It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?

page: 1
60
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+29 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?


www.psychologicalscience.o rg

Why do we stick up for a system or institution we live in -- a government, company, or marriage -- even when anyone else can see it is failing miserably? Why do we resist change even when the system is corrupt or unjust? A new article in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal published by the Association for Psychological Science, illuminates the conditions under which we're motivated to defend the status quo -- a process called "system justification."
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.psychologicalscience.org



+9 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Remember that term; "System Justification" because it is responsible for alot of those questions some people refuse to answer and often explains why they strongly beleive the adage: "... because that's the way it works, and it's never going to change."

Here at ATS we seem to stand apart from this dictum, brought to us by the intelligentsia academicians... who may have been more accurate had they specified that these studies seem to represent the net effect of dependence on homogenized and scripted MSM talking heads to formulate value judgements ...


System justification isn't the same as acquiescence, explains Aaron C. Kay, a psychologist at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and the Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, who co-authored the paper with University of Waterloo graduate student Justin Friesen. "It's pro-active. When someone comes to justify the status quo, they also come to see it as what should be."


The source press release generally identifies what many people in our community see as 'common' amiong those who seem to comforted and cradles by their disinterested approach to the matters of the world around them.... and claims several studies all contribute to an understanding that requires categorization:

According to the release, there are four (4) 'situations' that foster "System Justification," namely:

1 - system threat,
2 - system dependance,
3 - system inescapability, and
4 - low personal control.

The release offers some examples which may sound familiar to some of our community;

System threat:


Before 9/11, for instance, President George W. Bush was sinking in the polls. But as soon as the planes hit the World Trade Center, the president’s approval ratings soared. So did support for Congress and the police.


Note that here in our community, we apparently defied this maxim, as we quickly assesed the nature of event beyond the MSM's reporting of it.

Paradoxically; another example is cited...


During Hurricane Katrina, America witnessed FEMA’s spectacular failure to rescue the hurricane’s victims. Yet many people blamed those victims for their fate rather than admitting the agency flunked and supporting ideas for fixing it. In times of crisis, say the authors, we want to believe the system works.


Yet in our community it rapdily became clear that it had been the media which turned to vilifiying the victims who experienced the greatest abandon by government "non-efforts" and the abandonment they appeared to suffer.

System Dependence:


In one experiment, students made to feel dependent on their university defended a school funding policy—but disapproved of the same policy if it came from the government, which they didn’t perceive as affecting them closely. However, if they felt dependent on the government, they liked the policy originating from it, but not from the school.


Perhaps students just like to complain? Or perhaps funding matters are less understood by the comonly disconnected students living in a rarified academic setting or environment? In either case, as long as it could be the subject of disapproval - it must be disapproval they can find common supprt for voicing. I'm open to theories on this one.

System Inescapability:


When we feel we can’t escape a system, we adapt.


This example seems universally applicable around here.... the example sends the message home....


The authors note one study in which participants were told that men’s salaries in their country are 20% higher than women’s. Rather than implicate an unfair system, those who felt they couldn’t emigrate chalked up the wage gap to innate differences between the sexes.


Replace sex with race, religion, or any other form of perceived inequality, and you'll see what I mean.... check out the manufactured hatred for protesting citizens... does it not seem apparently parallel to the example? Or are some of us still 'justifying' our rejection of those people.?

Low Personal Control


The less control people feel over their own lives, the more they endorse systems and leaders that offer a sense of order.


I find this hard to accept. We are not sheep needing to be led by some secualr messiah from the very wilderness of the dysfunctional that they themselves led us into.... but then, as an ATSer, I have come to terms that we see things froma broader perspective than the MSM likes to encourage.

I hope you enjoyed reading this, and please discuss away, as you never fail to teach me....



www.psychologicalscience.o rg
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 13-12-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Excellent points,I at times wonder how can americans support and turn a blind eye to the corruption of bush and obama govts. This helps explain the wondrous stupidity and amnesia of the american sheeple.


+1 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Just like the majority on ATS, people often go (with little resistance) with popular opinion.

Popular public opinion is nearly always more attractive than actually having to think, research, analyze and rationalize and form an independent position on a multitude of issues.... And since popular public opinion is so easily manipulated in these times, people can be led to defending the "unjust, inept. and corrupt systems"

In these times of "social interactive media" and social networks the vast majority of people are no longer individuals, they are (like it or not) part of a group of "like minded" people.... Because of this, people are easily manipulated, and can be led like herds of sheep to support virtually anything.




posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Because the proposed solutions are worse?

Second line.
edit on 13-12-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   


Low Personal Control The less control people feel over their own lives, the more they endorse systems and leaders that offer a sense of order.

I find this hard to accept. We are not sheep needing to be led by some secualr messiah from the very wilderness of the dysfunctional that they themselves led us into.... but then, as an ATSer, I have come to terms that we see things froma broader perspective than the MSM likes to encourage.


Nope, this is exactly correct. The majority of people are sheep being led to the slaughter, that is the whole problem. more people would rather be clueless than to fact the reality that their world and way of life is slipping from their grasp. Kind of like my wife. I have a hard time discussing things with her because she doesn't want to hear all of the "doom and gloom" in my topics. I have tried to rationalize with her saying I would rather know the truth than to led blindly into who knows what. This is the mentality of most people. They will gladly follow the path of blind feel good than to accept the reality of their world.



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Max Planck: "Change happens when the Old Guard dies".

The solution is not political, we had best change our culture...then the politicians will follow. You have to change the paradigms by which you behave, scrutinize, think and, then react before the poli-social culture will tag up to you.

Look at the Chinese circa 1980s - they realized they had zippo chance of being a player in the world power circle embracing Maoism communism as an economic theory. When Mao died, he wasn't cold in the grave before change at the social level began, the politicals soon followed. See Mr. Planck above.
Out the window goes Mao-ideology; the Chinese were waiting for him to croak to get at what needed to be done.

Guess what, we need Rockefeller to croak. The waiting has begun.



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Group think...

en.wikipedia.org...

Look up the Stanford Prison Experiment...I believe they did a movie about this too...

en.wikipedia.org...

You could have left out the whole Katrina thing...That was clearly self-inflicted stupidity on the part of the people who lived in that area...FIVE FREAKING DAYS OF ADVANCE WARNING, yet they chose to stay...

All of the terms:

UNJUST - subjective
INEPT - subjective
CORRUPT - subjective
edit on 12/13/2011 by jeichelberg because: Further content


+6 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I liked it better when it was called what it really is.......STOCKHOLM SYNDROME!
But hey, at least someone is acknowleding the mentalities we are dealing with everyday here on ATS with some of these defenders of the Matrix.



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Cause its the EASY WAY OUT...
....that's my story and I am sticking to it

edit on 13-12-2011 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


It is simple, and has already been answered by the founding fathers;

all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Charters of Freedom



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
This makes sense when you think of it in relation with feudalism and capitalism, especially the 'Low Personal Control' idea. Why would you defend a king with your lives when he offers you no control over your life? Likewise with plutocratic systems but change king for those who control capital. Clearly to get away from the 'low Personal Control' idea in society, perhaps cultural shifts need to begin? Like the Enlightenment for example.



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by haarvik



Low Personal Control The less control people feel over their own lives, the more they endorse systems and leaders that offer a sense of order.

I find this hard to accept. We are not sheep needing to be led by some secualr messiah from the very wilderness of the dysfunctional that they themselves led us into.... but then, as an ATSer, I have come to terms that we see things froma broader perspective than the MSM likes to encourage.


Nope, this is exactly correct. The majority of people are sheep being led to the slaughter, that is the whole problem. more people would rather be clueless than to fact the reality that their world and way of life is slipping from their grasp. Kind of like my wife. I have a hard time discussing things with her because she doesn't want to hear all of the "doom and gloom" in my topics. I have tried to rationalize with her saying I would rather know the truth than to led blindly into who knows what. This is the mentality of most people. They will gladly follow the path of blind feel good than to accept the reality of their world.


I agree. People cling to things like the Republicans and the Democrats because they refuse to accept reality. They delude themselves. They are clinging to a corrupt system that is broken and cant be fixed. Yet still they continue on blindly in futility following the likes of Ron Paul knowing that nothing will change. I think they are scared.These people "gladly follow the path of blind feel good than to accept the reality of their world". I guess what you are saying is that the only group of people in America that are brave enough and willing to accept reality are those that support OWS. I could not agree more.



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 

Aren't most women that way? J/k.

Well, if women feel like they don't have control, maybe they will blindly accept the system? The same could be true for men if men are dependent on the system or feel they lack control.

The link listed the following situations where we blindly support the system/leaders:
1) We're threatened
2) We're reliant on it
3) We can't escape the system
4) We feel we lack control in our own life

Even though someone might say they defy the system or reject it, if they don't do something and remain inactive doesn't that mean, in essence, that they blindly support it? In the link it says that people make excuses and justifications to explain away the bad feelings. I've found myself doing this sometimes with our country. Maybe I am not as defiant as I thought. I lot of times I just tell myself that this is the way it's and unless I suddenly acquire superhuman ambition or power then it's pointless to try. Besides, people are the way they're. Men and women are different. Countries are different. The US can't be changed any more than a man can be made into a women.

I don't wnat a better world badly enough. I'm content to sit on my a**. Pathetic eh.

If Democratrs rely on Democrats then doesn't that mean Democrats will blindly support Democrats? Can the same be said for any political party? Isn't a political party a system? Aren't nations systems? Can't there be subsystems within systems that exhibit the same characteristics? So both nations and parties can be blindly supported in this way. What about families? Or organizations or companies? What about my boss (whom I rely on for a check)?

So this is explains why iranians will blindly support their leaders even if war looms?
edit on 13-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 



Remember that term; "System Justification"


I will. Thank you for yet another exceptional find and brilliant opus.

S&F&



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Because they fear the unknown more. It's the same with victims of abusive relationships in that they lack the self-esteam or the will power to jump into unknown waters. There is also the factor of investment. People have become to invested in false titles, notions, religious beliefs, material gain and hording (not just the rich but the poor and middle also) and identity (both self and nationalistic).

BTW I resonded to the title of the thread, and haven't taken the time to read the thread's contents, so I'll comment on that afterwards.
edit on 13-12-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Because those that have the money get to make the rules that everyone has to play within or else you become a gonner. No money equals no self respect and "no honey".
Sorry I just could not resist here. But yes my first statement stands correct!

The tea party tried and they failed. OWS tried and they failed. To bring change everyone should be on the same page. We need to know what we are fighting for.


Nobody like to stand alone. It is lonely!



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Screwed
I liked it better when it was called what it really is.......STOCKHOLM SYNDROME!
But hey, at least someone is acknowleding the mentalities we are dealing with everyday here on ATS with some of these defenders of the Matrix.


the term "stockholm syndrome" fits the relationship between the ruled and the rulers perfectly imho .

or as dr.med.andre put it in his song : "please refrain from having sexual intercourse with a dr. named dre"

www.youtube.com...

Yeah, that's what the .... I'm talkin about
We have your mother....ing record company surrounded
Put down the candy and let the little boy go

for some people the candy just becomes too tasty in the long run and they get diabetes type II .
sad story , but fortunately not true



posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
The only people resistant to mental pressure like this seem to be the madmen, crackpots, eccentrics and outsiders (look at ats if you doubt that).

if that is normal then I'm glad I'm a psychological freak show!



new topics

top topics



 
60
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join