It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Psychology And Society

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:23 PM
There's a thread at this site called "Anti-trumpism is fanaticism". What immediately pops into my mind is anger- and the words "bull$hit". This is a reversal of the actual reality, I tell myself, and it is.

Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Corporatism, World-Government by the .1% of the 1%.

These are facts, and capitalism has repetitively "explored" these cycles before. It is not a coincidence that the weimar republic - a free-thinking democratic period of Germany history which followed upon the trauma of the collapse of the "2nd" Reich with World War I. Does today not look similar?

Then the collapse of 1929 comes, and the German republic becomes shaky again. The nazi's - conservative fanatics unable to accept the reality of evolutionary change towards a more compassionate society - are Humans with an unhealthy positive relationship to evil. People of this ilk - or Humans who get caught up within this emotional-social vector ("a culture") - are always an extreme example of self-belief which believes external conditions will always be there - always be recreateable - and that they, god-men, will somehow "transcend" it all. The details - and mechanisms - are shaky, ambiguous, and insane. To put it simply: when a person crosses a certain threshold into a cult worship of masculinity, strength, and power i.e. see obelisk, the self is now petrified at the thought of "falling", or losing a grip, falling apart, and heaven forbid, actually be forced to account for dynamical effects in the world brought about by their unique agency.

It's a systemic effect of social-breakdown, akin to the cascades which happen in nature, where if a producer population goes down, the herbivore which relies upon this prodocer will need to find a new producer if it is to survive. If it cannot, the herbivore population goes down too. With the herbiore population down, the carnivore population, in turn, is effected.

In the Human social-world, the economic downturns of capitalism ALWAYS BRINGS FASCISM WITH IT. It is this a brazen lie to say that Trump or anything about him is over-blown. It is precisely a tactic designed on 'letting down of our guards' - to render us docile, lulled, and out of touch with legislative changes. Vigilance in this way is like putting on the brakes: they can't go fast enough or smoothly enough without everything they do being analyzed and put under the microscope.

The collapse of the Soviet Union gave birth to the Nazi-style propaganda of Vladamir Putin, who has ruled Russia since the late 90's. Within Russia, a Machiavellian ethic separates those who are pro-state and corporations (a very small minority) and those who are taken in by the states propaganda; and everyone else.

Same process - same effect: traumatic "fall from grace" (i.e. some ideal), and in it's emerges a stringent, hyper-idealistic replacement which embellishes, exaggerates, and generally distorts facts of reality. At the same time, the news media relativizes the change as if it were something which could be contained - which wasn't, day by day, inching closer to that boiling point - where the media no longer functions in the way it was designed, and it becomes, like Fox News, Breitbart, Infowars, and other hyper-conservative sites, a mouthpiece for the ultra-rich and ultra-powerful.

For instance, how does this picture feel to you?

I don't get it. The red ink. The sense of gravity - a complete legitimatization of the claim, and addressing it, as if it to be ultra-dramatic, as if it were a real question.

This is the hegelian dialectic behavior that many people rightly detect between the corporate "right" and the corporate left. If Time weren't retarded, it would not ASK A QUESTION, but make an ASSERTION - an EXCLAMATION OF TRUTH: FACTS ARE REAL, and not, "is Truth Dead"?

Do not believe their claim to naivety: these people are in the craft of subtle manipulation of awareness through colors, phrases, and other structural manipulations of the medium they communicate to you with.

It is dishonest - morally inept conmen - to be related to in this "artificial programming" sort of way. The asking of the question in this way IS THE MESSAGE, as Marshall Mcluhan understood, the medium can be a big part - even the main part - of a message.

“Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. . . . The process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there's no reason or excuse for committing thought-crime. It's merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won't be any need even for that. . . . Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?”

You think this preference for twitter is by accident? Is there any reflection upon Orwell's concept - a best seller, and yet it is happening before our eyes, in the neuroscience era, with almost no mainstream media exploring the significance of the twitter-relationship between Trump and his audiences? You don't see this as not merely an effort - but an effective effort, which will further reduce - and trivialize - the presidents relationship to the social, economic and moral life of a nation?

It's clever. Ingenious, how subtly they act upon the emotions through such schemes. It is a simple application of the "adjacent possible" within the heglian tension of opposites and the affordance that opens up as a resolution.

But people need to be mindful of this. An educated population is a MUST if democracy is going to work. The Simpsons, Family Guy, etc, is not safe for people who don't read - as their emotions/feelings become entrained to function in superficial ways - largely due to the inculcation of ways-of-being through T.V shows like the Simpsons.

I appreciate goofiness - and being mindful of the "polarizing" tendency that tends to occur when we recognize something off - I don't want to lose the pleasure I get from nihilistic comedy (understood and appreciated within the context of "play" i.e. fantasy) - but I also don't want to be an insane person who denies simple neuroscientific realities that are very simple: you ARE what you DO. If you don't read, or don't have conversations of any kind that expand your mental-cognitive/forebrain connections, then you will think and judge in simplistic ways - with simple referents that hold undue "force" for your thinking - and not just that, in being a citizen, will experience your opinion as factually 'truer' than those you disagree with - and so will pridefully defend because your views are intrinsic to your affect-regulation i.e. how you feel about yourself.

See the problem? Liberty needs to be complemented by responsibility, otherwise manipulative Humans will take advantage of the emotional imbalances that liberty - unregulated by a responsibly organized mind - will ALWAYS create.

How did Trump win? Did anti-intellectualism not play a big part?

edit on 1-4-2017 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 05:11 AM
The title is click bait for psychology but; the rest of the OP is just political and the ideologies held trying to put a psychological bent on it but that is not a discussion point just opinion. Then asking for a political opinion based on that... more of a pander to see where people stand politically than to discuss the pathology of what or why people hold one political ideology more than another... and all the pander to sway or bend someone to changing teams or choosing a side.

Political ideology is likely where this should have been placed... when there is no real philosophical or psychological inquiry going on; it is however a good OP.

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 07:02 AM
To add a little psychology to this I think it is worth asking the question 'why?'. Yes, economic downturns seem to inspire nationalism, but why does this happen? The focus is often fear, and's ability to manipulate people's fear, which is much easier to do when there is more negativity in the news (permeating the news with negative words such as 'downturn', 'social breakdown', 'failure', 'crisis' is always a good start if you want to inspire your own change). People's judgement's are often not as rational when in an emotional state, and there are a lot of common fears that aren't in agreement with the probability of it happening to them.

Here are a couple of tidbits in how psychology tries to explain why people fear certain things, and are attracted to nationalist ideas:

Availability Hueristic - We are more fearful of events that we find easier to bring to the forefront of our mind. People are more fearful of terrorism, plane crashes etc than heart disease which kills millions, this is likely because heart disease victims don't appear on the front page of newspapers and 24 news coverage for weeks on end.

Sense of self: Attachment and Identity - We form our identity in part based on the groups that we are part of, national identity is an example of this. Therefore a proud national identity can help our individual self-esteem, and allows us to form attachments within the group with more ease. If people perceive their country to be weaker than usual, they may see this as an attack on their own identity, so react to defend it in the name of 'patriotism'. This is where people are more susceptible to "us vs them" mentality, as well as the desire to re-discover nostalgic 'values' from a time when there was less political turbulence.

There are many many more psychological theories of nationalism and even more if you are interested in how ideas develop.

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 07:57 PM
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

The idea that there is any 'line' between political and psychological is ridiculous. Much of what we do is regulated from the "top-down" i.e. from the relationships we form with others. Some people are connected by very abstract affiliations like "nationalism', while others feel connected just by being round people who speak like them and do things like them.

It's entrainment. Politics is all about entrainment - hyponotism i.e. acting upon the affective modalities of the nervous systems organization. Priming of certain neural organizations through color, as in the Time article, legitimizes the question - and therefore, the group of people asking the question.

Is this not obvious? Are your guards not let down when people are relaxingly related to something? If people knew the intentions of the Nazis, they wouldn't have gotten anywhere.

In short: this is a psychology thread as it relates to "politics". Since politics entails thinking, and thinking occurs through feeling (an affective orientation) politics is a very important - perhaps the most important - application of Human psychological principles, because it is here, in particular, where insanity and craziness reigns strongest.

It is nothing but an absurdity to place politics into a special little category, as if Human brain-minds weren't being structured by the same exact processes which make psychology an interesting and important discipline - not just for any "academic", but indeed, it is a self-cultivated art of attunement, in the manner of Goethe, to the self and its own experienced reality, as compared against the objective data and information provided by the sciences.

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 08:11 PM
a reply to: twfau

Very interesting.

Your perspective is called "cognitive psychology". An interesting field - if a little dry and philosophically 'removed' from deeper realities i.e. feelings.

My viewpoint is informed by origin of life research, systems biology, cognitive science, embodied and enactive philosophy, emergentism, social-psychology, quantum field theory, complex-adaptive systems theory, coordination theory, complementary pairs philosophy, with a strong input from relational psychoanalysis, interpersonal neurobiology, and traumatology, which provide a general 'framework' for WHY people DO what they do.

I think the Steven Pinkers, Harold Blooms, etc, are sort of idolators - people worship their theories, or their political philosophy, or their feelings - insecurities based in fear - such that phenomenological realities around socializing, feeling, and the formative impact of feeling on the content of thinking - is ignored, and this is patently absurd - unscientific i.e. the opposite of the Latin meaning of "scientia" - "Knowledge", from sciens - "to know, to understand". If you don't register shame or recognize its presence - for example, if you can speak in a public setting, as Pinker does, and shame another person who questions you in a way that triggers a certain haughty defensiveness, as Pinker has displayed - this happens because the thinker - Pinker - doesn't conceptualize his thinking in terms of the affective dynamics of his body i.e. in terms of how social processes, built around pride-shame, unconsciously activate amygdala threat/advantage dynamics so that your consciousness reflexively self-organizes in ways that dissociate unwanted information: to quote the relational psychoanalyst and traumatologist Philip Bromberg:

“Dissociation narrows ones range of perception so as to setup non-conflictual categories of self-experience”

Cognitive psychology has traditionally termed this "cognitive dissonance", but the interesting point is that it is something that cannot be "re-presented" within the conscious mind: the mind is afraid - affectively/dynamically destabilized - when unwanted meaning-contents come towards consciousness. The mind reflexively de-focuses at the same time that it hyper-focuses: the fear dissociates precisely by activating an excited response in a different direction! A "quantum potential" exists that pertains to the real-causal dynamics that have failed to be re-presented, but the mind turns away, and in turning away, doesn't see with reference to more substantial and significant referents.

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 10:19 PM
a reply to: Astrocyte

In the Human social-world, the economic downturns of capitalism ALWAYS BRINGS FASCISM WITH IT

You are offering a very selective view of history, perhaps because you don't understand your own terminoloy.

Did the breakdown of 'capitalism' in Russia in the early twentieth century bring fascism? In Cuba during the 1950s? In Vietnam during the 1970s? In Iran during the 1980s?

What you really mean is that periods of social retrenchment in advanced societies bring authoritarian forces to power.

This is because anarchy is the alternative, and as our Muslim friends put it, 'better one hundred years of tyranny than one night of anarchy.'

Would-be tyrants are forever trying to convince us that the world is going to Hell in a handbasket and only their leadership can save us.

They are lying.

posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 11:24 PM
a reply to: Astrocyte
A very well written and thought provoking OP. Actually, I always enjoy your OP's. People like you are the lifeblood of ATS and counteract to the degree that one can the anti-intellectualism that permeates this site as of late. That being said I need some clarification on the exact point you're trying to make with this thread. Could you expound?

Are you saying Trump is a fascist?

edit on 2-4-2017 by Aristotelian1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2017 by Aristotelian1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 05:10 AM
a reply to: Astrocyte

Sorry I just see it as slapping sunburn... there are enough political forums. Many here at ATS use any kind of nook and cranny they can at ATS to get away from the political sewage seeping and draining all over everything... places like The Cafe or The Shed some stay in the greens or the blues to avoid it so here too?

Idology is political psychology is political philosophy, it dictates and seeks an ideal to put onto the masses whether they like it or not... so politics stomping all around everywhere it can even in areas not specifically for it? Excuse as all is politics? No it isn't. It is a religion focused on debate the majority isn't right or wrong so what is there to debate? It is an excuse to keep arguing when if majority rules? It is just a constant pander to get a majority to rule.

So majority of places on ATS eventually? Then bye bye ATS it'll just be a political forum once that majority takes over seeping into every last nook and cranny to pander get some feeling about what the philosophers or psychologists feel about things to pander them more effectively it is dishonest and disingenuous majority rule the issues do not matter when it is an agenda hiding behind the pander to get that majority the majority isnt going to be served no matter who is in office; however that agenda already in mind and in place no one is told about however will regardless of all the pander or fighting greed and hate to get people at each other's throats for a side.

What has politics solved in the last 30 years that has not been rehashed and fought over again and again? NOTHING it has just become a pander for a majority using debate as an excuse issues that are real as an excuse to pander for a majority and then do not serve them, being self serving instead...

Thats politics

new topics

top topics


log in