Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
what I think are enormous parallels in what is happening to the US today, and the dangers we also, I think, face
And these are?
"Of course you are going to have to read some and think, so this won't be for everybody:"
I already read it, troll. I'd like to know what moonbeam's take on it is, since he posted that generic "parallels" line. He posted it - I'd like to know what he thinks they are.
I see quite a number of them, but I know that I see what I already believe rather than really see what actually may be there. I assumed that others would also see what they already believe. I was interested, therefore, in what would stand out to different viewers.
Take our present situation. We have just passed from a period of deep fascist authoritarian rule and have elected a new kind of progressive Communist dictator, Gorbachev Obama takes over from Muscleheadbushilini. The sun has come out over America, no? But change is in great danger as described in the article here:
"The societies of the countries that embarked on a journey toward political democracy and economic liberty have to pursue the same prerogatives as before?prevention of social upheaval and a complex modernization. (Prevent social collapse from unemployment and green our economy.) A mere year after the fall of the old regimes, however, they are facing the specter, if not the reality, of sharp economic decline, growing prices, falling real incomes, rising unemployment, polarization of the political spectrum, increasing criminality, escalating racially and ethnically motivated violence, awakened national prejudice, eroding public solidarity, expansion of social and economic disparities among individuals, growing administrative instability, general psychological uncertainty, and organizational chaos. (You keep up with the news on the bailouts etc, I assume) Despite these warning signs, the new governments remain confident about their ability to secure the "social certainties" that their fellow citizens had taken for granted during the years of the Communist rule and to weather the conflicts implicit in the process of societal change." (The Democrats seem oblivious to the dangers of the entitlement generation and their instant gratification mentality.) Change is going to be slow and difficult, we are beginning to hear.) Obama's numbers are falling and lots of folk like me are telling their Mommies on him."
This is interesting too:
"There are, of course, the unsuccessful models, including those of the post-war "socialist revolutions" in these very same countries. The Communist strategy of subverting democracy under the promise of egalitarianism, (Read lower taxes, gun rights, homeland security, pro-life, liberals are evil.) however effective it proved to be in the past, is now largely discredited in Central Europe (and my list here) and will remain so for at least a generation. Thus its chances, in the absence of Soviet support (the major and decisive factor in the success of past antidemocratic left-wing campaigns in East Central Europe), are doubtful. However, the Communist (Republican) parties in the region have preserved their organizations, have effectively managed their election campaigns, are known to have strong support among less skilled workers in industrial areas and have already shown a revived ability to disturb, sabotage and frustrate democratic aspirations of their citizenry, particularly at the level of local administration and in industrial enterprises (and in this forum). It may be useful to remember that the party apparatus has been historically a very effective mobilizing and organizing force among the discontents of many kinds. Even today, the Communist (Republican) parties can claim loyalty of high- and mid-level managers, educators, administrators, army and police officers, workers, and, in particular, the Lumpenproletariat. The party recruiters have been traditionally very successful among the ethnic minorities(Whites), the incompetent, the marginal and the uprooted(That would be the south and Midwest).
Look what economic uncertainty has done to this forum:
"However, the psychopathology of individual human behavior in critical situations can be useful for gaging the magnitude of potential challenge to democracy, assessing its dynamics, and planning for its possible resolution. As we have seen, the breakdown of democratic regimes is often precipitated by severe economic hardship, followed by initially random and then organized violence. At the level of individual psychology, loss of economic and physical security translates into a severe emotional stress. Reasons for the gradual erosion of support of weakened democratic governments among citizens threatened to the core of their existence are related to unusual defensive reactions of individuals exposed to such stress."
Many of us seem to be losing our minds. Threatened to the core of ones existence of course means the breakdown of barriers we set up between us and our self hate, but the so called wise of the world don't know that yet.
"Although Maslow based his otherwise speculative theory on limited laboratory experimentation with free choice, he knew about preceding empirical studies concerning human deprivation. Bruno Bettleheim, in particular, pointed to the devastating dehumanizing effects of the German concentration camps on its Jewish inmates.15 Long internment, severe hunger, total loss of privacy, brutalization by guards and incessant threat of death had a depersonalizing effect (denial of reality) on prisoners, accompanied by regression of personality (concentration on basic biological functions, descent to child-like behavior) and a strong identification with the oppressor (aiding in persecution of less conformist inmates). (Similar reactions, that is, denial of reality and identification with the enemy, have been observed more recently in victims of hijackings and hostage situations in the form of the so-called Stockholm syndrome)." {And in those who still cling to Bush and the Republican party.}
I hope you take seriously the following too:
"At a less extreme level, complex stress reactions often result from a prolonged joblessness. Work, to be sure, is one of the most important components of life, at least in industrial societies. Employment is not merely the source of income, but, equally importantly, contributes to the sense of personal worth and dignity, often facilitates self-realization, is an organizing focus of daily activities and an important point of reference, offers group identification, provides opportunities for informal support and may offer formal social support and assistance. This self-identifying, protective and supportive network of personal ties disappears quickly after a layoff. As empirical studies from the time of the Great Depression and the oil crisis of the early 1970s have shown, long-term unemployment sets in motion an adjustment process that may result in a traumatic reaction. The process usually starts with denial or disbelief and is followed or accompanied by a considerable anxiety attack. Later, a phase of relaxation and relief sets in, characterized by efforts to find new employment. If these efforts fail within a reasonable time, the unemployed person may experience vacillation and doubt with occasional incidence of psychopathological symptoms, such as depression, paranoia, irritation, aggressivity, suicidal tendencies and various psychosomatic ailments. The final stage of adjustment to permanent unemployment is characterized by malaise and cynicism, resignation and apathy."
Obama's revolution of change is clearly in danger:
"More to the point of innate or inherited psychological traits, Theodore Adorno and his colleagues attempted to document, through empirical measurements, the existence of a totalitarian personality. This concept, based on assessment of expressed biases in personal opinion, was though to consist of a combination of personality traits such as conventionalism, submission to authority, aggressive tendencies, stereotyping, preoccupation with power, destructiveness, (paranoiac) projectivity and alienated sex concerns that were measured on opinion scales. The findings of the studies were doubted because of their methodological imperfection and because their replications failed to support the notion of more or less stable and unchangeable individual characteristics, allowing for more dynamic notion of individual tendency to "authoritarianism" susceptible to environmental influences. However, authoritarian beliefs, as measured on Adorno?s F-scale, were found to be related to rigid cognitive functioning, submission to authority, hostility to "outsiders" and lower socioeconomic status.
But surely you picked up on this:
"The above concepts and theories of reactivity to stressful conditions or dispositions for it do not postulate a direct and/or linear relationship between the deprivation and its effect on individuals. They do not, and possibly can not, explain why similar levels of deprivation and frustration elicit widely different adjustment reactions not only among individuals but also among various groups. At least one explanation was advanced in regard to dynamics of paradoxically differentiated reactions to stress. Known as the theory of relative deprivation, its can trace its origins to de Tocquville?s description of the demise of the Old Regime in France. According to its tenets,23 the potential for violence varies with the perceived discrepancy between value expectations (what people think they are entitled to) and value capabilities (what they actually get). Hence the paradox of uprisings of people that took place after their living conditions had already improved. The deprivation that leads to rebellion may be "decremental" (expectations remain the same but capabilities diminish), "aspirational" (expectations rise but capabilities remain the same) or "progressive" (value expectations rise and value capabilities rise with them but only to a certain point after which the value capabilities begin to diminish)."
Sounds to me like he's saying a sense of entitlement, the middle name of the left, is something that can be profoundly dangerous, no? It may be Democrats that can't stomach their own revolution.
At any rate, it seems to me that we already see a counterrevolution going on. Obama must be destroyed. The light must be put out because psychological growth and health is incompatible with economic collapse. The fear mongering right will destroy the revolution with hate and dread and pull a majority back over to them. The handwriting looks to me to be on the wall. People can't learn from history because there are no teachers. The spiders will win and hope will be crucified as it always is. Self hate always prevails.
Facebook
Twitter