Posts Tagged ‘Nazis’

The Psychology That Binds Trump Fans to His Racism

July 23, 2019

The title of this post is identical to the title of an article by Kathleen D. Vohs in the Outlook section of the 21 July 2019 issue of the Washington Post. Vohs is writing about Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance. This theory will be returned to later in this post, but the article reminded HM that psychological theories can account for Trump and his supporters.

There have been many posts about Kahneman’s Two System view of cognition. There was a previous post titled Kahneman and Identity Based Politics that provides a large portion of the explanation for Trump and his followers. In Nobel Lauerate Daniel Kahneman’s Two System View of Cognition, System 1, intuition, is our normal mode of processing and requires little or no attention. System 2, commonly referred to as thinking, requires our attention. One of the roles of System 2 is to monitor System 1. When we encounter something contradictory to what we believe, the brain sets off a distinct signal. It is easier to ignore this signal and to continue System 1 processing. To engage System 2 requires attentional resources to attempt to resolve the discrepancy and to seek further understanding.

Emotional processing is a System 1 process. System 1 is fast requiring minimal cognitive resources. Virtually all of Trump’s message is emotional and is processed on System 1. His MAGA message is one founded on hate and fear. Ironically, it seeks to turn the United States back to a time when it was much more racist and fearful of immigrants. There is nothing Great about what he wants to do to the United States.

Unfortunately, to rebuke these views requires System 2 processing. System 2 requires critical thinking, something which many find painful to do, and a recourse to facts and logic. Trump dislikes facts and tells his followers that he is the only source of truth. This is the hallmark of a demagogue, but his followers remain blind to his lies and contradictions.

Here is where Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance enters. Our minds do not like to confront dissonant ideas. So the tendency is to reduce the dissonance by shunning the truth. People refuse being called a racist, because racism is bad they, their families, and friends are certainly not racists.

Understand that we individuals cannot determine whether we are racists. We need to infer this from what we are called by others. “Strangers to Ourselves:  Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious”   by psychologist Timothy D. Wilson provides sound research showing that we need to understand ourselves from the reactions we receive from our fellow human beings. Unfortunately, many people remain unaware of this truth.

Perhaps the most prominent or well known example of this is Joe Biden. He has insulted people, but fails to apologize because he didn’t intend to insult them. There might be a problem with his brain, because this is not how it is supposed to function. Should you insult someone inadvertently, and HM has done this so many times that it is painful, apologize for insulting them and learn from this experience.
Many agree that Trump is not just a racist, but one of the world’s foremost racists. Unfortunately Trump’s base consists of Nazis and white supremacists. It is likely that Trump’s followers will deny this, but while they might not be Nazis, they are white supremacists. Indeed, Fox News has succeeded not from its fraudulent fair and balanced news, but by appealing to white supremacists. True they do not use the term, but the beliefs and the hatred of Obama stem from white supremacist beliefs.

Nazism and white supremacists are bad things, but people think of themselves as good people, not bad people. Similarly for their relatives and friends, they are good people, not bad people, so they cannot be white supremacists. But many, and it can be argued whether it’s a plurality or a majority, think that they are.

Trump voters express a variety of problems that are real and not racist. But still, how could they vote for Trump? Characterizing his behavior as boorish is being charitable. Clearly he is not presidential. He is an embarrassment for us regarding foreign nations. It is doubtful that he could pass a high school civics test. He embraces Putin and other totalitarian dictators. As was mentioned in a previous post, the paramount question is where did he get the money to make so many purchases since so many were in cash. He had been bankrupt and no respectable bank would lend him money. Trump’s son said that he got the money from Russia. So why won’t Trump release his financial data? The obvious reason is that he owes Putin and that Putin effectively owns him. All this was apparent before the election. Republicans recognized his faults and denounced him. But once he was elected, and many Healthymemory posts have outlined how Russia supported him, Republicans embraced him. It is clear that what they want is power, and the capability of profiting remuneratively from that power.

Expect Republicans to keep defending Trump. The Mueller report is not needed to impeach Trump. His behavior, which has worsened since he became President, is sufficient. Plus, how can the United States afford a president who is indebted to a hostile foreign power? Nevertheless, Republicans will ignore the facts and continue with the false narrative being advanced that Trump is the victim. This 1984 scenario is the only one that will save Trump.

Trump’s false claims about being the victim are clearly motivated out of desperation and are wrong, but to realize this it takes System 2 Processing, which requires mental effort and might be painful, so clearly Trump is a victim. Some people are for Trump for religious reasons, but religions that promote Trump have a political agenda. And for true Christians, they might want to switch to a Christian sect that is more in accordance with Christ’s teachings.

There is another dimension to consider, and that dimension is truly enormous. That is the social dimension. Although psychology provides an understanding of Trump’s support, unfortunately it provides little in the way of knowledge for changing people’s minds once they are firmly set. Usually this takes significant time. Abandoning Trump would likely produce frictions within families and among friends. So a thinking person needs to proceed carefully. One option would be to remain silent, but to use the ballot box to record one’s true and well reasoned opinions.

Reactive and Proactive Aggression

May 11, 2019

A distinction between these two types of aggression is made in a book by Richard Wrangham titled “The Goodness Paradox: The Strange Relationship Between Virtue and Violence in Human Evolution.” This is a recent, 2019, publication. For most of his career Wrangham has been intrigued by the relation between virtue and violence. Wrangham worked with Jane Goodall when she discovered war breaking out between two groups of chimpanzees in which they were killing, trying to destroy each other.

Wrangham defines reactive aggression as aggression that is fairly spontaneous in which something happens and the victim of the aggression quickly responds. In contrast, proactive violence is violence that is planned in advance for retribution or for some type of gain. Many other species are characterized by reactive violence. Something happens to one individual and that individual quickly responds with some sort of reciprocal violence.

Wrangham argues that the emergence of civilization was critically dependent upon a reduction in reactive violence. Although Wrangham does not seem to mention the difference between physical and nonphysical reactive violence, human language does provide the means of nonphysical violence and, fortunately, daily human violence tends to be of the verbal type.

Proactive violence is a matter of planning a violent response. So revenge killings, battles, and pogroms and wars are examples of proactive violence. Some non-human species engage in proactive violence, but lack the technology that humans have. While it is a reduction and changes in types of reactive violence by the human species that assisted in their success, it is proactive violence that brings out the worst in humans and presents a potential existential risk.

The holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis is an example of one of the worst types of proactive violence. The detailed planning entailed in this holocaust required the sophisticated planning only we humans can perform. A nuclear holocaust could potentially eliminate our species. Such a holocaust requires a high degree of scientific and engineering abilities as well as a lack of emotional control that allows true reasoning being overcome to achieve a pyrrhic victory.

Amplifying the Worst Social Behavior

April 4, 2019

This is the eighth post based on an important book by Roger McNamee titled “Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe.” Roger writes, “The competition for attention across the media and technology spectrum rewards the worst social behavior. Extreme views attract more attention, so platforms recommend them. News Feeds with filter bubbles do better at holding attention than News Feeds that don’t have them. If the worst thing that happened with filter bubbles was that they reinforced preexisting beliefs, they would be no worse than many other things in society. Unfortunately, people in a filter bubble become increasingly tribal, isolated, and extreme. They seek out people and ideas that make them comfortable.”

Roger continues, “Social media has enabled personal views that had previously been kept in check by social pressure—white nationalism is an example- to find an outlet.” This leads one to ask the question whether Trump would have been elected via the Electoral College if it weren’t for social media. Trump’s base consists of Nazis and white supremacists and constitutes more than a third of the citizens. Prior to the election, HM would never have believed that this was the case. Now he believes and is close to being clinically depressed.

Continuing on, “Before the platforms arrived, extreme views were often moderated because it was hard for adherents to find one another. Expressing extreme views in the real world can lead to social stigma, which also keeps them in check. By enabling anonymity and/or private Groups, the platforms removed the stigma, enabling like-minded people, including extremists, to find one another, communicate, and, eventually, to lose the fear of social stigma.”

Once a person identifies with an extreme position on an internet platform, that person will be subject to both filter bubbles and human nature. There are two types of bubbles. Filter bubbles are imposed by others, whereas a preference bubble is a choice, although the user might be unaware of this choice. By definition, a preference bubble takes users to a bad place, and they may not even be conscious of the change. Both filter bubbles and preference bubbles increase time on site, which is a driver of revenue. Roger notes that in a preference bubble, users create an alternative reality, built around values shared with a tribe, which can focus on politics, religion, or something else. “They stop interacting with people with whom they disagree, reinforcing the power of the bubble. They go to war against any threat to their bubble, which for some users means going to war against democracy and legal norms, They disregard expertise in favor of voices from their tribe. They refuse to accept uncomfortable facts, even ones that are incontrovertible. This is how a large minority of Americans abandoned newspapers in favor of talk radio and websites that peddle conspiracy theories. Filter bubbles and preference bubbles undermine democracy by eliminating the last vestiges of common ground among a huge percentage of Americans. The tribe is all that matters, and anything that advances the tribe is legitimate. You see this effect today among people whose embrace of Donald Trump has required them to abandon beliefs they held deeply only a few years earlier. Once again, this is a problem that internet platforms did not invent. Existing issues in society created a business opportunity that platforms exploited. They created a feedback loop that reinforces and amplifies ideas with a speed and at a scale that are unprecedented.”

Clint Watts in his book, “Messing with the Enemy” makes the case that in a preference bubble, facts and expertise can be the core of a hostile system, an enemy that must be defeated. “Whoever gets the most likes is in charge; whoever gets the most shares is an expert. Preference bubbles, once they’ve destroyed the core, seek to use their preference to create a core more to their liking, specially selecting information, sources, and experts that support their alternative reality rather than the real physical world.” Roger writes, “The shared values that form the foundation of our democracy proved to be powerless against the preference bubbles that have evolved over the past decade. Facebook does not create preference bubbles, but it is the ideal incubator for them. The algorithms that users who like one piece of disinformation will be fed more disinformation. Fed enough disinformation, users will eventually wind up first in a filter bubble and then in a preference bubble. if you are a bad actor and you want to manipulate people in a preference bubble, all you have to do is infiltrate the tribe, deploy the appropriate dog whistles, and you are good to go. That is what the Russians did in 2016 and what many are doing now.

Some Thoughts About Donald Trump

March 14, 2019

If you’ve read the preceding posts about emotional intelligence based on Daniel Goleman’s book, you’ve already read some hints that Trump’s behavior might be governed in some part by deficiencies in his brain. Trump does not behave like a president, and he is an embarrassment to the United States. When HM and his wife go on a cruise, they try to pass as Canadians. Trump behaves like a schoolyard bully. He uses degrading nicknames and fires back at whatever he regards as an insult or a failure to pay him proper respect. He does not speak the truth because he lives in his own reality that determines what he regards, at the moment, as the truth. He has no regard for facts, because what is true already exists in his mind. He disregards science and ignores the best intelligence system in the world.

If Trump’s actions are, at least in part, due to deficiencies in his brain, then he warrants sympathy, or maybe even pity. Unfortunately, he also warrants fear for a variety of reasons. Foremost is his control over nuclear weapons. He also is destroying international relations. He has already caused an enormous deficit and knowledgeable economists predict economic failures due to his policies.

Although Trump might warrant sympathy, the same cannot be said of the Republican Party, where the Republican Congress has ignored their constitutional responsibility to keep watch on the President. Instead, they have protected him and lied about the effectiveness of his policies. All genuine Republicans have left the party. Those who remain are either members of Trump’s base, viz., Nazis or White Supremacists, or want to maintain positions of power so they can enrich themselves.

It has been noted that Trump is likely to try to stay in power even if he loses the next election. He constitutes a genuine threat to the rule of law and our democracy.

The Republican Party died, a causality of the stupidity pandemic. What a shame. The loss of the GOP. The loss of the party of Lincoln.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Fascism

October 28, 2018

This post is based on Timothy Snyder’s book, “The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America.” When the Soviet Union existed it was a Communist nation and was regarded as being on the extreme liberal left. Under Putin, Russia has become a Fascist nation on the extreme right. So it is ironic that the Republican Party that once was strongly anti-communist, has nominated a presidential candidate who was chosen by Putin as the best person to lead the United States. Now this presidential candidate, who was clearly aided by Russia in his campaign, is joined in a mutual admiration union with Putin. And many Republicans are trying to frustrate, if not end, the investigation into Trump and Russia. This is an age of toxic irony.

Fascism is a troubling phenomenon. Germany and Italy were Fascist countries the allies fought and defeated during WW2. Fascism is a strongly authoritarian ideology. As a result of the Nazis an F (for Fascism) Scale was developed, that essentially measured the strength of an authoritarian personality. Two characteristics of Fascism are anti-semitism and a hatred of homosexuality. HM has difficulty understanding the basis of anti-semitism. The justifications for it are clearly fabricated done just to provide the basis for hatred. Actually, HM is grateful to Jews for their many contributions to the arts, science, and humor, just to mention a few. However, HM does think he understands, at least partly, the basis for the hatred of homosexuals. This hatred is found in both the religious right and Fascists. Being a cynical psychologist, who is not a clinician, HM suspects that latent homosexuality is the basis for most of this hatred. Unknowingly, they fear their latent homosexuality and project this on others. The stronger the fear, the greater the hatred. This conjecture occurs to HM whenever he sees Putin without his shirt.

Readers are encouraged to read Snyder’s “The Road to Unfreedom: Russian, Europe, and America. It outlines Putin’s goals to break up Europe into a Russian state Europa. Brexit was a successful effort to this end. He is encouraging right wing parties in the Europe and these parties are gaining increasing strength. Similarly, he is trying to break up the United States into vassal states that will support Russia. He does this by sowing dissension in these countries by various means, but primarily by social media.

Putin was extremely upset when the Ukraine, that was part of the Soviet Union, wanted to join the European Union. He invaded militarily the eastern part of the Ukraine that was largely Russian. However, the remainder of the Ukraine resisted his military efforts so that roughly two-thirds of the Ukraine remained free. During this time HM was able to view RT and saw the splendid propaganda Russian produced. It is so slick that it appears to be news, although the central message was propaganda. At the point of this writing, the situation remains a stalemate. So it appears that Putin can be contained, but Putin’s motives and means must clearly be recognized. All of this is described in Snyder’s book as well as Putin’s other efforts in Europe.

Even Putin’s efforts in the United States can only be touched on in the future posts. Much more of the text of “The Road to Unfreedom: will be copied directly. These portions will be indicated in quotes. Trying to paraphrase would only dilute the message Snyder is excellently communicating.

Why Do People Support Trump?

August 23, 2018

The immediately preceding post, “Science Explains the World of Manafort and Gates,” provides part of an answer to this question to which we shall return later. But many wonder how people can support someone who conducts himself as a thug, and makes playground insults and nicknames. Such behavior is not acceptable for an adult, much less the President of the United States.

First of all, there is Trump’s base, which consists of nazis and white supremacists. Fortunately this base is a minority, although a disturbingly large minority. It is difficult to understand why Republicans are supporting Trump, as Trump is no Republican in many ways. Perhaps the most conspicuous difference is his friendly relationship with Putin, which became quite embarrassing at Helsinki. But Trump has expressed his wish that we become allied with the Russians. Nothing could be more unRepublican than this.

But the article about the world of Manafort and Gates made this apparently contradictory behavior understandable. These Republicans are in politics for power and financial gain, which are the same reasons for Trump, although for Trump the need for popularity and marketing his brand should be added. True Republicans have left the party. The one exception that comes to mind is John McCain, but he is severely ill with a brain tumor. Were he well, if he did not leave the party, he would have fought Trump regarding every unRepublican action he took.

The ultimate goal is to create a kleptocracy, where the rich rule. This goal is being pursued by the rich by providing financial support to venues which provide support to Trump like Fox. It does not appear that Trump supporters have any interest in saving democracy, otherwise they would not be kicking back on the Mueller probe. Mueller is an outstanding American, who fought bravely in the Viet Nam war (while Trump found doctors that provided the basis for his draft deferment). Mueller could easily have avoided combat but he fought as a platoon commander, perhaps the most dangerous job in a war. Then he devoted his life to justice working in both the Justice Department and the FBI. And he is very efficiently conducting the probe of Russian involvement. It is much further along than other investigations that have taken place.

There are at least two groups that one could argue are not motivated by greed, but perhaps power. One is the military, who might be seduced by Trump’s budget. However, they should realize that under the continued leadership of Trump they might be participating in war games in which the United States and Russia were allies. But perhaps that would not matter. As long as they get to play soldier, they might not have any ideological commitment.

The second group are some evangelicals. They are against abortion because they believe that it kills babies, and that Trump will nominate Supreme Court justices that are against abortion. Readers should be aware that not all Christians, not even all Evangelicals support their view. Here is an alternative view.

Biological life is not important. Any notion of biological life being required for immortal life is a sham. Biological life is temporal and ends. Here is where the concept of a soul enters. Souls exist in another dimension and are immortal. Remember the child’s prayer:

Now I lay be down to sleep
I pray the lord my soul to keep
If I should die before I wake
I pray the Lord my soul to take

It is the soul that is immortal.

With the exception of some Trump supporters, most American were outraged about children being torn from their parents while trying to immigrate. There were many reports about the serious damage that was being done to these children. What many know, and what healthy memory blog readers should know, is that similar effects can be found with unloving mothers and mothers who do not want their children (see the healthy memory blog post “Memories from Infancy and Early Childhood”).

Under these circumstances, an abortion could be recommended. Souls are no lost. God is merciful. So the goal should not be Pro-life, but Pro-quality life.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Damage Done by Forcibly Separating Children from Parents

June 19, 2018

Please excuse this interruption in the series of the posts on “The Upside of Stress” (between the 11th and 10th Posts), but current events justify this interruption. There have been a number of healthy memory posts stressing the importance of mothers loving their children and the damage done by indifferent mothers. The notion advanced by HM is that that most of the negative incidents typically reported in the news probably are the result of children who lacked a loving mother. The forceful separation of children that is now occurring at our current borders is even worse. This current post is based primarily on an article by William Wan in the 19 June 2018 issue of the Washington Post titled “When children are forcibly separated from parents, ‘‘The effect is catastrophic.’”

Here is what happens inside children when they are forcibly separated from their parents. Their heart rate goes up. Their body releases a flood of stress hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline. These stress hormones can start killing off dendrites, which are the little branches in brain cells that transmit messages. Eventually this stress can start killing off neurons and, especially in young children, wreaking dramatic and long-term damage, both psychological and to the physical structure to the brain.

A pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School said, “The effect is catastrophic, There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science they would never do this.”

This is why pediatricians, psychologists, other health experts, as well as other caring human beings, have been led to vehemently oppose the Trump administration’s new border crossing policy, which has separated more than 2,000 immigrant children from their parents in recent weeks.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, and the American Psychiatric Association have all issued statements representing more than 250,000 doctors in the United States against this new, intolerable policy. Nearly 7,700 mental health professionals and 142 organizations have also signed a petition urging Trump to end the policy. The petition reads, “To pretend that separated children do not grow up with the shrapnel of this traumatic experience embedded in their minds is to disregard everything we know about child development, the brain, and trauma,” the petition reads.

Nelson has studied the neurological damage from child-parent separation, work which he has said has reduced him to tears. In 2000 the Romanian government invited Nelson and a team of researchers into its state orphanages to advise them on a humanitarian crisis created by dictator Nicolae Ceausescu’s policies.

At these orphanages, Nelson said, “we saw kids rocking uncontrollably and hitting themselves, hitting their heads against walls. They had to make up a rule as researchers that they would never cry in front of children. As the children grew older Nelson and his colleagues began finding disturbing differences in their brains. Those separated from their parents at a young age had much less white matter, which is largely made up of fibers that transmit information throughout the brain, as well as much less gray matter, which contains the brain-cell bodies that process information and solve problems. The activity in the children’s brains was much lower than expected. Nelson said, “it’s as though here was a dimmer than had reduced them from a 100-watt bulb to 30 watts.”

The children, who had been separated from their parents in their first two years of life, scored significantly lower on IQ tests later in life. Their fight-or-flight response system appeared permanently broken. Stressful situations that would usually prompt physiological responses in other people, increased heart rate, sweaty palms, would provoke nothing in the children.

What alarmed the researchers most was the duration of the damage. Unlike other parts of the body, most cells in the brain cannot renew or repair themselves.

“The reason child-parent separation has such devastating effects is because it attacks one of the most fundamental and critical bonds in human biology.

From the time they are born, children emotionally attach to their caregiver and vice versa, said Lisa Fortuna, medical director for child and adolescent psychiatry at Boston Medical Center. Skin-to-skin contact for newborns, for example, is critical to their development, research shows. ‘Our bodies secrete hormones like oxytocin on contact that reinforces the bond, to help us attach and connect,’ Fortuna said.

A child’s sense of what safety means depends on that relationship. And, without it, the parts of the brain that deal with attachment and fear, the amygdala and hippocampus, develop differently. The reason such children often develop PTSD later in life is that these neurons start firing irregularly. ‘The part of their brain that sorts things into safe or dangerous doesn’t work like it’s supposed to. Things that are not threatening, seem threatening.’

Research on Aboriginal children in Australia who were removed from their families also showed long-lasting effects. They were nearly twice as likely to be arrested or criminally charged as adults, 60% more likely to have alcohol abuse problems and more than twice as likely to struggle with gambling.

In China, where 1 in 5 children live in villages without their parents, who migrate for work, studies have shown that those ‘left behind’ children have markedly higher rates of anxiety and depression later in life.

Other studies have shown separation leading to increased aggression, withdrawal and cognitive difficulties.

Luis H. Mayas, a psychiatry professor at the University of Texas said “if you take the moral, spiritual, even political aspect out of it, from a strictly medical and scientific point of view what we as a country are doing to these children at the border is unconscionable . The harm our government is now causing will take a lifetime to undo.’”

The justification provided by several in the Trump administration was that they were enforcing the law. This is reminiscent of Nazis running the concentration camps killing jews claiming that they were only following orders.

Remember that at Charlottesville Trump was given several opportunities to denounce the nazi demonstrators. HIs lack of response was understandable when one considers that nazis are part of Trump’s base.

The Group

May 15, 2016

The sixth cryptomind discussed in “The Mind Club” is “The Group.”   The first question the authors raise is whether groups have a mind.  The mind is intimately related to brains, and groups certainly do not have brains.  Then they note that brains themselves are merely groups of neurons, which themselves are merely groups of neurons.  The authors raise the idea that the group mind might be created by emergence.  So individuals in a group might be unaware of the mind entity just as individuals neurons are unaware of a group mind.  Although individuals in a group might be unaware of an entity such as the group mind, they are aware of many of the beliefs of the other members in the group.

A question that can be difficult is how to define a group.  The authors choose to use Gestalt psychology’s five principles of groupiness:  proximity, similarity, closure, continuation, and common fate.  Combining these principles yields a measure of groupies  that is typically given the more scientific name of “entitivity”—how much something is an entity.

Research suggests that anyone seems dumber in a group to include teenagers, college students, and even the elderly.  Note that this list should not be considered exhaustive.  Psychologists Adam Waltz and Liane Young investigated this notion with the hypothesis that the strength of this effect hinged upon the entitivity of the group, the less mind that individual members should be perceived to possess.  To test this hypothesis, participants rated the minds of individuals  belonging to low-entitivity group like Facebook  users or golf players and high-entitivity groups like the U.S. Martine Corps or the New York Yankees.  It  is unclear how these researchers defined this classification.  It appears that they did an ad hoc definition.

The finding was that the more entitlve group members were stripped of their individual minds.  Unfortunately, this result can be easily misinterpreted.  It is not saying that the individuals of these groups did not have individual minds, but rather that the perception of others were that they did not have individual minds.  One can argue that mission-oriented entities such as the Marine Corps and the Yankees need high entitivity as compared against other groups.

There are two reasons for reporting this study.  One is that psychologists are capable of conducting poorly conceived, executed, and reported research.  The second reason is that research in this area is fairly loose.

This is unfortunate as an understanding of groups is important.  There are dangerous groups such as the Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan.  A particularly unfortunate characteristics is that they make the individual anonymous and more likely to commit harmful, destructive, and discriminatory acts.

Conspiracy theories are a product of the group mind and provide a depressing view of the stupidity in our species.
Unfortunately, the author used histograms to report the results I want to present.  Had they used a table rather than histograms to report these data I could provide accurate numbers rather than having to glance over to the ordinate and try to infer the value.  This is due to the misconception that graphical presentations are preferable to numerical presentations.  The primary consideration for the presentation of results concerns the accuracy and speed by which the information can be interpreted. So I am going to do the best I can given the shortcomings of the presentation format chosen by the authors.

Moon landing hoax                            5%
CIA introduced crack cocaine        12%
Vaccines and autism                       20%
UFO Crash Coverup                        21%
New World Order                            25%
Global Warming Hoax                   35%
JFK Conspiracy                               50%

These results make one question the accuracy of naming our species Homo Sapiens,

The Enemy

May 13, 2016

The fourth cryptomind discussed in “The Mind Club” is the Enemy.  The most conspicuous example of the enemy is in warfare when there is an explicit enemy to be fought.  Enemies are usually demonized.   However, there are more subtle examples of the enemy.  When cheap labor was needed during the colonization of North American, Africans were regarded as being sub-human.  Consequently, they could be captured sold into slavery and treated as farm animals. Frequently, they were treated worse than farm animals.  Then, there were the native americans who already occupied North America.  They were the unfortunate occupants of the land these Europeans wanted.  Consequently, they were dehumanized and regarded as the enemy.

How could the holocaust happen?  Through an extensive and elaborate propaganda program conducted by the Nazis, Jews were dehumanized.  There were side benefits of this dehumanization.  Jewish property was confiscated and the Jews provided a cheap source of labor.  However, Nazi ideology required that Jews be exterminated.  This extermination was so important to the Nazis that when they were losing the war, they devoted sources needed to fund the war effort to the extermination of the Jews instead.

Actually it is easier to understand what the Nazis did that what the remainder of the free world did not, with a few notable exceptions, do.  And that was to offer refuge to the refugees.  While Jews were not explicitly the enemy, they still had a lower status that allowed them to be ignored.

The response to the holocaust was “Never Again.”  But it has occurred “again” and several times already, and it will continue to occur.

Research has indicated that it is remarkably easy to create enemy groups.  The authors state that three elements are required to form these enemy groups.  The first is the opportunity for kindness or cruelth, situations in which people can interact either nicely or nastily.  The second element is reciprocity.  Reciprocity is when you are friendly to people who treat you nicely and unfriendly to people who treat you nastily.  Healthy memory feels compelled to state that while these elements might be required in research designed to study artificially created enemy groups, this certainly was not true of the Jews in Germany.  Utilitarian need is more likely the requirement in the real world.  The third element is transitivity.  Transitivity means sharing your group’s opinion of others—liking the group’s friends and disliking the group’s enemies.

Research has indicated how easy it is to form us versus them groups.  To do this, social psychologists have created the “minimal-groups paradigm.”  In one experiment participants were shown hundreds of dots and asked them to guess the number.   The researchers knew the exact average of the number of dots and divided the participants into two groups, “Underestimators” and Overestimators.”  People in each group were kind to those in their group, but cruel to people in the other group.

A creative third-grade teacher, Mrs. Jane Elliot, in rural Iowa as a result of the assassination of the Rev Martin Luther King, Jr., wanted her students to learn firsthand about the pernicious effects of prejudice.  She made a new racial distinction proclaiming that children with brown eyes were inferior to children with blue eyes.  In no time the blue-eye children grew smug and powerful and treated their brown-eye classmates with condescension and cruelty, seeing them as less than human.

The social psychologist Muzafer Sherif conducted the classic “Robbers Cave” experiment at a boys’ summer camp.  The camp had two cluster of cabins dividd by a small forest, and boys randomly assigned to one side, “the Eagles,” or the other, “the Rattlers.”  In short order the boys had bonded strongly with their own groups and held nothing but contempt toward the other group., in spite of them all being fundamentally the same.  The authors note that in real life boys no older than those in this Robber’s Cave Study are told that they are a Crip( blue) or a Blood (red) and are expected to show unwavering allegiance to their brothers and ruthless cruelty to their rivals.  In these gangs handguns are used to claim and hold drug-distribution territory.

Another group that is technically not the enemy, but which is regarded as being unworthy are the homeless.  These people are regarded as psychotic, substance abusers, or bums, and not worthy of our consideration.  This provides a means of avoiding the problem rather than feeling empathy towards these people and working to solve the problem.

Can anything be done about this problem?  One approach is to get people in the different groups to work together to solve a problem  During wartime in the military it has been found that different racial groups need to depend upon each other in combat.  Consequently, they bond and there are few interracial problems.  There was a very good documentary on this topic during the Viet Nam war titled “same mud, same blood.”
Racial problems are more likely in support units who are more likely fighting boredom than the enemy.

One group doing yeoman’s work to address this issue is the Southern Poverty Law Centers https://www.splcenter.org/what-we-do  .In addition to programs on teaching tolerance they have worked with individual members of hate groups to remove the source of their hate.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.