Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Indoctrinated

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Welcome! Wasn't sure if this fit better into ATS Skunkworks or The Gray Area, but I figured WTH. ATS Skunkworks has a certain appeal and it'll do until a Mod has a look see.


indoctrinate
ɪnˈdɒktrɪneɪt/Submit
verb
past tense: indoctrinated; past participle: indoctrinated
1.
teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
"broadcasting was a vehicle for indoctrinating the masses"
synonyms: brainwash, propagandize, proselytize, inculcate, re-educate, persuade, convince, condition, discipline, mould; More
archaic
teach or instruct (someone).
"he indoctrinated them in systematic theology"


This term's heyday was in a period of personal self-development for me. The governments of the world were going into secrecy overdrive. People couldn't yet be called sheople ... more like little lambs on their way to the feeding trough.

Everyone ... to include every member of the general readership of ATS ... has to some extent been indoctrinated. It starts when you pick a side ... so beware ... that first step can be a doozy. In life, we find ourselves constantly faced with choices. You are going to pick sides so make sure you do it from an educated perspective. Be careful when forming an opinion and don't do it in haste. Admitting we've erred is much more difficult than taking a patient approach in forming opinions.

I want to talk about a much broader, yet narrower, scope though. I want to cover areas of endeavor as opposed to simple opinion. The military, police, journalism, education, etc. (career fields) are deserving of a critical review in this thread. "Why" is the question. Why is the military a huge clique? Why is the thin blue line so protective of itself? Why has the 'art' of journalism become so opinion driven? Why have conservative values been driven out of the institutions of higher learning?

I'm going to leave off here and let this thread run rather than turning it into a rant. What do you folks think? What have your experiences been?
edit on 10112013 by Snarl because: Title




posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   
I think journalism has become so opinion based because you can't pin opinions on anyone except the person, and then that opinion can't be held against them because they 'have the right' to their opinion. However, in the cult of personality, one's opinion can easily become another's opinion, should they choose to adopt it. Indoctrination happens more easily through opinions, because if they're presented in such a way, to the right people, by the right people, then they are more apt to be trusted, and thus followed.

I think the real problem with opinion oriented journalism is that it inevitably finds new and creative ways to further divide people into smaller subsets, based on opinions which represent limitless possibilities, and not facts, which, by process of elimination bring one closer to the truth.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 


You might want to look up socialization (which is necessary to be able to function in a society).

You might want to look into Edward Bernays of 'Public Relations' fame.

The critical difference between socialization/education and propaganda/education is one of degree. Using your cited definition that demarcation would be the teaching of critical thinking skills.

To paraphase the Buddha: "Don't believe anything you hear, even from me unless it agrees with your common sense"

The above is a simple example of education.

Blind faith, "Just believe what I tell you" is a simple example of propoganda.

A bit of Bernays:

www.historyisaweapon.com...


CHAPTER I
ORGANIZING CHAOS

THE conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.
Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 03:10 AM
link   

FyreByrd

Blind faith, "Just believe what I tell you" is a simple example of propoganda.


People are trained to simply soak in broadcasts like a sponge, and to believe that there are no reasons or means by which they could have knowledge of important, life-impacting events, laws, and policies. The have to work a 9 hour workday, commute another hour and a half to two hours or more, and then they've got 4 hours left of the day if they want to get 8 hours sleep.

This is why our kids are jerks, and this is why the country is in this untenable situation. The general concept of civic duty and function as a citizen has been so convoluted and bureaucratized, than only lawyers can now fulfil civic functions.

When the Holy Roman Catholic Church wanted to maintain power, they severely limited the masses' access to education, particularly reading, so that bull# flags wouldn't be raised against their leaders when people figured out what the bible really says. People know how to read today, but for the most part don't do it, unless it is more gratuitous 'entertainment' reading, or tabloid periodicals. When it comes to learning about things that really affect our lives, like what lawmakers do on the hill, either for us or against us, there is an intellectual roadblock placed in the way.

Ironically, civilians don't take oaths to defend the constitution, and they are, and those who do take oaths to defend the constitution are destroying it. This is a good sign.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 

I agree with you that it may not have been fair attempting to limit the scope of how our will and behavior is shaped by life itself. Figured it would be a better idea at tackling small and progressing my way through the game. Your point is well made.

What are your thoughts specific to how a normally socialized person is changed by set and setting? Do you have a personal experience which shows a radical change in what you learned in your hometown contrasted with how you were expected to behave say ... in uniform?



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Mon1k3r
 

I thought a lot about your post before hitting reply. Religious indoctrination was a major oversight on my part. At first it seemed overly broad, but there are definitive layers which should be duly addressed here. Sorry I can only give you one star for your contribution.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Mon1k3r

FyreByrd

Blind faith, "Just believe what I tell you" is a simple example of propoganda.


People are trained to simply soak in broadcasts like a sponge, and to believe that there are no reasons or means by which they could have knowledge of important, life-impacting events, laws, and policies. The have to work a 9 hour workday, commute another hour and a half to two hours or more, and then they've got 4 hours left of the day if they want to get 8 hours sleep.

This is why our kids are jerks, and this is why the country is in this untenable situation. The general concept of civic duty and function as a citizen has been so convoluted and bureaucratized, than only lawyers can now fulfil civic functions.

When the Holy Roman Catholic Church wanted to maintain power, they severely limited the masses' access to education, particularly reading, so that bull# flags wouldn't be raised against their leaders when people figured out what the bible really says. People know how to read today, but for the most part don't do it, unless it is more gratuitous 'entertainment' reading, or tabloid periodicals. When it comes to learning about things that really affect our lives, like what lawmakers do on the hill, either for us or against us, there is an intellectual roadblock placed in the way.

Ironically, civilians don't take oaths to defend the constitution, and they are, and those who do take oaths to defend the constitution are destroying it. This is a good sign.


I don't disagree with you but I know that it isn't true in all cases.

Not all young people are jerks. Many are (as are many adults). You can educate yourself and having role models of critical thinking is vital and sorely limitied in many cases. Not all churchs are anti-intellectual.

My personal single evil of modern world is the SCREEN. Media and Computers on a Flat Screen. While both can be of value and educational, mostly they are mind-killers. Person killers.

I refer you to "Teaching our Kids to Kill" (and not think, IMO) by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.

www.killology.com...


A Case Study: Paducah, Kentucky
Michael Carneal, the 14-year-old killer in the Paducah, Kentucky school shootings, had never fired a real pistol in his life. He stole a .22 pistol, fired a few practice shots, and took it to school. He fired eight shots at a high school prayer group, hitting eight kids, five of them head shots and the other three upper torso (Grossman & DeGaetana, 1999).

I train numerous elite military and law enforcement organizations around the world. When I tell them of this achievement they are stunned. Nowhere in the annals of military or law enforcement history can we find an equivalent "achievement."

Where does a 14-year-old boy who never fired a gun before get the skill and the will to kill? Video games and media violence.


This was written in 2000.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 




I want to talk about a much broader, yet narrower, scope though. I want to cover areas of endeavor as opposed to simple opinion. The military, police, journalism, education, etc. (career fields) are deserving of a critical review in this thread. "Why" is the question. Why is the military a huge clique? Why is the thin blue line so protective of itself? Why has the 'art' of journalism become so opinion driven? Why have conservative values been driven out of the institutions of higher learning?


Wow Snarl. Even your narrower scope cuts a wide swath of territory. All good though and deserving of critical review.

Am on the run right now but I'll take a quick stab at opinion driven journalism. There's a ton that can be said about this but I'll start here.

Real facts are in short supply. Reasoned analysis of those facts is in even shorter supply. Knowledge and thus understanding of those facts?


So what we're left with is people being paid to find and/or make up their own facts, apply their own spin and opinion to those "facts" based on their own biases and beliefs and/or what will get them the best "ratings", all being spoon-fed to a predefined audience - i.e. preaching to whatever particular choir is paying their bills at the moment.

Bottom line, if you really want to know who or what's behind this opinion-based journalism, do what has worked well for many others in the past - follow the money. Because money is the "why" at the journalism level. As you follow the money further up the chain the reason behind the "why" may change...

Those are my thoughts. Feel free to let the spitballs fly...
edit on 11/10/2013 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Mon1k3r
I think journalism has become so opinion based because you can't pin opinions on anyone except the person, and then that opinion can't be held against them because they 'have the right' to their opinion. However, in the cult of personality, one's opinion can easily become another's opinion, should they choose to adopt it. Indoctrination happens more easily through opinions, because if they're presented in such a way, to the right people, by the right people, then they are more apt to be trusted, and thus followed.

I think the real problem with opinion oriented journalism is that it inevitably finds new and creative ways to further divide people into smaller subsets, based on opinions which represent limitless possibilities, and not facts, which, by process of elimination bring one closer to the truth.


Here's the thing with opinion journalism - it could never help but be anything else, and this is due to the richness of our language and the way our journalistic writing/reporting is structured. Let me explain.

For starters, they use the inverted pyramid style of reportage. You report on the who, what, when, where, how of a story to cover all the important/basic facts, but the reporter assigns a ranking to those facts based on which of those facts he/she feels is most important to the overall understanding of the story. Depending on which one is chosen, it can affect the reader's understanding of the story a lot especially in today's attention-span challenged age where people are likely to only read or listen to the beginning of a story where they might only absorb the most important fact or facts and miss other things the reporter deems less relevant meaning they are not getting the full story. This is one way bias slides in as different reporters will find different facts more or less important based on personal bias and thus they shape how their viewers/readers will see these stories, too.

Additionally, news rooms also pick and choose stories based on which ones they feel will be important to their readership/viewership. The basic determinants are those things they feel are universally important (national/international or with local importance, for example). If they feel that there is not enough of either of those factors, they will either ignore a story or bury it on the bottom of a section most everyone ignores. So, this is another avenue to slide news they want to ignore under the rug as it were.

The most subtle level of bias in the news lies in the richness of the language. English is very rich with lots of different possible word choices to describe many basic concepts. Shack and mansion are both synonyms for a house, and yet the mental image you likely conjured for all three words was probably very different. In Spanish by contrast, all three words would be translated into "casa" with differing adjective phrases attached to it. A reporter can conjure a positive or negative feeling in a story just be using words that have positive or negative connotations without even really thinking about it or being aware of it. And that feeling can be translated to their readers/viewers. It's as simple as word choice.





new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join