well you've certainly gotten a few strong responses in this thread nik.
Humans have evolved mechanisms to ensure the survival of society. One of these very strong mechanisms is a tendency to conformity. The majority of people are rational and moral beings... therefore, for the most part, the majority can be said to be correct. The tendency to conform keeps the minority in line, and society keeps on humming. Without the stabilizing inertia of the majority and the tendency to conform, I don't think that civilization would have ever developed.
However, you can fool most of the people some of the time, especially with little secrets that affect the whole world but are known to very few people. And really, all you have to do is create a majority, or even just the image of a majority, and people will start to fall into line. Do you know what Bolshevik means? It means majority. That's right, back in the days of Tsarist Russia, 1903 I think, the Communists, with very little real popular support, called their party the Bolsheviks -- the Majority Party. Were they actually the majority? Far from it.... but in the world of politics, image is everything and substance is unimportant. And once a group has established its view, any opposing group must necessarily be *anti-* that view. Thereby firmly establishing the original group as a *positive* force and the opponents to be a *negative* force. Sometimes it happens the opposite way, but every time it's a "us = good" vs. "them = bad" view that's pushed along consistently. It's funny here in the U.S., where we have 2 parties and any Republican will immediately see through and decry "Democratic propaganda" but pride swells in their hearts when they hear/read/view something that could just as easily be labelled "Republican propaganda". It's the feeling of belonging to a group, and not just any group -- the *right* group -- that can push people to irrationalities like that.
Once a movement has an *actual* majority of the people in its favor, it is very easy for its proponents to simply shout over, intimidate, ignore, marginalize, and otherwise destroy any opposition. This can be done in many ways, some subtle and some overt. From non-coverage of protest events (see the recent thread here in OT about the huge protest in LA that went unnoticed -- or, rather, unmentioned -- in the media... a lot of stuff in that thread is relevant to this discussion including this cartoon) to simple ad hominem labelling of opponents as wackos, fanatics, people on the fringe.... mentioning of alleged crimes in the past that didn't result in a conviction (but still bring up a negative connotation to the average reader/viewer), connecting one's views with those of a completely fringe group or a group that's easy to dismiss as uninformed (as has happened at least three times in this thread, with Art Bell, the National Enquirer, and public schools)... anything that can be done to discredit and nullify their opponents.
I also find that out-of-hand judgments often come from those whose core beliefs (particularly belief in one's self-worth) are threatened by the new proposal. If it forces them to believe that their God could be wrong, their beloved country could be wrong, their lives could be all for nothing, their parents didn't really love them -- whatever -- it will often elicit a strong denial and a refusal to even entertain the idea, if only to disprove it. This doesn't mean that the people who show this behavior are stupid, naive, or evil; they're simply doing what's been encoded into all of our genes to ensure our continued existance as a race. If everybody was a leader, we'd never get anywhere. The world *needs* followers, and there's nothing wrong with being one. In fact it's usually only the followers who ever get anything done.
I end with selections from John Stewart Mill's On Liberty
In that vein, thanks nik
but for crying out loud, watch your temper will ya? saying things like "SHUT THE GODDAMN MOTHERFSCK UP" won't lead anywhere productive. You're trying to stifle his viewpoint just as he was trying to stifle yours, but in a much more negative way. You should have known when posting a thread like this that people would come in with very strong views on the matter. It's your thread, you have the responsibility to keep it civil.
Humans have evolved mechanisms to ensure the survival of society. One of these very strong mechanisms is a tendency to conformity. The majority of people are rational and moral beings... therefore, for the most part, the majority can be said to be correct. The tendency to conform keeps the minority in line, and society keeps on humming. Without the stabilizing inertia of the majority and the tendency to conform, I don't think that civilization would have ever developed.
However, you can fool most of the people some of the time, especially with little secrets that affect the whole world but are known to very few people. And really, all you have to do is create a majority, or even just the image of a majority, and people will start to fall into line. Do you know what Bolshevik means? It means majority. That's right, back in the days of Tsarist Russia, 1903 I think, the Communists, with very little real popular support, called their party the Bolsheviks -- the Majority Party. Were they actually the majority? Far from it.... but in the world of politics, image is everything and substance is unimportant. And once a group has established its view, any opposing group must necessarily be *anti-* that view. Thereby firmly establishing the original group as a *positive* force and the opponents to be a *negative* force. Sometimes it happens the opposite way, but every time it's a "us = good" vs. "them = bad" view that's pushed along consistently. It's funny here in the U.S., where we have 2 parties and any Republican will immediately see through and decry "Democratic propaganda" but pride swells in their hearts when they hear/read/view something that could just as easily be labelled "Republican propaganda". It's the feeling of belonging to a group, and not just any group -- the *right* group -- that can push people to irrationalities like that.
Once a movement has an *actual* majority of the people in its favor, it is very easy for its proponents to simply shout over, intimidate, ignore, marginalize, and otherwise destroy any opposition. This can be done in many ways, some subtle and some overt. From non-coverage of protest events (see the recent thread here in OT about the huge protest in LA that went unnoticed -- or, rather, unmentioned -- in the media... a lot of stuff in that thread is relevant to this discussion including this cartoon) to simple ad hominem labelling of opponents as wackos, fanatics, people on the fringe.... mentioning of alleged crimes in the past that didn't result in a conviction (but still bring up a negative connotation to the average reader/viewer), connecting one's views with those of a completely fringe group or a group that's easy to dismiss as uninformed (as has happened at least three times in this thread, with Art Bell, the National Enquirer, and public schools)... anything that can be done to discredit and nullify their opponents.
I also find that out-of-hand judgments often come from those whose core beliefs (particularly belief in one's self-worth) are threatened by the new proposal. If it forces them to believe that their God could be wrong, their beloved country could be wrong, their lives could be all for nothing, their parents didn't really love them -- whatever -- it will often elicit a strong denial and a refusal to even entertain the idea, if only to disprove it. This doesn't mean that the people who show this behavior are stupid, naive, or evil; they're simply doing what's been encoded into all of our genes to ensure our continued existance as a race. If everybody was a leader, we'd never get anywhere. The world *needs* followers, and there's nothing wrong with being one. In fact it's usually only the followers who ever get anything done.
I end with selections from John Stewart Mill's On Liberty
In that vein, thanks nik
but for crying out loud, watch your temper will ya? saying things like "SHUT THE GODDAMN MOTHERFSCK UP" won't lead anywhere productive. You're trying to stifle his viewpoint just as he was trying to stifle yours, but in a much more negative way. You should have known when posting a thread like this that people would come in with very strong views on the matter. It's your thread, you have the responsibility to keep it civil.
Facebook
Twitter