy quotas, so a two-person team doesn't have to be representative but a 20 000 person company shouldn't be almost exclusively white men in their 30s.
      - jjeaff 6y ago
        A steady forward trend of progress seems quite reasonable. As long as you are not the one who was on the receiving end of past injustice. In basketball, if someone gets fouled while trying to make a shot, is it unfair that everyone has to stand back while the person fouled gets to shoot free throws just because they are wearing the same color uniform? It would be great if we could leave race out of the equation when trying to right past wrongs. Unfortunately, when a past wrong was committed based solely on race, given limited resources, the remedy likely needs to be based on race as well.
- mito88 6y ago
  but if you're caught later on, then fasten your seatbelts
  - varispeed 6y ago
    If you own the media then you can sit back and relax. At most you'll get few days of moaning and things will go back to normal. Majority of people won't even know or connect things anyway. If media are licensed, then they will never run anything that will upset government too much. I've seen this many times. Even if hostile nation's media pick up the topic and report it honestly, the government can dismiss it as a conspiracy theory or just say it is an attack. Ultimately even if people see all the evidence, most of the time they'll pretend they didn't and stick with the status quo.
  - marcosdumay 6y ago
    As I said above, people will just not believe it. Things are obviously more complex than everybody just automatically not believing, and owning the discourse makes all the difference (although owning the press like a sibling comment says is overkill). But it happens again and again on politics, and rarely becomes a problem.
ravenstine 6y ago
> They think that majority of people won't actually verify that and such message will embed a positive impression about that person. That's pretty accurate, though. 80% of people are too distracted or lack the intellectual rigor to put two and two together, or even care about doing so.
6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
Everyone thinks they’re different. This other person’s bad behavior is a pattern, but my own is one time things. I’m certain I have my facts right about their behavior from skimming these articles/internet comments, but they are wrong about what I’m doing because they’re too lazy to do their own research. They don’t deserve it, but I do. They’re doing it in bad faith, but I’m not. Their behavior is inexcusable, but you’re missing context to understand mine. Or my favorite: their ends (which I don't understand) don’t justify their means, but mine do.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  I tend to sum that up with a joke self contradictory sentence: "Normally this would be special pleading but....".
- alanfranz 6y ago
  Fundamental attribution error.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

syshum 6y ago

it is not new, it is called Projection. It has been around for as long as humans existed. it is easier to spot today because of internet and archiving tools that means everything you ever say or do is recorded for all time.

jgalt212 6y ago

Does as I say, not as I do whether it's the Mega Church pastor or Tim Cook. Trust No One.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

marcosdumay 6y ago

Well, Orwell had a thing or two to say about this in 1984. It's incredibly common in party politics. If you are the party that always criticize something, nobody will believe that you are doing it. So, if you plan on doing something, you accuse our largest opositor of doing it, loudly and repeatedly.

cultofmetatron 6y ago
This puts that insane Qannon theory and the kids who went missing under Trump's kids in cages program in an entirely new context...
- z3ncyberpunk 6y ago
  You mean Obama Biden's cages, they built them and continue to operate them after all. Exemplifying the point made above about hypocrisy
  - cultofmetatron 6y ago
    Last I checked, Biden wasn't separating children from their parents at the border as a blanket policy and using them as leverage to get the parents to go away. Emphasis on BLANKET POLICY. Obama/Biden didn't put every child in a cage the way steven miller did. So no, I dont' see hypocrisy here. Its night and day. Trump's stewardship put these children in a lord of the flies scenario where they had to take care of each other and the leadership acting more like prison guards than caretakers. I agree that Biden should close those things down but he cant just release the children into the wild. He got left with a timebomb and care has to be taken when dismantling it. Time will tell if he commits to transitioning these children to more appropriate living facilities and finding their parents (https://reason.com/2020/10/21/545-migrant-kids-snatched-by-the-u-s-government-are-still-missing-parents/ https://reason.com/2020/10/21/545-migrant-kids-snatched-by-t...) or relatives. He's been president less than 2 months. it will take time to see if he honors his commitments.
    - takeda 6y ago
      The effort is in progress https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/lawyers-have-found-parents-105-separated-migrant-children-past-month-n1258791 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/lawyers-have-fo... They seem to locate parents for 1/6 of them within a month where trump administration just thrown hands in the air that nothing can be done, when court ruled that the children should be reunited.
    - covidthrow 6y ago
      > ...it will take time to see if he honors his commitments. "I will not ban fracking." ...bans fracking "$2,000 stimulus checks for everyone." ...$1,400 checks for some "I have an extensive plan for COVID." ...doesn't have a COVID plan "We need to close the immigration facilities used to separate parents and children." ...Trump admin closes one site. Biden admin reopens it "I will eliminate President Trump’s... MPP on day one." ...hasn't ended the MPP So far, at least on the hot ticket items, he's not running a great track record. He's done a bunch of little stuff, but the big things promised during the campaign have systematically failed, and several the exact opposite direction. So, sure, let's see if the career politician honors his commitments. I'm not holding my breath.
secondcoming 6y ago
Indeed, like fighting systemic racism with systemic racism.
- wizzwizz4 6y ago
  Actually, that's one of the more reasonable strategies of this form. What would you have done to reduce the harm of that problem?
  - covidthrow 6y ago
    Well, that "problem" presupposes an upward or stagnant trend, which are not demonstrably true. Then the admittedly harmful act of racism was used to accelerate resolution of "that problem". Here's the problem with that: - it was not demonstrated that other more productive forms of change were ineffective; in fact, history shows there has been tremendous progress in the absence of "racism to fight racism" - it has not been shown that "racism v racism" has improved "that problem" - it is yet to be shown the negative consequences of such a strategy, but history is full of examples of further suffering, not less You call it "reasonable", and yet I find a complete lack of reason in its use. When challenged to provide reason, all responses I've witnessed reflect an attitude of, "I don't need to give you a reason/justify it". To my mind, that is precisely absent of reason, so I challenge your assertion that it is in any way "reasonable".
    - wizzwizz4 6y ago
      Okay, first up: make sure we're talking about the same thing. I'm talking about hiring (etc.) quotas requiring the demographics of (e.g.) a workplace to be roughly similar to the demographics of the general population. Fuzzy quotas, so a two-person team doesn't have to be representative but a 20 000 person company shouldn't be almost exclusively white men in their 30s.
    - jjeaff 6y ago
      A steady forward trend of progress seems quite reasonable. As long as you are not the one who was on the receiving end of past injustice. In basketball, if someone gets fouled while trying to make a shot, is it unfair that everyone has to stand back while the person fouled gets to shoot free throws just because they are wearing the same color uniform? It would be great if we could leave race out of the equation when trying to right past wrongs. Unfortunately, when a past wrong was committed based solely on race, given limited resources, the remedy likely needs to be based on race as well.
mito88 6y ago
but if you're caught later on, then fasten your seatbelts
- varispeed 6y ago
  If you own the media then you can sit back and relax. At most you'll get few days of moaning and things will go back to normal. Majority of people won't even know or connect things anyway. If media are licensed, then they will never run anything that will upset government too much. I've seen this many times. Even if hostile nation's media pick up the topic and report it honestly, the government can dismiss it as a conspiracy theory or just say it is an attack. Ultimately even if people see all the evidence, most of the time they'll pretend they didn't and stick with the status quo.
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  As I said above, people will just not believe it. Things are obviously more complex than everybody just automatically not believing, and owning the discourse makes all the difference (although owning the press like a sibling comment says is overkill). But it happens again and again on politics, and rarely becomes a problem.

ravenstine 6y ago

> They think that majority of people won't actually verify that and such message will embed a positive impression about that person. That's pretty accurate, though. 80% of people are too distracted or lack the intellectual rigor to put two and two together, or even care about doing so.

6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago

Everyone thinks they’re different. This other person’s bad behavior is a pattern, but my own is one time things. I’m certain I have my facts right about their behavior from skimming these articles/internet comments, but they are wrong about what I’m doing because they’re too lazy to do their own research. They don’t deserve it, but I do. They’re doing it in bad faith, but I’m not. Their behavior is inexcusable, but you’re missing context to understand mine. Or my favorite: their ends (which I don't understand) don’t justify their means, but mine do.

Nasrudith 6y ago
I tend to sum that up with a joke self contradictory sentence: "Normally this would be special pleading but....".
alanfranz 6y ago
Fundamental attribution error.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]