1. Its the ultimate control.

2. If they are about to be found out, the followers never have to hear the truth.

3. Misery loves company.

Ultimate power trip.

Yup

It's because they think they'll do better in November if there are no pandemic constraints on the economy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/17/2020 11:03PM by Lot's Wife.

This pandemic has been used to bring in ever more restrictions on personal freedom by both sides.

You yourself admitted as much yesterday.

up to the point of putting other people's lives in danger.


This isn't about "sides."


Suppose you are on a commercial airline flight and group of deranged passengers are about to open all the doors at 35,000 feet.


The passengers belong to a cult whose leader claims flight is impossible, that if "God wanted men to fly he would have given them wings," and to prove it, they are going to open all the hatches to show everyone that they are still on the ground surrounded by giant 3D projection screens and that it's all a big hoax.


What would you do?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/18/2020 07:17AM by anybody.

> This pandemic has been used to bring in ever more
> restrictions on personal freedom by both sides.

Can you explain why that assertion has anything to do with what I just said?

MoFunster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This pandemic has been used to bring in ever more
> restrictions on personal freedom by both sides.
>
> You yourself admitted as much yesterday.

The fact that Americans have turned this into a political issue, and started using the virus to make excuses about personal freedoms, is absolutely mind boggling to those of us in the civilized world. Follow the damned science and listen to the public health officials. There is a reason most of the world has moved well past the peak and into more of a recovery phase while the virus is reaching record numbers each day in the States. Meanwhile, your bickering about "personal freedom" has cut off your access to most of the planet. The United States has about 6% of the total land area on earth, and because of your obsession with "freedom", you have trapped yourselves into that 6% because nobody else wants filthy, disease ridden Americans to infect them. You have only succeeded in trapping yourselves in a virus infected cage while thinking you are "free". Your are like the rat in the maze, free to go wherever you want, as long as you remain within the maze. Congrats.

Absolutely! It’s mind boggling seeing the idiocy here. As an American who travels abroad several times a year, I’m extremely embarrassed and annoyed by America’s response to the situation. It’s been worse than 3rd world countries.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coronavirus-responses-highlight-how-humans-have-evolved-to-dismiss-facts-that-dont-fit-their-worldview/

In theory, resolving factual disputes should be relatively easy: Just present strong evidence, or evidence of a strong expert consensus. This approach succeeds most of the time, when the issue is, say, the atomic weight of hydrogen.

But things don’t work that way when scientific advice presents a picture that threatens someone’s perceived interests or ideological worldview. In practice, it turns out that one’s political, religious or ethnic identity quite effectively predicts one’s willingness to accept expertise on any given politicized issue.

“Motivated reasoning” is what social scientists call the process of deciding what evidence to accept based on the conclusion one prefers. As I explain in my book, “The Truth About Denial,” this very human tendency applies to all kinds of facts about the physical world, economic history and current events.


DENIAL DOESN’T STEM FROM IGNORANCE
The interdisciplinary study of this phenomenon has made one thing clear: The failure of various groups to acknowledge the truth about, say, climate change, is not explained by a lack of information about the scientific consensus on the subject.

Instead, what strongly predicts denial of expertise on many controversial topics is simply one’s political persuasion.

A 2015 metastudy showed that ideological polarization over the reality of climate change actually increases with respondents’ knowledge of politics, science and/or energy policy. The chances that a conservative is a climate science denier is significantly higher if he or she is college educated. Conservatives scoring highest on tests for cognitive sophistication or quantitative reasoning skills are most susceptible to motivated reasoning about climate science.

Denialist phenomena are many and varied, but the story behind them is, ultimately, quite simple. Human cognition is inseparable from the unconscious emotional responses that go with it. Under the right conditions, universal human traits like in-group favoritism, existential anxiety and a desire for stability and control combine into a toxic, system-justifying identity politics.

Science denial is notoriously resistant to facts because it isn’t about facts in the first place. Science denial is an expression of identity – usually in the face of perceived threats to the social and economic status quo – and it typically manifests in response to elite messaging.

And there it is in a nutshell.

Nature did not select for human rationality per se. It selected for the ability to organize a decent hunting or foraging strategy in the savannah; to mount an attack on a neighboring clan; and to cheat, and detect cheating, as people divvied up the meat around their campfire. The broader rationality and all the philosophy, science, art, and music it entailed were a mere by-product. Humans are still 70% emotion and only 30% logic.

So how much can facts matter? When people are secure and happy, yes, they are willing to consider reality and the needs of others not directly related to them. But when push comes to shove, they still hunker down with their family and friends, bow down to their traditional gods, and throw facts to the winds.

To alsd, whose diagnosis of the American disease I fully embrace, I would only add that other peoples are vulnerable to irrational self-immolation as well. It was only a century ago when Europe tore itself to pieces twice in the space of a single generation, and I am cynical enough to believe that such a disaster could under certain conditions recur.

So yes, the United States is the poster child for self-destructive irrationality right now. But the predisposition to the illness is sadly universal. Let's hope that things get better before the world learns anew that American exceptionalism is indeed a myth.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coronav
> irus-responses-highlight-how-humans-have-evolved-t
> o-dismiss-facts-that-dont-fit-their-worldview/
>
> In theory, resolving factual disputes should be
> relatively easy: Just present strong evidence, or
> evidence of a strong expert consensus. This
> approach succeeds most of the time, when the issue
> is, say, the atomic weight of hydrogen.
>
> But things don’t work that way when scientific
> advice presents a picture that threatens
> someone’s perceived interests or ideological
> worldview. In practice, it turns out that one’s
> political, religious or ethnic identity quite
> effectively predicts one’s willingness to accept
> expertise on any given politicized issue.
>
> “Motivated reasoning” is what social
> scientists call the process of deciding what
> evidence to accept based on the conclusion one
> prefers. As I explain in my book, “The Truth
> About Denial,” this very human tendency applies
> to all kinds of facts about the physical world,
> economic history and current events.
>
>
> DENIAL DOESN’T STEM FROM IGNORANCE
> The interdisciplinary study of this phenomenon has
> made one thing clear: The failure of various
> groups to acknowledge the truth about, say,
> climate change, is not explained by a lack of
> information about the scientific consensus on the
> subject.
>
> Instead, what strongly predicts denial of
> expertise on many controversial topics is simply
> one’s political persuasion.
>
> A 2015 metastudy showed that ideological
> polarization over the reality of climate change
> actually increases with respondents’ knowledge
> of politics, science and/or energy policy. The
> chances that a conservative is a climate science
> denier is significantly higher if he or she is
> college educated. Conservatives scoring highest on
> tests for cognitive sophistication or quantitative
> reasoning skills are most susceptible to motivated
> reasoning about climate science.
>
> Denialist phenomena are many and varied, but the
> story behind them is, ultimately, quite simple.
> Human cognition is inseparable from the
> unconscious emotional responses that go with it.
> Under the right conditions, universal human traits
> like in-group favoritism, existential anxiety and
> a desire for stability and control combine into a
> toxic, system-justifying identity politics.
>
> Science denial is notoriously resistant to facts
> because it isn’t about facts in the first place.
> Science denial is an expression of identity –
> usually in the face of perceived threats to the
> social and economic status quo – and it
> typically manifests in response to elite
> messaging.

I certainly cannot argue your point. But I can say that in the rest of the western world, there are a wide variety of political beliefs and leanings. In my country of residence, there are ten different parties represented in the Parliament. Yet the bizarre conspiracy theories that are so prevalent in the United States just don't exist. There are liberals and conservatives here, but nobody disputes the fact of global warming. Sure, there is debate about how this small country should deal with it, and to what extent it is a problem. But there is no debate about whether global warming exists and that it is caused overwhelmingly by human activity. The prevalence of that belief is very uniquely American. The same goes with Covid19. Again, there is debate here regarding the virus. But the debate is centered around how the government should handle the economic impact, and when and how to open the borders for foreign visitors. There is virtually no debate about whether or not Covid19 exists, or if it is serious, or whether or not we should listen to the public health officials. Again, those types of debates seem to be very uniquely American. So what is it about American conservatism that breeds the extreme and wild conspiracy theories that conservatism in other western countries does not seem to breed?

@ alsd and kentish:

Last weekend, I watched an old 1955 movie about the Mau Mau in colonial Kenya ("Simba" starring Dirk Bogarde and Virginia McKenna).

You may have seen this news story about married lawyers in St. Louis pointing guns at protest marchers:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ABC/status/1277526031935647744

In the movie, white ranchers go about armed and view all non-whites as dangerous savages who will slaughter them at a moment's notice as soon as their backs are turned. In present day Arizona for example, many people go around armed just like this. In Michigan, armed militia occupied the state capitol in a show of force. Why?

What is going on here? It's existential fear. Fear of being "wiped out." Fear of being culturally "erased." Fear of no longer being "special."

This fear of being "wiped out" is what lies behind all of this — and religion in America was adapted to respond to this fear. Unlike ancient Greece and Rome, slavery in the Americas was based solely on race and not just conquest or power. That was new in the world. Religion was adapted to justify it. That's why white supremacy is part and parcel in Southern evangelical Christianity and Mormonism.

Once you understand this fear, it's easy to manipulate people and their reality.

Remember the Scopes Monkey Trial? America is the only modern industrialised country where people are still seriously arguing about the validity of evolution. You may have heard of the infamous Noah's Ark replica park in Kentucky. Tennessee has been in the news lately for passing religious fundamentalist legislation. It's all a response to fear — and there are those who unscrupulously take advantage of these fears for their own purposes.

Right now America is a very divided country and religion is at the heart of it. But that's just on the surface. Religion is the scab that covers a plethora of social divisions — the people who need to be racially superior and seperate divide, the rural vs. urban divide, the liberal vs. the intolerant divide, and so on. Some people just don't want change. It's like Brexit in the UK. The kids who stayed in town don't want to be told what to do by the kids who went to university and moved away to live in the big city. Masks weren't a problem a hundred years ago during the 1918 influenza epidemic, but somehow they're a problem now. People in 1950s America didn't need to go around carrying semi automatic assault rifles. They were afraid of a Soviet nuclear attack and put the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance to prevent godless atheist Communists from saying it, but they were not afraid of being culturally erased in their own country.

All of this reminds me of the story of the Ghost Dance cult. Native Americans back in the 19th century were being wiped out and the world as they knew it was swifty fading away. A holy man named Wovoka arouse and started a new cult, promising his followers the buffalo would return and all would be as before Europeans came. Special talismanic "ghost shirts" would stop bullets.

Fear drives people to do strange things.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/21/2020 07:23AM by anybody.

In the 1950s we practiced being safe from Soviet and nuclear attack by crawling under our chairs in school. It all seemed normal.

So are you saying all mandates are bogus? I’m confused.

I'm saying the reaction to the fear of today is different from the fear of other eras and used the 1950s as an example. (Imaginary) fear of being culturally enveloped or overwhelmed doesn't seem to be the same as the fear of being (really) wiped out in a nuclear attack. I've never seen any pictures from the 50s showing people parading through the streets or occupying government buildings armed with military style rifles.



I'm also saying religion is a major component of science denial and the end of a widely shared objective fact based reality that most people accepted.


"Deny what you see with your eyes. What you see is not real. What science tells you is not real. Only {insert prophet, religious text, or other shamanistic mumbo-jumbo} has the 'real' truth and everything else is lies." This is how it starts. Once you go down this path, it's easy to fall victim to conspiracy theories or dictatorial fascist demagogues.

> This pandemic has been used to bring in ever more
> restrictions on personal freedom by both sides.
>
> You yourself admitted as much yesterday.

Where did I say that? I think you are misconstruing what I wrote.

Narcissism, cowardice, self-defense, psychosis... You name it.

To be fair, most cult leaders don't want their followers dead. There are thousands and very few ever follow this scenario. Even at the siege at Waco, there is considerable evidence that the authorities were in the wrong and they ended up setting the building alight, not the Branch Davidians.

Not crazy about your COVID comment but I think got it right here about cult leaders. I don’t think they want their followers dead and most, I think, haven’t necessarily gone the Jim Jones route where they instruct their followers to die.

But typically followers do die for their cult leader along the way. Mormons died. Muslims died. I’m sure a number of Scientologists have even died, though in mysterious circumstances or not enough evidence to hold the church or it’s leaders accountable by the courts.

I see most cult leaders as self-serving, narcissistic, psychopathic dictators and will do anything to maintain control over their little kingdom. They love the adoration and worship they receive from their followers and would prefer them alive for this purpose but are disposable to them if they either turn on them or to defend them if being threatened by outside forces.

They probably run the spectrum of by total narcissistic psychopaths that really have no empathy towards their followers, or they do but they are selfish and care more about themselves than their followers (Joseph Smith, Tiger King guy), etc.

They have a god complex and the most important thing to them is themselves and their little kingdom they want to preserve and keep absolute power over. They’d prefer to not have any of they followed die but casualties along the way are sometimes a necessity in order to preserve their little kingdom. And sadly, in some circumstances, when that kingdom is being truly threatened, including their leader, they become desperate and would prefer to have die, than not have their cherished kingdom, and they don’t want anyone else to take over their kingdom, so they’d rather everyone dies with them instead of handing it over to their unworthy, unclean and hated enemies.

Maax, the evil High Priest of the god Ar (Rip Torn), commands two of his priests to hang themselves before King Zed in a demonstration of power

https://youtu.be/vhkGfLFopRc?t=200



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2020 01:48AM by anybody.

“I realize that some of you will die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.”

For them to "want" followers to live or die may be to attribute too much humanity to them.

I suspect these don't care one way or the other.
Followers are so many lawn chairs, useful only when exploitable.
There are always more lawn chairs.

Functional MRI has demonstrated that in the psychopath, the part of the brain that carries empathy, ethics, and allegiance/loyalty (vmPFC) is nonfunctional.

In order to move up the mormon ladder both parts of the brain need to be non-functional. This explains Elder Bednar and the age of Mormon Prophetic Psychopaths. Too arrogant to know they don't speak for God and too dumb to care.

A severe form of narcissistic supply.

Maybe once they feel cornered and the only way out for themselves is to die, they have to take their followers with them because they see them so strongly as a part of themselves. Maybe they see the whole of the cult as one body.

Maybe they think that no one would take care of their cult members like they would. It's sort of like the people who want to commit suicide, so they commit murder-suicide on their own family in order to protect them, or so they think.

Maybe they're just plain delusional to the point where they truly believe that they're just moving the entire cult to a new place, out of reach of the annoying humans who are trying to destroy them.

Maybe sometimes it's a bit of all of the above.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> n/t

Because they lead a cult, not follow it.

Cult leaders tend to be more interested in sex and money from their followers.

Cult leaders love/need loyalty, it's what motivates them from the get-go.

Most ppl can develop a relationship with enough caring & sex to keep them going / 'happy' but cult leaders need the loyalty perhaps more than anything else if not separately...


that's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

Why do cult leaders want their followers to die for them?

So they can be killed off if they fall out of line.

Willingness to die for a cause puts adherents at risk.
- expectation that you might die.
- belief that a death is not a tragedy, just part of the battle.
- assumption that you'll go to heaven if you die.
- lack of suspicion when people end up dying.

Look at Lori and Charles Vallows' killing spree. With some earlier suspicion, maybe a few lives could have been saved.

RG