Spontaneous preferences in politics

85 views
Skip to first unread message

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 1, 2020, 12:45:22 PM11/1/20
to realpsychohistory

Spontaneous preferences in politics

 

We should see it as it is: the power of the small, rural, conservative states in the US political system is quite strong. They have a lot of weight in the U.S. Senate and can prevent and enforce many things there. For example, the Senate elects the judges of the US Supreme Court. The Senate is dominated by rural, relatively small and medium-sized states, which are relatively backward in terms of social development, economic development and living standards.   A conservative electorate often dominates, especially since the beginning of neoliberalism and neo-conservatism. The conservative, rural states with their conservative electorate spend little on education, schooling and health care and are therefore largely to blame for their own social backwardness and weak economic situation

 

Since neoliberalism, voters' political preferences have changed and become more convservative. The political influence of liberal forces and regions, the big cities, the growth regions within and among the states has decreased and the conservatives find stronger allies in our social alters than was the case at the time when the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court could lead to a de facto right to abortion on a national level.

 

Historically, it has been difficult to form the state. This is probably evidenced by the strong position that had to be given to small rural states.

 

It is okay if young people cannot see this important aspect in the phase of their first politicization.

 

But the government has no choice; it has to deal with the Senate. It should not, if the urban cancel-culture condemns something which is behind their own belief-systems, withdraw support from the Administration, blame the national government and withdraw political support, if the Administration would not side with them.  For the latter only does what it can to find majorities in the Senate for reasonable policies.

 

And we should not forget that not only democracy but ultimately also the statehood of the USA is prinicpally endangered. It is a crisis of the USA as a federal state, the conservatives and the liberals are not getting together. Social growth and liberalism are an increasing nightmare for the conservatives.

 

It is not only the ideological right, but also the left that can endanger the statehood of the USA. Corbyn, the former leader of the British Labour Party, was a highly respected politician among the radical left, although he hardly lifted a finger to prevent Brexit. Even the notorious Black Bloc, from which many left-wing liberals cannot distance themselves and which so clearly manifested its will to destroy and its contempt for democracy at the G20 summit in Hamburg in 2017, is diametrically opposed to our democratic system and tries to harm it wherever it can.

 

When I say that we have become wise by harm, I understand it to mean that the rational personality has been purified by the harm caused by the Trump government and that therefore, without us realizing it, less pressure from social age is weighing on our rational personality. This then makes it easier for us to take reasonable positions.

 

In my approach I focus on the individual voter and the political opinion leaders. They should admit to themselves that their spontaneous political preferences should be questioned if they have proven to be unwise in retrospect.

 

We should be better able to relativize our spontanrous apocalyptic, anti-democratic preferences.

 

The Trump administration's vicious corona policy produced 3 times more deaths than Americans were killed in Vietnam.

 

Not everyone needs 200,000 deaths before they become reasonable. If we, as enlightened citizens, admit in principle that our political involuntary preferences can cause harm, it makes us more inclined to take a reasonable political position and distance us form ideological ones.

 

Florian Galler

Nov. 1, 2020

www.psychohistoy.ch

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 1, 2020, 2:55:08 PM11/1/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Florian, you did not respond to a single point made in response to your
posts.

Instead, you present more moral polarization posing as intellectualism.

Both the left and the right are busy constructing narratives for the
purpose of deluding themselves that their side is virtuous and the other
side is villainous. It's a game called moral polarization, and it is that
game that is threatening our civilization. Those who play that tribal
game are the true psychological primitives, and they are pretty much
running the show on both sides of the political fence these days.

The future looks bleak indeed. It doesn't much matter who wins the US
election, because the issue isn't ideology, but the lack of awareness, the
lack of conscious enlightenment.

David
>
> *Spontaneous preferences in politics*
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/219cce3c-441c-428f-9c19-0c441ed255dfn%40googlegroups.com.
>


Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 1, 2020, 4:28:59 PM11/1/20
to realpsychohistory
David, make no mistake. Dems were since Neoliberalism generally for Democracy, rule of law, international cooperation, Reps with the exception of Bush sen. were not.

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 1, 2020, 4:45:06 PM11/1/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
You insist on your moral polarization. Of course, that is all it takes to
keep it.
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/3b9962cf-fc78-420b-8242-2150bcfc7622n%40googlegroups.com.
>


Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 2, 2020, 12:06:34 AM11/2/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
David, Trump is to nobody as respectful as to the Neo-Nazis, whereas Biden would not side with and not giving support to left extremists or transporting their hate feelings by his presidential politics. Would this be a remarkable difference or not?
Florian

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: David Shackleton <da...@integraldesign.org>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 1. November 2020 22:45
An: realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: Spontaneous preferences in politics
>> > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fww
>> > w.psychohistoy.ch%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7Ce7fe6f65bfb841f8d5c108d8
>> > 7eaf65ae%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6373986390676
>> > 00141%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiL
>> > CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=eR0AoKkU%2FGGRfbxvQu
>> > UaFvRXaGRekH5QMie1WWnn0hA%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> > "realpsychohistory" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> > send
>> an
>> > email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgro
>> ups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2F219cce3c-441c-428f-9
>> c19-0c441ed255dfn%2540googlegroups.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7Ce7fe6f65
>> bfb841f8d5c108d87eaf65ae%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7
>> C637398639067600141%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQI
>> joiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=fLh1Tg1%2B
>> g6pQh8ccH09WkKEnzYBU9Cq4pI4u01OTe1M%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> .
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2F3b9962cf-fc78-420b-8242-2150bcfc7622n%2540googlegroups.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7Ce7fe6f65bfb841f8d5c108d87eaf65ae%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398639067610136%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=kSSrk8bK0z%2Fom1rTL7lAPzDPmvVoy31g0OLeuxkhWfk%3D&amp;reserved=0.
>


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2F824187eef726b6e5e4d0e97de55e8e8e.squirrel%2540emailmg.netfirms.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7Ce7fe6f65bfb841f8d5c108d87eaf65ae%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398639067610136%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=zivuzyBdehOdMx%2FD9igHB5uhPX0iVfi3JcXnmfNLip0%3D&amp;reserved=0.

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 2, 2020, 12:44:24 AM11/2/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Florian, Biden and other Dems are respectful to Black Lives Matter rioters
who destroy property, attack people and want to defund the police. They
refuse to criticize leftist extremists like Antifa.

Is there really a difference?

David
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/DB6P189MB05811230D65726471FBA8CE892100%40DB6P189MB0581.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.
>


Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 2, 2020, 12:57:31 AM11/2/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
David, I do not believe that Biden would side with rioters. However, the blacks urgently need our support in view of the danger they are in because of murderous police violence.

Isn't it a remarkable difference that the Democratic candidate never would and Democratic presidents never did touch or the electoral law and Biden would not do so either, although the extreme ideological left would want him to do so, while Trump mockingly promises that he won't accept the election and that he did everything in advance to make it a disaster?
Florian

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: David Shackleton <da...@integraldesign.org>
Gesendet: Montag, 2. November 2020 06:44
An: realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: AW: Spontaneous preferences in politics
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2F3b9962cf-fc78-420b-8242-2150bcfc7622n%2540googlegroups.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C7f57f3a9b2e84f29e61408d87ef25b17%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398926654273295%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=CvOI4LLH3Bj%2B%2Bd4Kpm7zn%2FoAv92kaeL%2BurNzwBD0l30%3D&amp;reserved=0.
>>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2F824187eef726b6e5e4d0e97de55e8e8e.squirrel%2540emailmg.netfirms.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C7f57f3a9b2e84f29e61408d87ef25b17%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398926654273295%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=9692XvmPWGiaaxAyecce3b5f44EujiTolGpPqpRorko%3D&amp;reserved=0.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2FDB6P189MB05811230D65726471FBA8CE892100%2540DB6P189MB0581.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C7f57f3a9b2e84f29e61408d87ef25b17%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398926654283293%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=72YtaraZUObZBKii1BtlIrsNC5%2BEszMItnYLJ4Y0rWI%3D&amp;reserved=0.
>


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealpsychohistory%2Fd76dfd9ffc5172e6a1c4791882711777.squirrel%2540emailmg.netfirms.com&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C7f57f3a9b2e84f29e61408d87ef25b17%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637398926654283293%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ixx5VGwPzGEYmNZNr9VqpY3lWYRM0WRFgca%2FQE08Gh8%3D&amp;reserved=0.

Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 2, 2020, 1:17:35 AM11/2/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

Florian from Zürich and me from Helsinki do not matter one bit for the political life of the United States. It is interesting that the American culture and politics seem to have an influence on our emotional lives here across the pond, and that many here have strong views about political matters over there. I suspect the emotional impact comes partly from the pop culture and also partly from the real effects of economic, environmental, and military policies on the whole world. 

Views about American politics are also an identity marker here in Europe. There is concern for universal values which cross the boundaries (human rights, rule of law, democracy). That there should be justice in this world. Related to this, Finland's former president / strong man / dictator Kekkonen said that we as a small country should not act as a judge but as a physician when dealing with the problems in this world (and there was quite a bit to judge across the border in USSR). That's a role that psychohistory could have. 

Nevertheless, Trump presents a much larger threat to the values and to the view of justice that matters to me than Biden. Biden is also the centrist, both-sides option, that seems to be close to the position David Shackleton claims to support.

Good luck!
Esa

- Here's a centrist conservative's view on Biden's centrism (from the FAKE NEWS, FAILING New York Times, though):

"Biden is campaigning in a land filled with fear, hatred and apocalyptic thinking. It would be so easy for him to reflect that fear and hate back to voters. That’s what Trump does.

"But Biden is not doing that. Never in my life have I seen a candidate so confidently avoid wedge issues. Biden is instead running on the conviction that, despite it all, Americans deeply love their country, and viscerally long for its unity. He’s running with the knowledge that when you ask America about the greatest threats to our future, “political polarization and divisiveness” comes out No. 1.


"Biden has avoided the stupid binaries about race. Donald Trump went to Mount Rushmore and made a speech essentially saying you can either believe in systemic racism or you can love America. Biden went to Gettysburg and argued that you can “honestly face systemic racism” and love America. He argued that you can believe in fighting racism and believe in law and order. His worldview is based on universal categories — the things we share — not identitarian ones — the ways we supposedly can’t understand each other across difference."


(https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/opinion/joe-biden.html)


- Fact check (from the commies at Reuters) about Biden's respect for looters: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-biden-condemn-violence-idUSKBN25V2O1



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to 
realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com
.
.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to 
realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com
.

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 2, 2020, 11:22:03 AM11/2/20
to realpsychohistory
David, I wrote a lot. If you intend boring me and not wanting me to react to what you write anymore,  you should just goi on like this.

da...@integraldesign.org schrieb am Sonntag, 1. November 2020 um 20:55:08 UTC+1:

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 4, 2020, 8:14:15 AM11/4/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Florian, actually it is I who am bored with this. Ever since the election
of Trump in 2016 I have watched the left lose their minds, including
(especially) the intellectuals among them. And I have realized the power
of moral polarization, which is a psychological mechanism of guilt
projection. It results in the polarization of perceptions and judgments
in a moral dimension, resulting in convictions about innocent victims (our
group) and guilty perpetrators (the out group). For a good example, see
https://www.academia.edu/36536454/Why_Trump_Won_Outgroup_Hostility_as_the_New_Ethnocentrism?email_work_card=title

The distortion of reality which this requires, or results in, is serious,
unconscious, and sustained. This, the moral polarization, rather than any
partisan issue of the left or the right, is the great sickness of our
time. All of identity politics is caught up in it; the last time we had a
healthy identity movement was that led by Martin Luther King, over fifty
years ago. And of course, partisan politics is currently entirely driven
by it, though it was not historically.

You can recognize movements that are driven by moral polarization because
they are accusatory rather than visionary, and grievance based rather than
collaborative. They build moral polarization in at the foundations, as
feminism did with patriarchy theory, and as all modern identity movements
do, and as US partisan politics does, and this means that they are not
about equality or about solving real problems at all, rather they are
about affirming the righteousness of the victims and the guilt of the
perpetrators.

This is what psychohistory should be seeing and investigating. Instead,
it is caught up in the very polarization dynamic, at least as far as I can
tell on this list. You, Florian, are a perfect example of what I am
describing. Yes, you have written a lot, but it has all be simple
re-assertion of your claims, not dialogue at all. This is how moral
polarization operates, of course; the case FEELS so compelling when one is
in its grip, and the position of the adversary FEELS so obviously wrong
that it doesn't feel worth engaging with.

David
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/3cfd7e8e-aa96-4883-97d2-d0928d0b4b66n%40googlegroups.com.
>


Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 4, 2020, 9:21:05 AM11/4/20
to realpsychohistory
Thank you, Esa for the New york Time quote on Biden " that you can “honestly face systemic racism” and love America. He argued that you can believe in fighting racism and believe in law and order. "

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 5, 2020, 9:57:42 AM11/5/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com

I do not believe Biden is respectful to rioters. The Blacks however urgently Need our compassion and support

­

­

­

­

Die Lage am Morgen

­

Ihr Morning-Briefing um 6 Uhr

­

Montag, 2. November 2020

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

­

Sebastian Fischer

Leiter des SPIEGEL-Hauptstadtbüros

­

­

­

Liebe Leserin, lieber Leser,

­

­

­

­

­

heute beschäftigen wir uns mit den nahenden US-Wahlen und dem beginnenden Corona-Shutdown in Deutschland.

Die Entscheidung des Jahres

In dieser Woche, am Dienstag, haben die Amerikaner die Wahl zwischen einem Demokratiezerstörer und einem Demokratiebewahrer. Wir alle, die ganze Welt wird vom Ausgang dieser Wahl geprägt werden. Mittun können wir nicht.

Es klingt noch immer surreal: Das Land, das uns vor einem Menschenalter die Demokratie brachte, ringt nun ernsthaft mit dieser Alternative: Zerstörer Donald Trump gegen Bewahrer Joe Biden. Dass Trump überhaupt eine realistische Chance hat, im Amt zu bleiben, das entzieht sich noch immer trotz so vieler erhellender Erkläransätze der politischen Rationalität.

Und realistisch ist die Chance allemal. 

­

­

­

­

­

­

Trump in North Carolina am 1. November

Chris Carlson / AP

­

­

Der deutliche Vorsprung in den Umfragen, den Biden bundesweit und in wichtigen Swing States zwei Tage vor der Wahl für sich verbuchen kann, ist nunmal ein rein virtueller Vorsprung. Der jüngsten Erhebung der "New York Times” zufolge liegt Biden in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida und Arizona vor Trump. Alle vier hatte Trump 2016 gegen Hillary Clinton gewonnen, sie ebneten ihm den Weg zum Sieg. 

Bringen sie ihn nun auf die Verlierstraße? Aber würde er eine Niederlage denn überhaupt akzeptieren?

Am Wochenende suchte der Präsident neuerlich Misstrauen mit Blick auf den Wahlprozess und die Briefwahlstimmen zu säen: "Die ganze Welt und unser Land werden warten und warten und warten, um zu erfahren, wer gewonnen hat, ihr werdet wochenlang warten.” Der 3. November werde kommen und gehen und man werde es nicht wissen: "Und ihr werdet chaotisches Durcheinander in unserem Land haben.” 

Mittlerweile haben bereits mehr als 90 Millionen US-Amerikaner ihre Stimmen abgegeben - das sind bereits zwei Drittel der Gesamtstimmenzahl von 2016. Mit einer Rekordwahlbeteiligung ist zu rechnen. Wobei Rekord relativ ist: Wenn 65 Prozent der Wahlberechtigten abstimmten, wäre das bereits eine Bestmarke für US-Verhältnisse. 

Bleibt Trump, wenn Biden kommt?

­

­

­

­

­

­

Joe Biden in Philadelphia am 1. November

Andrew Harnik / dpa

­

­

Sollte Joe Biden siegen, wird er das Land nicht einfach aufs alte Gleis zurücksetzen können. Auch wenn er das verspricht und Trump nur als Verirrung der Geschichte sehen mag. Tatsächlich würde Biden nicht da anschließen können, wo Barack Obama vor vier Jahren aufgehört hat - sondern er müsste an Trump anschließen.

Deshalb möchte ich Ihnen unsere aktuelle SPIEGEL-Titelstory empfehlen: Was von Trump bleibt - selbst wenn er gehen muss. Trump ist ja nicht allein die Ursache für die Spaltung der Nation, sondern Symptom einer tief reichenden Krise, die nicht verschwindet, wenn Trump verschwindet. 

Und noch etwas kommt hinzu: Wir Menschen tendieren dazu, uns an alles zu gewöhnen. Das sichert unser Überleben, aber das macht uns auch manchmal blind. Wir haben uns an Trump gewöhnt, an seinen Hass, seine Dummheit, seinen Rassismus. 

Der große US-Erzähler Philip Roth hat in seinem Buch "Verschwörung gegen Amerika”, das eine Präsidentschaft des Fliegers und Nazis Charles Lindbergh in den Vierzigerjahren imaginiert, vom "Terror des Unvorhergesehenen” geschrieben. Im historischen Rückblick würden solch unvorhergesehenen Ereignisse leider als zwangsläufig dargestellt, ein Ereignis folgt nunmal chronologisch aufs andere. Heißt: Man tendiert dazu, die Brüche wegzurationalisieren. Ein Desaster, schreibt Roth, wird dann einfach zur Erzählung. Wir sollten das Desaster Trump niemals vergessen.

Geschlossene Gesellschaft

­

­

­

­

­

­

Sperrschild vor Kieler Sportplatz: Heute beginnt der Teil-Lockdown in Deutschland

Frank Molter / dpa

­

­

Ab heute stehen wir auch in unserem Land alle jeden Tag im Kleinen vor großen Entscheidungen: Der zweite Shutdown im Kampf gegen das Coronavirus beginnt, er soll voraussichtlich bis zum Ende des Monats gelten. Wie viele werden sich wie entschieden daran halten? Und wie groß ist künftig noch jene Minderheit, die in den vergangenen Monaten mit ihrem unsolidarischen Verhalten die anfänglichen Erfolge teils verspielt hat? 

War die erste Welle im Frühjahr noch eine Naturkatastrophe, auf die Gesellschaft, Wissenschaft und Politik (neue) Anworten finden mussten, ist die zweite Welle doch vornehmlich menschengemacht. Weil wir wussten, was zu tun und zu lassen gewesen wäre. 

Dieses letzte Wochenende vor dem Shutdown machte da nicht nur Mut. Bei mir am Hauseingang etwa hing ein Zettel eines Clubs: Man wolle noch einmal Party machen und entschuldige sich für die Lautstärke. 

Wahrscheinlich ist die Lautstärke unser geringstes Problem.

Noch einmal einen raushauen, bevor wir alle wieder drinsitzen. Wenn jeder Tag zählt, wie es so schön heißt, ist das eine reichlich dumme Strategie. Und es illustriert erneut, dass unser gegenwärtiges Problem menschengemacht ist. Je größer das Ich, desto größer die Krise.

Außer Schulen und Kitas sowie Supermärkten und Geschäften (und ausgerechnet Gottesdiensten) wird nun alles wieder heruntergefahren. Weil die regional spezifischen Maßnahmen der vergangenen Wochen nicht griffen, bleibt nur die Hoffnung auf dieses generellere, sogenannte Wellenbrechermodell

Ist das gerecht? Nein, ist es nicht. Kann es ja gar nicht sein. Weil nun auch engagierte Unternehmerinnen, Künstler, Restaurantbesitzerinnen die Zeche dafür zahlen, dass wir alle es gemeinsam nicht hinbekommen haben. Die Details zu den einzelnen Maßnahmen lesen Sie hier.

Außerdem darf ich Ihnen an dieser Stelle ein spannendes SPIEGEL-Buchprojekt ans Herz legen: Heute erscheint "Lockdown” - 21 Autorinnen und Autoren aus verschiedenen Ressorts haben die politische Krisenbekämpfung in der ersten Phase detailliert nacherzählt und analysiert, etwa handfeste Konflikte zwischen den Ministerien - und am Schluss die Frage gestellt, was Politik, was wir als Gesellschaft für die Zukunft daraus lernen können. Und was das mit Blick auf die rollende zweite Welle heißt. 

­

­

Verlierer des Tages…

­

­

­

­

­

­

"Ständige Vertretung" in Berlin (Archivbild)

Britta Pedersen / dpa

­

­

…ist die StäV. Die Berliner Kölsch-Kneipe "Ständige Vertretung” nahe des Bahnhofs Friedrichstraße will wegen des Corona-Shutdowns Angela Merkel, Olaf Scholz, den Regierenden Bürgermeister Michael Müller, Bayerns Ministerpräsidenten Markus Söder und andere nicht (mehr) bewirten. Hausverbot für die Politiker. Das ist natürlich erstens unter Shutdown-Bedingungen ohnehin schwierig, zweitens ist nicht bekannt, ob Merkel und Co. in der näheren oder ferneren Zukunft überhaupt einen Besuch der Lokalität geplant hatten und drittens ist es für einen Laden, der damit wirbt, dass hin und wieder politische Prominenz vorbeischaut vielleicht nicht so zielführend, politische Prominenz zu verbannen.

­

­

Die jüngsten Meldungen aus der Nacht

­

­

Die SPIEGEL+-Empfehlungen für heute

Ich wünsche Ihnen einen guten Start in die Woche.

Ihr Sebastian Fischer

­

 

 

Gesendet von Mail für Windows 10

 

Von: David Shackleton
Gesendet: Montag, 2. November 2020 06:44
An:
realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: AW: Spontaneous preferences in politics

 


>>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit


>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "realpsychohistory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit


>


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.

James Sturges

unread,
Nov 6, 2020, 2:18:43 PM11/6/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
David,

Arguing with Florian is like trying to argue a schizophrenic out of their delusions.

And he's not the only one hanging around this list who is on the wrong side of the psychoanalytic couch.

----Jim



> email to realpsychohistory+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

>


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realpsychohistory+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/00e01e02101c244c49fddef97fde8996.squirrel%40emailmg.netfirms.com.

Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 6, 2020, 5:37:01 PM11/6/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

Since I am the only one I see on this thread other than Jim, Florian, and David, I assume that Jim is referring to me as being on the wrong side of the psychoanalytic couch for suggesting that Biden is not that partisan, assessing him to be a lesser threat to democracy than Trump, and presenting a fact check from Reuters for claims mabe by David. Maybe a delusional schizophrenic like Florian?

I have hung around or lurked on this list for two decades or so. I have posted only a couple of times, and I have generally not been interested in this or other psychohistory matters for a decade. Very seldom some posts appear on my inbox, and probably most go to junk mail. Since I found out about psychohistory as a teenager after reading Alice Miller, Juha Siltala, and Lloyd deMause in the 90s, I thought psychohistory and psychology might help humanity deal with its most important and difficult problems. It propelled me to get a degree in history, masters in economics, and a doctorate in psychology, as well as several years in psychoanalytic psychotherapy. 

I really liked the authentic, insightful and mindful interaction in psychotherapy where there was no name calling or jargon used as insult or as pretend understanding. Experiences on this and other similar lists, and reading some writings of psychohistorians, on the other hand, have been somewhat disappointing, I am sorry to say. People seem to have lots of room to grow in dealing constructively with each other and with conflicts, and with different political ideologies. The words, terms or connotations used seem to be more like walls than bridges to make connections and bring understanding. Also, it seems difficult to agree on what is real. I have grown to appreciate the quantitative side of academic research where I can debate fruitfully with, for example, communists and islamists about psychological trauma. We can all more or less agree on the facts and learn new things despite our political and religious ideologies being worlds apart, enemies even. That is true even though researchers have trouble understanding the math behind the methods they are using. Qualitative research seems easier on the surface, but turns out to be much harder because there is so much room for interpretation that, I assume, it is even easier to fit the data to your preconceptions than with statistics. And you can very much do that already with statistics so that whole literatures can be mistaken (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716.full). And hardest of all are the moral value judgements which seem to come so easily and readily that we have trouble stopping them even if we try. Questions of values, ethics or ideology may be impossible and maybe even nonsensical. I have the same experience as the great American psychologist Paul Meehl, that I tend to always agree with whatever is the latest political philosopher I happen to read (http://meehl.umn.edu/talks/philosophical-psychology-1989).

That's my experience with psychology and with some psychohistory here. Probably will not be bothering you much further.

Esa

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 4:23:33 AM11/7/20
to realpsychohistory

Esa, you write the following: “Since I am the only one I see on this thread other than Jim, Florian, and David, I assume that Jim is referring to me as being on the wrong side of the psychoanalytic couch for suggesting that Biden is not that partisan, assessing him to be a lesser threat to democracy than Trump, and presenting a fact check from Reuters for claims mabe by David. Maybe a delusional schizophrenic like Florian?”

Are you aware, that this mean you think I am a delusional schizophrenic? But still, an interesting idea. he behaves in any case like some sort of sociopath

No Sturges does not mean you, he has been harassing me for decades.

 

I can agree with what you say below: “The words, terms or connotations used seem to be more like walls than bridges to make connections and bring understanding”

Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 8:26:29 AM11/7/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Hi Florian,

I have no reason to think you are a delusional schizophrenic. I was referring to what Jim wrote, associating people here with mental disorders and probably shaming them for having one. Even if one did suffer from schizophrenia or sociopathy, one could still make correct claims and valuable scientific contributions. Indeed, we probably would not be able to communicate using these computers without the work of several mathematicians and logicians with serious mental disorders: http://www.logicomix.com/; https://people.ucalgary.ca/~rzach/blog/2009/09/logic-and-madness.html.

I hope the best for all of you.

Esa

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 8:36:39 AM11/7/20
to realpsychohistory
I know Esa, hope you stay in the group. Thankyou for your valuable remarks!

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 8:51:26 AM11/7/20
to realpsychohistory
David, you wrote the following to me: Florian, you did not respond to a single point made in response to your
posts."  You are not entitled to the kind of response  as you expect, as you think it should be.  As well as I can not expect other people  to deal with my postings in a comprehensively way, as I expect. I am not obliged to answer you at all or in the way you expect me to. I can write something to it and you can appreciate it or not, that's it.

da...@integraldesign.org schrieb am Sonntag, 1. November 2020 um 20:55:08 UTC+1:

da...@integraldesign.org

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 9:05:06 AM11/7/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com

I do not much enjoy the kind of exchange that I have engaged in over the last few days, chiefly with Florian.

I joined this list some years ago hoping to see substantial analysis of current affairs from a psychohistorical perspective.  This is, after all, what deMause founded the field in order to support.

Is there anyone on the list who would be interested in discussing the issue of moral polarization, the us-and-them victim/perpetrator narrative that has become the main psychological vehicle of modern politics?  If not, I propose to leave the list, as it adds no value for me.

David

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 9:46:56 AM11/7/20
to realpsychohistory
I will of course respect your wish and will not write any more comments to your postings. Unless you comment my postings.

Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 7, 2020, 10:31:19 AM11/7/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

I likely won't be joining the discussion you want. But you might be interested in research suggesting that showing people stimuli related to attachment security or secure base reduces ingroup bias (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001). Unfortunately, I was unable to replicate the result in the laboratory. I found an ingroup bias in giving money to domestic rather than foreign homeless people, but no statistically significant effect on the bias from the stimuli that Mikulincer and Shaver used. I am not sure what the non-replication tells us. Maybe not much, because the statistical power was not very high.

Esa
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2001). Attachment theory and intergroup bias: Evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 97–115.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "realpsychohistory" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.

Florian Galler

unread,
Nov 8, 2020, 6:29:01 AM11/8/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com

Dear Esa, are you also on https://groups.google.com/g/cliospsyche? There is much more going on there than on realpsychohistory. It has interesting participants, even if the group is dominated by narrow-minded left-wing ideologues.Best

Florian

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 8, 2020, 10:20:07 AM11/8/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Thank you, Esa. Do you have a link for that study, I was unable to find a
copy that wasn't behind a paywall by using Google.

David
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/0f05a42850f778f9521e72338fd365b9590e0e0e.camel%40gmail.com.
>


Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 8, 2020, 10:24:09 AM11/8/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Google Scholar gives this link which seems to work: https://www.academia.edu/download/45458979/Attachment_Theory_and_Intergroup_Bias_Ev20160508-20701-1lq5vi6.pdf. Sci-hub with its several servers around the world also usually has a version available although that may be illegal.

Esa

Esa Palosaari

unread,
Nov 8, 2020, 10:24:52 AM11/8/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Thank you for the link, Florian! I will check it out.

Esa

David Shackleton

unread,
Nov 8, 2020, 10:32:27 AM11/8/20
to realpsyc...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Esa

David

> Google Scholar gives this link which seems to work:
> https://www.academia.edu/download/45458979/Attachment_Theory_and_Intergroup_Bias_Ev20160508-20701-1lq5vi6.pdf
> . Sci-hub with its several servers around the world also usually has a
> version available although that may be illegal.
> Esa
> su, 2020-11-08 kello 10:19 -0500, David Shackleton kirjoitti:
>> Thank you, Esa. Do you have a link for that study, I was unable to
>> find acopy that wasn't behind a paywall by using Google.
>> David
>> > Hi,I likely won't be joining the discussion you want. But you might
>> > beinterested in research suggesting that showing people stimuli
>> > relatedto attachment security or secure base reduces ingroup bias
>> > (Mikulincer& Shaver, 2001). Unfortunately, I was unable to
>> > replicate the result inthe laboratory. I found an ingroup bias in
>> > giving money to domesticrather than foreign homeless people, but no
>> > statistically significanteffect on the bias from the stimuli that
>> > Mikulincer and Shaver used. Iam not sure what the non-replication
>> > tells us. Maybe not much, becausethe statistical power was not very
>> > high.Esa Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2001). Attachment theory
>> > andintergroup bias: Evidence that priming the secure base
>> > schemaattenuates negative reactions to out-groups. Journal of
>> > Personality andSocial Psychology, 81(1), 97–115.
>> > la, 2020-11-07 kello 09:04 -0500, da...@integraldesign.org
>> > kirjoitti:
>> > > I do not much enjoy the kind of exchange that I have engaged in
>> > > overthe last few days, chiefly with Florian.I joined this list
>> > > some years ago hoping to see substantial analysisof current
>> > > affairs from a psychohistorical perspective. This is,after all,
>> > > what deMause founded the field in order to support.Is there
>> > > anyone on the list who would be interested in discussing theissue
>> > > of moral polarization, the us-and-them
>> > > victim/perpetratornarrative that has become the main
>> > > psychological vehicle of modernpolitics? If not, I propose to
>> > > leave the list, as it adds no valuefor me.
>> > >
>> > > David
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>> > > GoogleGroups "realpsychohistory" group.
>> > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
>> > > it,send an email to
>> > > realpsychohist...@googlegroups.com.
>> > > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realpsychohistory/73c6c3b23eb74dc6673111cd4541f3f2%40integraldesign.org
>> > > .
>> >
>> > --You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>> > Google Groups"realpsychohistory" group.To unsubscribe from this
>> > group and stop receiving emails from it, send anemail to
>> > realpsychohist...@googlegro