I don't read many actual books anymore and when I do it is usually non-fiction. However, I've just read a book that I completely love and am glad I had the time to carry with me, thumb through at random, and turn the pages (as opposed to the reader/Ipad experience).
Professor Richard Wiseman's book "Paranormality" is a wonderful exploration of the various quirks of the human mind that cause us to see ghosts, believe in strange phenomenon, and allow ourselves to conned. Evolutionary psychology explains a great deal. For example, we see patterns which are not there because our brains are constantly looking for patterns. Spotting a pattern in time (a lurking predator for example) carries with it evolutionary rewards. Spotting a pattern and then discovering there is nothing (like a stump resembling a crouching lion) carries no evolutionary penalty. You still get to live and mate and pass along your DNA.
Not spotting a pattern carries a very severe evolutionary penalty, you don't get to live and pass on your DNA. You become a predator's lunch
Not spotting a pattern carries a very severe evolutionary penalty, you don't get to live and pass on your DNA. You become a predator's lunch
The book is filled with examples of this and how the way the functioning of the brain can cause us to see non-existent patterns.
The book is full of little instances like this which explain how and why our grey matter functions and the manner in which it can be manipulated.
Of particular fascination is a chapter on Mind Control. In that chapter, he brings up the sad story of the People's Temple, Rev. Jim Jones and Jonestown, Guyana. For those unfamiliar with what happened, in November 1978, cult leader Jim Jones ordered the assassination of visiting US Congressman Leo Ryan and his entourage on an airstrip in Guyana. Immediately afterwards, he and 900 of his followers committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Flavor Aid (popularly reported as Kool Aid). This has passed into modern slang as "drinking the Kool Aid" to mean believe what you are told to your own harm or detriment.
Of particular fascination is a chapter on Mind Control. In that chapter, he brings up the sad story of the People's Temple, Rev. Jim Jones and Jonestown, Guyana. For those unfamiliar with what happened, in November 1978, cult leader Jim Jones ordered the assassination of visiting US Congressman Leo Ryan and his entourage on an airstrip in Guyana. Immediately afterwards, he and 900 of his followers committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Flavor Aid (popularly reported as Kool Aid). This has passed into modern slang as "drinking the Kool Aid" to mean believe what you are told to your own harm or detriment.
In the book, he outlines four warning signs that indicate you are in danger of being brainwashed and relates them to what Jones did and experiments in human psychology that provide examples of why it works so effectively. They are-
1- the "Foot in the Door" method-asking for something small initially and gradually increasing the request until it is something extremely unreasonable being requested that would never be considered upon initial apraisal.
2-the appeal to the Supernatural-people tend to put aside critical thinking if they genuinely believe they are witnessing a Diety's work or any demonstration of paranormal phenomenon.
3-harsh initiation-after a gruelling, humiliating, expensive and/or physically strenuous ordeal, people feel invested and don't want to admit that all that effort may have been for nothing.
4-rigidly enforced conformity- Any dissent is squashed, any chance for criticism is ridiculed, and punished. Conversely, thinking alike and mindlessly going along with the "official party line" is rewarded and encouraged.
Professor Wiseman has the insight to observe that these techniques are not confined to the " somewhat bizarre and esoteric world of cults." He says that we "frequently encounter exactly the same principles of persuasion in everyday life...practitioners of mind control are not restricted to cult leaders and religious sects. Instead, they walk among us on a daily basis".
And we don't have to look far into the world of DC elitist hypocrites and their massive propaganda and doctrinal systems to find samples of each.
As of this writing, the research paper written by Harvard Economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff which has been used to justify ignoring unemployment in favor of austerity and deficit reduction has been publicly debunked because of coding errors used to prove their conclusion. But let us never forget or forgive the rigidly enforced conformity that empowered that this cancerous groupthink which has made the aftermath of this Great Recession so much worse!
And we only got to this point because of the harsh initiation of a inflationary housing boom, a war and occupation based on fraudulent accusations and looting of the public treasury during the Bush years. Once again, we forgive and forget what was done in recent history at our own risk. Shame on all those who recently rationalized evil, corruption and incompetence on that massive scale while the George W. Bush presidential library opened!
And it is not even questioned when brazen attempts at theocracy,appeals to the Supernatural, are subtlely introduced into our state legislatures by agents of ALEC, the right-wing corporate lobby group drafting legislation to rework America to their design. Here in Nevada, the "Preservation of Religious Freedom Act" which would institutionalize religous-based discrimination was recently introduced into the legislature by Senator Barbara Cegavske.
It's interesting that they have to use "Religous Freedom" as a mask in the title and preamble of this piece of legislative excrement. We already have the protection of the 1st Ammendment! We all do! The damned Westboro Baptist Church just had the right for it's vile protests upheld by the Supreme Court! Asking for extra "Religous Freedom" at the expence of constitutionally mandated equal protection under the law is something a cult leader or other religous demogogue would do!
It's interesting that they have to use "Religous Freedom" as a mask in the title and preamble of this piece of legislative excrement. We already have the protection of the 1st Ammendment! We all do! The damned Westboro Baptist Church just had the right for it's vile protests upheld by the Supreme Court! Asking for extra "Religous Freedom" at the expence of constitutionally mandated equal protection under the law is something a cult leader or other religous demogogue would do!
And I do believe we just experienced two brothers in Massachusetts exercising their "Religious Freedom" of pursuing jihad at the Boston Marathon.Senator Barbara Cegavske, her cronies at ALEC and the Tsarnaev brothers are cut from the same cloth. Does it matter if you die or are injured while watching the Boston Marathon finish or because some bigot in a position of power in a hospital chooses to not help you because of his selective interpretation of the Book of Leviticus?
But the entire framing of that debate is wrong as well! It is not a "Relgious Freedom" issue. As I just said, we already have the 1st Ammendment! The issue at stake is the concept of equal rights and protection under the law. Does a gay man have the same rights in an emergency room as a straight man? Is a Buddist or an athiest entitled to police protection in a crisis situation if the officer believes he is ordered by the Christian/Islamic/Judaic god of Abraham to treat them differently? These constitutional concepts are what Senator Cegavske is trying to erode. It is a valid reason for my lack of respect for her.
But the entire framing of that debate is wrong as well! It is not a "Relgious Freedom" issue. As I just said, we already have the 1st Ammendment! The issue at stake is the concept of equal rights and protection under the law. Does a gay man have the same rights in an emergency room as a straight man? Is a Buddist or an athiest entitled to police protection in a crisis situation if the officer believes he is ordered by the Christian/Islamic/Judaic god of Abraham to treat them differently? These constitutional concepts are what Senator Cegavske is trying to erode. It is a valid reason for my lack of respect for her.
But it is the "Foot in the Door" method that concerns me. Especially when it comes to Obama's wish to put it on the table as part of a "Grand Bargain"! Despite the fact that Social Security does not impact the deficit, it has continually come under assault by those who propose reduced benefits as a cure for persitant unemployment. This is in part motivated by a sadistic hatred of poor/middle class citizen taxpayers in the elite circles of Washington D.C.Any excuse to pass costs on to the public is a valid one in thier minds. And when it comes to Social Security, there is this huge fund of money going to those same hated people whom have paid into the fund for their entire lives. All that money is there for the looting if Washington D.C's elite legalized thieves can only get their foot in the door!
It works like this, while leaving in place the costly $110,000 threshold in place (which if removed would fund the entire 75 year shortfall that has been forecast for Social Security) and the current regressive tax structure, claims of insolvency are made. Claiming insolvency all the while not daring to cut military contractor handouts, adjustments to the current system are made. The retirement age for full benefits is raised, or the Cost of Living Adjustment is decreased, or maybe the benefits are reduced or the benefits are chained to the Consumer Price Index or some combination of these is enacted in response. Soon, after seeing how well that worked, all of these options become a reality all the while the Bush tax cuts remain in place and people earning more than $110,000 don't contribute to Social Security. What was once a great insurance plan for the elderly and disabled becomes a method to redistribute wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy before our very eyes!
Maybe you think I'm being paranoid? In the words of Alan Simpson and Erksine Bowles themselves-"While the president's proposal is a step in the right direction, it does not go as far as we believe is necessary to put our nation's fiscal house in order," the men said in a statement last week on Obama's 2014 budget proposal. The Simpson-Bowles "Grand Bargain" which Obama covets as compromise lays the groundwork for future looting of the Social Security fund. Simson and Bowles as much as admit it!
Even worse, this violates one of the President's campaign promises! Forget the right-wing noise machines contrived reasons for hating Barack Obama. Forget the Death Panels (which I'm still looking for-supposedly they would be worse than private insurers deciding whom was to live and die), the muslim socialist accusations, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright "connection", and the "false flags" in Aurora and Newtown. This is a valid reason to despise the man and it happened in the real world not Fantasyland. A "Grand Bargain" with Congress (as despicable as this Congress is) that lays the groundwork for gutting the Social Security fund is nothing to be proud of. Democrats need to reject this as a worthwhile prize.
It made no sense to make your child drink cyanide laced Flavor-Aid along with you in Jonestown in 1978.And it was devastating! It makes no sense to adjust Social Security in 2013.And it will be devastating!
It made no sense to make your child drink cyanide laced Flavor-Aid along with you in Jonestown in 1978.And it was devastating! It makes no sense to adjust Social Security in 2013.And it will be devastating!
And what is especially disgusting is that this does not impact the deficit at all!
"Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit...Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So, Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or lowering the deficit."-Ronald Reagan. 1984
"Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit...Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So, Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or lowering the deficit."-Ronald Reagan. 1984
