Stockholm syndrome, the MSM and the 2012 presidential election.

Stockholm syndrome

From this source

In psychology, Stockholm Syndrome is an apparently paradoxical psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm Syndrome.

Wait a second, victims experiencing empathy toward people that are putting them in danger? 27% of people aren't bright enough to realize their enemy is the enemy?

Let us move on. The main stream media has been shockingly blatant in its biased coverage of anything that has to do with the government. Does this mean the media might be an arm of the government? I know this might sound shocking to some, see the above wiki. Or see these links.

FOX again caught with their pants off. (Fox edits out the audience booing and replaces with it applause

Ron Paul VS MSM... the man attracts technical difficulties !!!

I don't want to turn this into just a bunch of links so at this point we will move on.

The 2012 presidential election is shaping up to be very interesting. A lot of people on here love Ron Paul, as do I. I purposely left Ron Paul's name out of the conversation until now. The man's name alone brings up attacks from both sides and that's not what I want to start here. I will talk about some trends I have seen. The Mitt Romney threads are non existant. The Rick Santorum threads are typically bashing him about something he said and portrays him in a negative light. I do see some Santorum comments that are generally positive. This is fine, we are all entitled to our opinions. Newt Gingrich is also generally painted in a negative light but I rarely if ever see anything positive about him. Ron Paul. There are threads started about this guy daily. Regular people that have jobs, family's and a stake in this country start threads about this man daily!

First off, lets keep this civilized. Everyone has an opinion.

My questions, are the people that support anyone but Ron Paul experiencing some type of stockholm syndrome? Do they somehow believe that the government wouldn't throw us under the bus in a heartbeat if it served their purpose? Could this be a sign of the times, the blatant manipulation of an entire country?

Thanks for reading, I'm exciting to read your replies. Have a wonderful night!

Interesting thought, but it it's much more simple than that. Basic human psychology says that everybody wants to support a winner and nobody wants to support a loser. This is how it's been going in the media for quite a while but it is really obvious in this election cycle.

You consistently put out a message that candidate A is a winner (even though it may not be true-see Romney:Iowa) and candidate B is unelectable (even though Paul polls very well against Obama) and there you have it.

The larger portion of people who have been bred to just follow directions want to vote for who they perceive is the winner.

are the people that support anyone but Ron Paul experiencing some type of stockholm syndrome?

No, they are experiencing cognitive dissonance and are under the effects of mass hypnosis from the idiot box in their living rooms. Their brains won't allow true information in until their hypnotic states of mind are awoken.

Do they somehow believe that the government wouldn't throw us under the bus in a heartbeat if it served their purpose?

Yes they somehow believe in that nonsense.
Most common statement, "If it wasn't true, they wouldn't be able to say it on TV."

Could this be a sign of the times, the blatant manipulation of an entire country?

Nothing new really, this manipulation of the population has been going on for 1000s of years. The names and faces change, but the main theme always remains the same, suppression of the under classes so as to maintain the hold on power.

reply to post by coyotepoet

Originally posted by coyotepoet
Basic human psychology says that everybody wants to support a winner and nobody wants to support a loser.

This isn't entirely true. Take sports for an example. People get really worked up over the "under dog". Of course everyone has their own reasoning behind why they think whatever team is "better" so that point might be moot. I'll mill it over and come up with a better example.

reply to post by litterbaux


I think you might be headed in the right direction with that line of thinking. I especially think the people who have been told of all the wrong-doing and still aren't even a little upset about it are experiencing stockholm syndrome, or something like it.
I also wonder at times if people are experiencing the symptoms of grief, when they realize how things are. I f you take all the available info into account, our country is dying a slow death from a political cancer, and grief is an appropriate reaction.

reply to post by JibbyJedi

Originally posted by JibbyJedi

Nothing new really, this manipulation of the population has been going on for 1000s of years. The names and faces change, but the main theme always remains the same, suppression of the under classes so as to maintain the hold on power.

I am aware this is a common theme, look at the history of any empire. The problem I have is, when did the land of the free openly accept this. Why don't people see this as it is?

If we have any chance to save ourselves its now.

Thanks for your other comments, I think you are correct.

reply to post by georgiaboy


If it's grief then we are all in a world of hurt because denial is the first stage. I think you might be along the right line too.

Thanks for bringing this up

reply to post by litterbaux


Being nice.

reply to post by Domo1


Would you be willing to clarify? If you have something to add please add it.

Thanks!

reply to post by litterbaux


Clarify what? I think I would be most happy to.

ETA Sweety do you want a definition of SS? Perhaps you could utilize the DSM. OMG Ron Paul is PUUUUURRRRRRFEEEEECTTTTTT!!!! Anyone who disagrees is obviously totes brainwashed! LOL! OMG.

Sane voters don't need to go gloating on the internet or to rallies. They just vote.

Psycho radicals go to rallies and are the ones blasting the internet with VOTE FOR SO-AND-SO threads.

reply to post by litterbaux

This isn't entirely true. Take sports for an example. People get really worked up over the "under dog". Of course everyone has their own reasoning behind why they think whatever team is "better" so that point might be moot. I'll mill it over and come up with a better example.

Of course it isn't entirely true. That's why I specified. For the majority of people however, the sheeple if you will, the way media covers things favoring a particular person influences the sheeple to support that person as well.

reply to post by Domo1


You edited your post. You said, "why bother".

I can make educated guesses as to why you would say that. Either you said "why bother" to the fact I kind of promoted Ron Paul. This isn't entirely the case tho, I did my best to keep it fair.

Did you say why bother because the things in the OP might open some people's eyes up that they actually might be showing signs of Stockholm sydrome? To your credit, if that's what you meant by it, you're right. By bringing this to their attention I would turn into the bad guy which would negate the thread.

Just wanted some clarification because I'm interested in what you were thinking. Thanks!

reply to post by litterbaux


Oh hell. What did I say why bother in reference to? I want to un edit! Why bother doesnt sound like me buy I'll take you're word for it. Allow me a few minutes to walk a very grumpy puppy, and by all means quote me or sort of reconstruct. Damnt I wish I hadnt edited.

reply to post by litterbaux


So I guess you are trying to say that if someone supports someone other than Ron Paul, they suffer from some psychological disorder, they are dumb and believe everything they hear on TV, and they don't truly support their candidate for valid reasons, they are just brainwashed.

Is that about right?

It's just another more polite and trying to sound scientific way of saying "If you don't support Ron Paul, you are dumb".


Here's the deal...you support Ron Paul, and many others here on ATS do to, GREAT...I'm happy that you guys found someone you align with and think can help the country. I don't support him because there are other candidates and ideologies that I align with more than Ron Paul. Yes, there are things I agree with Ron Paul on, but I disagree with him more than I agree with him.

Now, does that make me a victim of stockholm syndrome? Does that make me too stupid to know what is "right"? Do I hate my country because I support someone who you don't personally agree with?

What would be your reaction to someone who said those things to you about supporting Ron Paul?


I just don't get why people can't understand that everyone has differnet views, beliefs, philosophies, morals and priorities. Mine aren't more "right" or "wrong" than yours are...yours aren't more "right" or "wrong" than mine are. There is no right or wrong in politics...just opinion and preference.


What is your end goal in a thread like this? All I see you trying to do is insult people that don't support Ron Paul.

The entire system is geared to destroy Ron Paul and the election is rigged the only way we will win is by a massive effort right now by everyone. Remind people that freedom caused electricity which spawned thousands of useful inventions and saved many lives. Were it not for freedom then we all would still be living in the dark ages.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by litterbaux

 

What is your end goal in a thread like this? All I see you trying to do is insult people that don't support Ron Paul.

Sorry if you took my post that way. I understand why you feel that way. I just don't see support for other candidates other than on the TV box. I know from previous experience you back Obama. That's cool, he seems like a cool guy. He honestly seems like your average Joe.

I think I need to make one thing blatently clear here tho. The president does not run the show. He has powers and he ultimately has to take the brunt of the blame when things don't go well but he doesnt run the show.

I think you and I would agree on one thing. Let Paul get the presidency so all of the Paul fan's can realize the president is just a puppet.

I don't want to argue with you about who is right or wrong. My OP was about the everyday person and why none of this seems to matter to them even tho they are losing their houses, jobs and well being.

I look forward to your response!

reply to post by litterbaux


I disagree about the President running the show. He can't do anything he wants...but he does direct the agenda.

He does this with his veto power...he can very clearly say "Focus on X issue...anything besides X that comes to my desk is getting a veto".


And no, I don't think we should just have Paul be president so his supporters will see that he is a failure...that doesn't make sense at all.

I think there is a defiantly an argument to be made for the Stolkhom Syndrome considering the last con job was hope and change but people will still vote for this guy again. Don't know about you but that hope & change schtick is old and was an EPIC failure. I guess everyone is feeling OK about the current administration as long as their still getting their FOOD STAMPS. What a joke.