Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: There will be consequences

Expand Messages
  • Don Zimmerman
    ... DWZ: Liberals need to learn that a national election is a package deal in which voting a straight Democratic ticket is absolutely necessary to insure
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 19, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:

      > A Senate in the Gun Lobby's Grip
      > By Gabrielle Giffords
      >
      > SENATORS say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that
      > fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy
      > Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of
      > bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must
      > feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into
      > closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love
      > would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them.


      DWZ:
      Liberals need to learn that a national election is a "package deal" in which voting a straight Democratic ticket is absolutely necessary to insure progressive legislation. Any notion that it is OK to vote for a Republican candidate for Congress because of some special issue, or because of the desirable personal characteristics of that particular candidate, is self-defeating.

      I would go so far to say that it is a kind of vanity the part of the person making such a decision, as if he or she is saying: "Look at me! I am doing the right thing!" But unfortunately, the "right thing" in this case promotes failure of the progressive platform. The same reasoning applies to third-party candidates. A vote for the Green Party, this or that extremely progressive party, or whatever, is one wasted liberal vote. Let the right-wingers create their third parties. We need solidarity of the left! This is the message that should be spread far and wide in social media in the next election.

      Best regards,

      Donald W. Zimmerman
      Vancouver, BC, Canada
      dwzimm@...
      http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a82899
    • GOUILLOU Philippe
      In evolutionary psychology, how can we explain that some people are so willing to give up all they have to protect themselves to a leader having already enough
      Message 2 of 4 , Apr 22, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        In evolutionary psychology, how can we explain that some people are so willing to give up all they have to protect themselves to a leader having already enough shown that he is not following the rules (here: the Constitution) and that he will not hesitate to use his power against these very same people?

        Historically, Yuri Bezmenov has detailed 30 years ago the process used to obtain this from people. But what is the evolutionary explanation? What are the triggers engaged? Is that just submission to the Big Man?

        Philippe

        Le 19 avr. 2013 à 18:19, Don Zimmerman a écrit :

        > --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:
        >
        >> A Senate in the Gun Lobby's Grip
        >> By Gabrielle Giffords
        >>
        >> SENATORS say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that
        >> fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy
        >> Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of
        >> bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must
        >> feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into
        >> closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love
        >> would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them.
        >
        >
        > DWZ:
        > Liberals need to learn that a national election is a "package deal" in which voting a straight Democratic ticket is absolutely necessary to insure progressive legislation. Any notion that it is OK to vote for a Republican candidate for Congress because of some special issue, or because of the desirable personal characteristics of that particular candidate, is self-defeating.
        >
        > I would go so far to say that it is a kind of vanity the part of the person making such a decision, as if he or she is saying: "Look at me! I am doing the right thing!" But unfortunately, the "right thing" in this case promotes failure of the progressive platform. The same reasoning applies to third-party candidates. A vote for the Green Party, this or that extremely progressive party, or whatever, is one wasted liberal vote. Let the right-wingers create their third parties. We need solidarity of the left! This is the message that should be spread far and wide in social media in the next election.
        >
        > Best regards,
        >
        > Donald W. Zimmerman
        > Vancouver, BC, Canada
        > dwzimm@...
        > http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a82899
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      • Don Zimmerman
        ... DWZ: Perhaps the powerful influence of ideology and the inclination to follow a great leader (actual or mythical) is an unfortunate side effect of the
        Message 3 of 4 , Apr 22, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, GOUILLOU Philippe <pg@...> wrote:

          > In evolutionary psychology, how can we explain that some people are so willing to give up all they have to protect themselves to a leader having already enough shown that he is not following the rules (here: the Constitution) and that he will not hesitate to use his power against these very same people?
          >
          > Historically, Yuri Bezmenov has detailed 30 years ago the process used to obtain this from people. But what is the evolutionary explanation? What are the triggers engaged? Is that just submission to the Big Man?


          DWZ:
          Perhaps the powerful influence of ideology and the inclination to follow a great leader (actual or mythical) is an unfortunate "side effect" of the process of human socialization. Human beings have been highly successful in constructing a culture that promotes their well being in many ways, but at the same time, the advanced cognitive processes that make it possible can "go astray" and result in a cultural pathology. With knowledge and science also comes superstition. With society and cooperation also comes blind and senseless following of the leader. With language and thought comes the ability to construct fantasy and mistake it for reality.

          At any rate, I would be inclined to seek the explanation in the recent explosion of human society and culture, rather than in biological natural selection in the remote past, although perhaps both elements contribute to some degree. Certainly these issues are of great concern to psychologists, evolutionary and otherwise.

          Best regards,

          Donald W. Zimmerman
          Vancouver, BC, Canada
          dwzimm@...
          http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a82899
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.