Work pressures will keep me away from blogging for the next few days. Dymphna will hold the fort here while I’m gone.
For those of you who decide to make this a comment thread and start arguing: remember the rules! Civility and temperate behavior are the order of the day.
This is my objection to the “genocide” post.
It purports to divine a historical process where certain conditions will “create” a genocidal situation. This is immoral, as it presents man as a faceless, amoral beast who doesn’t think, he is merely acted upon by socio-historical forces. This belief is false to the core and must be opposed tooth and nail, for not only is it the weapon and outlook of our social-engineering masters in Brussels, but most importantly it absolves one of responsibility. And being absolved of responsibility is one of the things the drives the violence of the crowd.
Let he who hath wisdom understand:
Carl Jung, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, Concerning Rebirth, page 125
“A group experience takes place on a lower level of consciousness than the experience of an individual. This is due to the fact that, when many people gather together to share one common emotion, the total psyche emerging from the group is below the level of the individual psyche. If it is a very large group, the collective psyche will be more like the psyche of an animal, which is why the ethical reliability of large organisations is always doubtful. The psychology of a large crowd inevitably sinks to the level of mob psychology.”
Groups like Expo and AFA are already good examples of this animalistic crowdism. Believing themselves to be participating in the common communion of Historical Forces they believe they have a special mission to fulfil by (attempted) assassination of political opponents without higher and individual restraints like flinching, pity, or mercy.
The same communion of “Historical Forces” is also implicated in that “genocide” article.
And that’s my two penneth/cents.
With respect, As I understood things the post didn’t actually may those conditions would create genocide, more that they’d be a good indicator of its likelihood as an outcome.
That comment by Jung can also be used in reference to large corporations and a government with overgrown bureaucracy.
“Work pressures,” – is that side reference to your business manufacturing Hitler mustaches?
Formerly Known as Gordon:
The moustache manufacturing is going well (a small shock of black hair for the forehead is extra).
You must’ve seen our ads in the neo-Nazi mags.
Btw, study re the formation of groups was done by a British psychiatrist after WWII.
Wilfrid Bion thought that groups could form in several ways, and “basic assumtion” groups often did regress to the lowest common denominator.
However, his ideas about “the work group” showed that people coming together to share a common goal did not necessarily regress, but rather formed around tasks to be accomplished.
This seems like a good thread to post a brilliant insight I had today.
Democrats see America as a problem to be fixed.
Republicans see America as a solution to be implemented.
What do you think?
That’s a good differentiation. It points to the tendency of Dems to long for some Utopia, if they can just “fix” everyone.
Republicans are going wobbly, though. They seem to be retreating to Rockefeller Republicanism rather than the emphasis on a strong national security.
They also have regressed re taxes, but I hope that is one solution they will begin to address and implement eventually.
It certainly won’t come from the Dems.