News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Trump Versus Biden

Started by Jason Harvestdancer, July 03, 2020, 09:46:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

GSOgymrat

Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 29, 2021, 12:50:39 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-JOaNhx0F8

Not everyone who has radical political views or engages in criminal activity is mentally ill. Should mental health professionals "de-program" #BLM supporters who engage in violence or is this de-programming reserved for people with whom we disagree? I support restorative justice and universal access to mental health care but this guy's perception of mental health treatment really bothers me. Humanistic mental health professionals don't set the agenda, the client does, including situations where treatment is mandated.

drunkenshoe

#1876
Quote from: GSOgymrat on January 29, 2021, 02:01:10 PM
Not everyone who has radical political views or engages in criminal activity is mentally ill. Should mental health professionals "de-program" #BLM supporters who engage in violence or is this de-programming reserved for people with whom we disagree? I support restorative justice and universal access to mental health care but this guy's perception of mental health treatment really bothers me. Humanistic mental health professionals don't set the agenda, the client does, including situations where treatment is mandated.

Honestly, I think he means trying to integrate them back into reality, GSO. He is using the word cult, literally. He doesn't mean 'oh they are like a cult'. These people are not some bunch of crazies who just doesn't agree with you and will go their own way to do their own crazy things. I agree with him on the cult definition. They are a cult whose members are determined to murder people. 

I know that this idea is probably very alien to American culture, scary and sounding very exaggerated. You guys are not used to a defined, resident domestic terrorist group. I know that fear. It changes everything. Fortunately, you guys have huge space.

This is not something like gun violence, shootings that happens here and there. There is nothing more dangerous/deadly than an organised, armed mass of people, scattered around somewhere, who are completely convinced that they are the righteous saviors of something, and that only they can do it. That's who they are and that's how people are convinced to blow themselves up. I know how this sounds to you. It sounds the same to me. It isn't something we can wrap our heads around.

I'd like to say exactly like ISIL, but it is actually worse because a member of a terrorist group like ISIL, cannot integrate normal life, live with people, look like normal people and so cannot recruit people directly, so it is different. But these people are not like that.   

BLM supporters is nowhere near an example here. I don't think he is using the word 'deprogram' to describe some process to put opinions or some different life vision in their head with an agenda. He is talking about making these people understand that they are living in a very dangerous delusion, a world completely out of reality. That their country is going on with its normal flow now, as they and their lives will do go on normally; that the regime is not going to change, their lives are not going to change. That nobody is sending them secret orders or messages to start a war. Nobody will take anything from them or force them into something.

This is what they believe. These people believe they are acting in righteous self defense for their own and that if they do not go on, they will lose everything. They are that far gone. 


"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

drunkenshoe

#1877
In a better expression, I believe he says 'they need to be 'deprogrammed' ' because they are 'programmed' to do something specific which is beyond another political opinion or disagreement or protests. Yes, that is better. Sorry, language switches are exhausting for me sometimes.
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

SGOS

They won't get locked up for 20 years.  That's an exaggeration to underscore the seriousness of their crimes.  They will get fined for trespassing and vandalism at the most.  I could be wrong of course.  There will be NO deprogramming, and GSO was right about therapy. It is only useful to those who want it.  Fines for trespassing are too little to make them face their own issuses effectively. Twenty or thirty years, keeps them off the streets until they are too old to be threats.  There is no intermediate solution that I know of.  Right now the "Law and Order Party" is running for cover, and they want no part of this.  Law and order is only needed for the poor and the miscolored, who make a big issue out of getting murdered by law and order.

drunkenshoe

I think you are right (and the video says the same thing, and offers the rest as 'ideally') but yeah it is not gonna happen.

You are both right on therapy. I know that. I just can't think anything else when thinking about a cult. 
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

Cassia

..Or maybe they are just assholes? Assholes United !

GSOgymrat

Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 29, 2021, 04:23:55 PM
You are both right on therapy. I know that. I just can't think anything else when thinking about a cult. 

Certainly some members of extremist groups can benefit from therapy, particularly reality testing, but I would recommend these people talk with people who have left extremist groups. There are people who have left white supremacists groups, gangs, and cults who have experience with helping others in those situations.

https://youtu.be/0eD-TKZlbMk

drunkenshoe

#1882
OK. That's a good example about how the majority sees these people. I'll try to express what's in my head, you'll find it fringe probably. Anyway, what takes my attention with that video is that the ex-white supremacist says 'he is not a white nationalist because it is this insular group...' (I'm not interested in T**** part really, if not him another one wold getin the role) and goes onto explain how those people interact with others, how they handle people from 'garden-variety' racism, people who are already in track. So he is talking about a notion of conscious racism talked out loud while denying it, without mentioning any other thing. I understand that they have to be brief in front of the camera with limited time because the show's actual message is that there are people who became aware of this madness, got out and it is important for white people to stand up against this, become loud about it.

But I have seen this often before and have difficulty to understand why the racism is taken as an open, admitted main notion while trying to understand these people's actions and motivations. Because in my experience and opinion, people don't work that way. Majority of people who can be brainwashed to go out with guns to kill people, do not start from the point of conscious racism. I don't believe the majority of them see themselves as racists at all, let alone recuriting people this way. Of course there are traditional groups. They are in Q probably too. Bu tI think this one has a unique profile more than that.

It must be frustrating for people in some field of pyshcology to watch terms like 'mental illness', like 'psychopath', 'sociopath' thrown around by people for anything they find abhorrent. I don't think I'm that ignorant, while I know it is equally stupid trying to apply a formula for human behaviour, I also tend to think there should be a common component between people who can be recruited to any kind of organisation of this sort. Doesn't matter what it is. I don't even think it is necessarily political or racial but that's the visible currency because they are the main categories, the fundamental means of conversation.

But esp. because these people are not actually in danger, facing or experiencing any threat. This is very important and makes the whole definition for me. So for example, putting BLM supporters as counter example creates an impass because it is invalid as we all have experienced in the last coup attempt very openly.

In the old world, the people whose jobs are to pick up conversations, forge relationships with suitable recruits are called 'agitators' (and the process, 'agitation') in ideological brainwashing. These people often know the whole literature/counter literature with its ins and outs, every angle, every possible answer against their ideology, the profile of people they can possibly recruit and they almost always have some preaching, oratorical talents, fatherly attitudes esp. if their pursue is promising.

But besides all that there is crucial element of brainwashing -which agitators use perfectly- and it is injecting victimhood. Convincing the individual that he is subjected to an injustice with no way out, with a doomed end which he can't get out without violence and destruction, while he is of more and ultimately the deserving one -with careful wording (entitled)- if he is to take the responsibility, do what's necessary. And this needs to be a common, 'natural' victimhood in the group that exists in reality.

E: For the very process of brainwashing, which his online today, all you need is a departure point to be picked up by the individual. Face to face process, today which comes much later, finding what that individual lacks in their lives and build it around that. This is mostly very primitive and simple I think. I'm not going to put money in the first place. I'll put,

-Being a part of something, belonging to some group
-Working together for a mutual goal, belief; the sense of unity and solidarity that comes with it
-Doing good and the right for the world
-Saving the world

-Money and life style
-Desire to have women for men, becoming a certain profile of women for women. (Yeah, well young women are the common object of desire unfortunately.)

This is how you start to brainwash people to recruit for a terrorist group like ISIL to a manosphere group or some religious cult bunkers in the desert.

But every time, there is a desire, there is a need at play to trigger that. Something specific to abuse for a group of people that could be found in real life. Now, what is the set of desires or need at play for this group? Racism and religion. Being white and religous are not natural victimhoods. That's why they keep creating tons of fuckced up fake ones. But nevertheless, this is the ready answer given to their motivation. But I see a very highly diverse group where majority is not even interested in races or religions to begin with.

I'm not claiming anything, it is just an opinion in the end but when I read their posts, their objectives, look at them...etc. I see mass schizophrenia and think that it has occured connecting certain profile of people with certain mental dispositions via social media. I actually want to say social media is driving people with certain dispositons crazy, but I won't. :lol: Do you remember the Satanist mass paranoia in the 80s? Like that but consideirng the circumstances, the climate, the time...it is in a higher level and more complicated way. The traditional KKK meets the religious freaks look like a bake sale on the ground with this lot.

***Sorry, it became too long. Trying to express it simply, one by one, so the language wouldn't get the better of me.

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

SGOS

Biden's approval rating for an incoming president is apparently lower than any other, except for Donald Trump.  54%.  I would have expected it to be higher just because so many would still be basking in the euphoria of an absent Trump.  But Trump is such a god to that other 46 percent, that Biden must seem like the Devil to them, and if he actually does something good, they won't admit it.

"Trump Pence" signs still decorate my area in abundance, and even outnumber the once more prominent "Thank You, Jesus" signs.

Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on February 01, 2021, 09:24:20 AM
Biden's approval rating for an incoming president is apparently lower than any other, except for Donald Trump.  54%.  I would have expected it to be higher just because so many would still be basking in the euphoria of an absent Trump.  But Trump is such a god to that other 46 percent, that Biden must seem like the Devil to them, and if he actually does something good, they won't admit it.

"Trump Pence" signs still decorate my area in abundance, and even outnumber the once more prominent "Thank You, Jesus" signs.
Like covid, I think this will get uglier before it gets better.  And I'm hoping for better.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Unbeliever

Yeah, me too, Mike, but we know that hope doesn't affect reality unless it's combined with hard work. There's a lot of that to be done if we're ever going to bring the Trumpanistas back into the realm of reality.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

SGOS

Russia sentences Opposition leader to more than two years in prison.

QuoteNYT
“Hundreds of thousands cannot be locked up,” Mr. Navalny said during the hearing before he was sentenced. “I really hope that more and more people will recognize this. And when they recognize this â€" and that moment will come â€" all of this will fall apart, because you cannot lock up the whole country.”
This is chilling considering our own situation, although we have not locked up Trump.  But even being close to thinking it may be necessary, is not something I want in our democracy.

SGOS

QuoteNYT
Donald Trump’s lawyers denied that he incited the Capitol riot as House impeachment managers laid out a case that he was “singularly responsible.”
He will beat the impeachment of course.  It's just an impeachment with political partisans as the jury.  But it has annoyed me for years listening and watching "hate radio" celebrities stirring the fires of violence while hiding behind the 1st amendment.  OK, now we've had the violence.  Are we going to rethink the 1st amendment or is it really OK to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater?  They tell me that's actually against the law, and whadayaknow, people do refrain from doing it.  I think it's time to regulate the 1st.  I'm not buying that you can say anything you want and get away with it.  Words have consequences.  I expect most everyone to disagree, and I won't defend myself.  FWIW, it's just where I'm at.

Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on February 02, 2021, 01:34:59 PM
He will beat the impeachment of course.  It's just an impeachment with political partisans as the jury.  But it has annoyed me for years listening and watching "hate radio" celebrities stirring the fires of violence while hiding behind the 1st amendment.  OK, now we've had the violence.  Are we going to rethink the 1st amendment or is it really OK to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater?  They tell me that's actually against the law, and whadayaknow, people do refrain from doing it.  I think it's time to regulate the 1st.  I'm not buying that you can say anything you want and get away with it.  Words have consequences.  I expect most everyone to disagree, and I won't defend myself.  FWIW, it's just where I'm at.
I agree with you.  People seem to think that one can say anything, to anybody and it falls under the 1st. amendment.  Even when it does, they want to reject the responsibility that is attached to what you say.  We do have a category for speech called, fighting words. 
https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/959/fighting-words

It seems to me that making a threat falls into this category.  We need the courts to uphold this and we need people to be charged for fighting words.  So, SGOS, I stand with you on this.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

GSOgymrat

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 02, 2021, 01:49:25 PM
I agree with you.  People seem to think that one can say anything, to anybody and it falls under the 1st. amendment.  Even when it does, they want to reject the responsibility that is attached to what you say.

When people cite the First Amendment it's almost never actually about the First Amendment. Trump didn't make tweets and then get arrested-- that's covered by the First Amendment. He is being judged for the consequences of his statements and actions, which involve things like intent and reasonably predictable results. The First Amendment doesn't absolve people of responsibility.