Excessive Obedience to Authority

[Time for change]

Very few people (and certainly not I) have a thorough understanding of the power structures that determine the course of our country and the world. In previous posts I’ve discussed a shadowy and powerful elite whom some refer to as “the powers that be” (PTB), who exercise power and influence over events far more than most people are aware of. One of their primary methods is to create an alternate reality, which is necessary in order to convince the American people to continue to play the GAME that has been laid out for them.

I discussed the awful consequences of this in a follow-up post: a nation in which war, imperialism, and an obscene mal-distribution of wealth are accepted as a matter of course. Even genocide and torture are taken far less seriously than they should be. Yes, Americans if polled would say that they are against those things. And yet, too many of us passively accept these things when performed by our country in our name.

The underlying problem, I believe, is excessive obedience to authority.

The PTB strive mightily to create an alternative reality which people can accept. In pursuance of this goal, the worst abuses perpetrated by our country are barely talked about or covered up: They worked us into a fit of hysteria over the 9/11 attacks on our country (before that it was Communism and the Cold War), and used that to justify an invasion of a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with those attacks; they do everything in their considerable power to prevent Americans from learning about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis whom we have killed in the ensuing invasion and occupation of Iraq; and few Americans are aware of the multitude of covert actions in which our government has overthrown sovereign governments for a variety of nefarious reasons.

A prerequisite for these action is story line in which we are the good guys, and all those who get in the way of the PTB’s goals are the bad guys. Such was the case with the Native Americans who occupied our land before the first European-Americans arrived; as it was with the African slaves who so much improved the financial lot of the slave masters; and the Mexicans who occupied territory that the PTB wanted; and a multitude of individuals and peoples over the years who were inconvenient to the PTB; and on and on and on. Anyone who questions this reality, much less tries to do anything about it, is painted as “unpatriotic” – or worse.

Again, it all boils down to obedience to authority. Those who are sufficiently obedient will recognize the reality that the PTB paints for them; they will not object to it; they will go along with it, they will support it; and they will even go off to war and fight for its goals and its “glory”.


Some clear examples to demonstrate the problem of excessive obedience to authority

The Milgram experiments
In his book “The Authoritarians”, Bob Altemeyer describes the obedience experiments of Stanley Milgram. In the most famous of these experiments, men were recruited for the experiment through newspaper ads. They were told that they were participating in a “memory” experiment, in which they would play the role of “Teacher”. Their job was to deliver electric shocks to a “Learner” whenever the Learner gave the wrong answer to the memory test. The Learner’s role was to purposely give wrong answers, thereby necessitating that the Teacher deliver progressively higher voltage “electrical shocks” to the Learner with every wrong answer. Unknown to the Teacher, who was actually the subject of the experiment, the Learner was part of the research team, and the “electrical shocks” were fake, as were the Learner’s reactions to the “electrical shocks”.

At 75 volts, the Learner gives a grunt, simulating pain. By 120 volts, the Learner shouts “Hey, this really hurts”. By 150 volts, the Learner shouts “Experimenter! Get me out of here. I won’t be in the experiment any more. I refuse to go on”. By 270 volts the Learner is hysterical, screaming “Let me out of here. Let me out of here. Let me out of here. Do you hear? Let me out of here.” At 345 volts the Learner fakes unconsciousness or death, but the experiment continues. After 450 volts is used three times, the experiment ends.

If the “Teacher” at any time during the experiment turns to the Experimenter (who is the authority for the experiment) and suggests that the experiment stop, the Experimenter explains in no uncertain terms that the experiment must continue. The purpose of the experiment is to see how far the “Teacher” will go before he puts the welfare of the “Learner” above obedience to the Experimenter and refuses to go any further.

Prior to conducting his experiment, Milgram asked 39 psychiatrists how many “Teachers” would go all the way to the third use of 450 volts. They all said that nobody would do that. Yet, of 40 “Teachers” participating in the experiment, 85% of them went past 150 volts (the point at which the Learner demanded to be let out of the experiment), and 62% went all the way.

Altemeyer sums up the results, and beyond:

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been called a liar or a fool by people who had never heard of Milgram’s experiment before I told them. The results just stagger one, don’t they? But they seem to be true and general. Milgram’s basic finding that most adults would inflict severe pain upon and even risk the death of an innocent victim in a psychology experiment has been found numerous times since, elsewhere in the U.S., and in Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria and Jordan. University students as well as persons recruited from the general population have served as subjects, and obeyed just as much.

Milgram also conducted variations of the experiment. If the Learner was seated right next to the Teacher (thereby increasing the potential for empathy), the percent of Teachers who went all the way was reduced from 62% to 40%. And if the Teacher was allowed to observe a fellow teacher refusing to participate, the percent who went all the way was reduced all the way to 10%.

Ordinary Men – Observations of obedience during the Nazi Holocaust
Christopher Browning, in his book “Ordinary Men”, describes similar findings in real life situations during the Nazi Holocaust.

On July 11, 1942, Police Battalion 101, led by Major Wilhelm Trapp, was ordered to the town of Jozefow, to kill 1800 Jewish women, children, infirm, and elderly. Major Trapp told his battalion of about 500 men that anyone who wished not to participate could step forward and be relieved of the assignment. Only one man stepped forward. The man was verbally berated by his Company Commander, but true to his word Major Trapp intervened on behalf of the brave man. Then another 10-12 men stepped forward to be relieved of the killing. The remainder of the battalion was moved out to participate in the killing (though some of them surreptitiously managed to avoid it).

Altemeyer summarizes the situation:

At least 80 percent of those called upon to murder helpless civilians did so and continued to do so until all the Jews from Jozefow had been killed.

How to explain such excessive obedience to authority?

Of course the good majority of Americans are aware of the Nazi Holocaust and accept it as something that happened. But most Americans believe that something like the Holocaust could not happen in this country. Americans they believe could never do something like that. But Milgram’s experiments suggest otherwise. They suggest in fact that the excessive propensity for obedience to authority may be much more universal than most people realize. What could explain such depressing results? Here is Altemeyer’s explanation, which I tend to agree with:

The bigger reason has to be that the vast majority of us have had practically no training in our lifetimes in openly defying authority. The authorities who brought us up mysteriously forgot to teach that. We may desperately want to say no, but that turns out to be a huge step that most people find impossibly huge – even when the authority is only a psychologist you never heard of running an insane experiment. From our earliest days we are told disobedience is a sin, and obedience is a virtue, the “right” thing to do…

I am saying that we as individuals are poorly prepared for a confrontation with evil authority, and some people are especially inclined to submit to such authority and attack in its name.

But what about Milgram’s ancillary experiment, in which the Teachers were allowed to observe a fellow teacher refusing to obey the authority, in which the percent of Teachers who increased the voltage all the way up to the max went down to only 10%? What explains that? Altemeyer attributes that to the role of peer pressure. He says:

Milgram has shown us how hard it is to say no to malevolent authority, how easy it is to follow the crowd, and how very difficult it is to resist when the crowd is doing the biding of malevolent authority. It’s not that there’s some part of “No” we don’t understand. It’s
that situational pressures, often quite unnoticed, temporarily strike the word from our vocabulary.

Right Wing Authoritarians

Altemeyer defines authoritarian followers and authoritarian leaders (also known as “social dominators”). He defines authoritarian followers as having the following three core characteristics:

1) High degree of submission to authority
2) Willingness to attack other people in the name of the authority
3) Highly conventional attitudes

Altemeyer provides a 22 question personality survey that measures a person’s right wing authoritarian follower propensity. He calls it the right wing authoritarian (RWA) scale because in the United States the great majority of authoritarians are politically right wing, and even if they are not politically right wing, their personality is right wing.

I discuss authoritarian followers (RWAs) in detail in this post. Specifically, I discuss their tendency for submission to authority, conformity, hatred and cruelty, and cowardice. You might recognize that all of those traits, individually or in combination, help to explain the results of the Milgram experiments (as well as the Nazi Holocaust, other genocides, and much of the passivity of the American people in the face of atrocities committed by our government in our name).

Altemeyer sums up RWAs like this:

If illogical thinking, highly compartmentalized ideas, double standards, and hypocrisy help one to be brutally unfair to others, high RWAs have extra helpings in all those respects. If being fearful makes one likely to aggress in the name of authority, high RWAs are scared up one side and down the other. If being self-righteous permits one to think that attacks against helpless victims are justified, authoritarian followers have their self-righteousness super-sized, thank you…. If being defensive, blind to oneself and highly dogmatic make it unlikely one will ever come to grips with one’s failings, authoritarian followers get voted “Least Likely to Change”.

Gradations of the RWA trait

But how do we explain 85% of men in Milgram’s experiment willing to continue to shock people beyond the points where they beg them to stop, and 62% willing to continue until they’re dead? Surely 85% of Americans are not RWAs, are they?

Altemeyer explains that it’s more complicated than that. The RWA trait is not simply an either/or proposition. There are many gradations of the trait, and the vast majority of us have at least some of the characteristics of the RWA in us:

Research shows it takes more pressure to get low RWAs (those with low scores on the RWA test) to behave shamefully in situations like the Milgram experiment than it takes for highs. But the difference between low and high authoritarians is one of degree, I repeat, not kind… With enough direct pressure from above and subtle pressure from around us, Milgram has shown, most of us cave in. Not very reassuring, huh. But it makes crystal clear, if it wasn’t before, why we have to keep malevolent leaders out of power.

Resistance to authority

If Altemeyer is correct – and I believe he is – then one of the biggest underlying problems facing our nation and our world today is the tendency of the bulk of humanity towards excessive obedience to “authority”. That trait allows the authoritarian leaders – the “social dominators” – to use much of the rest of us as tools for their malevolent purposes.

How do we change that? That’s a tremendously difficult question, and Altemeyer has no easy answers for it. Basically, he says that it’s a matter of education. People need to be educated in school and in their personal lives that obedience to authority is not the virtue that the PTB make it out to be. For the sake of a better country and a better world, it is far more important to question authority than it is to offer blind obedience to it. But the PTB have control of our educational system.

So how do we change the mind set of the world? Altemeyer speaks of finding common ground with those who are more RWA than us; creating a system that makes a liberal education affordable and accessible to everyone; and being a role model through non-violent protest and through being willing to question or buck authority when we need to.

I have never been in a situation similar to those depicted in the above noted accounts of Police Battalion 101 or Milgram’s experiments. So I can’t say for sure how I would react in those situations. But I can give a less dramatic example from my personal life: About 25 years ago I was a physician in the U.S. Air Force, and I was treating a pilot for a sexually transmitted disease. In accordance with Air Force policy, I asked him who his sexual contacts were, so that we could contact them and make sure that they were treated with the appropriate antibiotics. He refused to tell me. We argued about it for several minutes, and finally I told him that he would have to give me the information or else I would turn him in. That’s when he told me that he was gay. Consequently, I was required to turn him in even if he didn’t have a sexually transmitted disease (In those days, there was no patient-physician confidentiality understanding in the U.S. military, as there is in civilian life – I don’t know if that rule still exists today). If I turned him in (or if he named his sexual contact) he would lose his job and his pension – everything. That put the matter in an entirely different light. I had to stop and think. How could I do that to somebody and live with myself? So I made a deal with him. If he promised me that he would notify his sexual contact I would let the matter drop at that.

Doing that didn’t take much courage. There was almost no chance that the Air Force would ever find out about my failure to report him. What it took was an ability to question the rules that I was supposed to operate under. I stopped to question those rules, and I determined that they were inhumane. From there, the decision was easy. I simply decided that I was a human being first and an Air Force officer second. That’s the way I look at it anyhow. I think that the world would be a lot better if more people did that more often. I also think that the good majority of DUers would have made the same decision that I did in those circumstances, but that most Air Force physicians at the time would not have. The military is a very authoritarian organization.


Our current situation

Bob Altemeyer, who has studied authoritarianism for several decades, believes that authoritarianism poses a great, if not the greatest danger to the world today. In the last part of his book, he summarizes his major findings and explains why the combination of psychopathic authoritarian leaders (otherwise known as “social dominators” or the PTB) and authoritarian followers poses such a great danger to us (This was just after the 2006 election, I believe) :

Authoritarian followers… are now mightily active and highly organized in American politics. They claim to be the “real Americans,” but the America they yearn to create seems quite antithetical to the nation envisioned by the founding fathers… The Religious Right has helped elect to high public office a lot of the power-mad, manipulative, amoral deceivers to whom these followers are so vulnerable…What the country got was a government infested with social dominators and Double Highs (those who have characteristics of both authoritarian followers and leaders). True, some of them got caught, or were recently voted out of office. But most of them haven’t moved an inch. They’re still sitting in Congress or running the show…

9/11 has nearly swept us to disaster, the authoritarian threat has grown unabated, and almost all the protections I saw in 1996, such as a “free and vigilant press,” are being eroded or have already been destroyed. The biggest problem we have now, in my view, is authoritarianism. It has placed America at one of those historic cross-roads that will profoundly affect the rest of its history, and the future of our planet. The world deserves a much better America than the one it has seen lately. And so do Americans.

Altemeyer speaks of the need to question authority rather than to render blind obedience to it. He ends his book with:

The social dominators want you to be disgusted with politics, they want you to feel hopeless, they want you out of their way. They want democracy to fail, they want your freedoms stricken, they want equality destroyed as a value, they want to control everything and everybody, they want it all. And they have an army of authoritarian followers marching with the militancy of “that old-time religion” on a crusade that will make it happen, if you let them.

Some things for humanity to think about

I think it’s appropriate that I end this post with some quotes that Larry Ogg gave me just today (Come to think of it, those quotes must have given me the idea for this post), since they summarize the dangers of excessive obedience better than I can say it.

From Frederic Bastiat

When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.

From “Failure to Quit”, by Howard Zinn

Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running and robbing the country. That's our problem."

[Mojorabbit]

1. It is

discouraging to think we as a group are this way yet the fact that we acknowledge it gives room for hope that we can transcend this.

[Time for change]

60. Yes

Acknowledging a problem is the first -- and mandatory -- step towards constructively addressing it.

[anonymous171]

2. Capitalism is more likely the problem. nt

[Patchuli]

6. and the almighty Corporfuckrations!! nt

[readmoreoften]

16. You said it. It's not "authoritarians" that are the problem. It's Wall Street. /nt

[Time for change]

70. You don't think that Wall Street contains a lot of authoritarians?

[skooooo]

57. Wow, in one sentence you dismiss the OPs point....

...and ignore addressing the many credible points made.

:eyes:

[OnyxCollie]

62. It's capitalism that creates the ideology

to keep RWA's in line. The mythos of "cold-blooded killers" who need to be "smoked out of their holes" plays to the RWA's belief system. It allows capitalists to overcome the political and social constraints that limit lateral pressure available to exploit opportunities to obtain resources and territory. Couple it with nationalism after an attack and you've got all you need for imperialism.

[skooooo]

63. That makes no sense..

..because you find authoritarianism in other forms of economic and political systems too.

[Larry Ogg]

67. That’s part of the problem,

there’s enough of them that they can create huge problems with their ass backwards way of thinking,the other part of the problem comes from society who is capable of proper thinking, but is totally unaware of this personality characteristic which turns the individual into something akin too being as dumb as a box of rocks. And yes you find them everywhere you go, and everywhere you look, and every discussion board on the internet.

[skooooo]

68. So it's not capitalism, but authoritarianism..and subservience.nt

[OnyxCollie]

74. Semiotic Marxism.

First, control the ideology. Next, the political. Finally, the economic. You're missing the point, however. The ideological, political, and economic systems all benefit the same people- the ruling class of politicians/capitalists.

The ruling class capitalists are looking for opportunities to exploit to gain resources and territory. States have capabilities, or lateral pressure, in order to obtain these things. Some of these lateral pressure capabilities use force; Others do not. Circumstances determine what lateral pressure can be used. These circumstances involve political and social constraints. These constraints are relatively unamendable. However, speed of change is directly proportional to greatness of force. Here, let the Project for the New American Century explain it to you:

Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and
industrial policy will shape the pace and
content of transformation as much as the
requirements of current missions.

-Rebuilding America's Defenses, p. 51.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

A democratic society is (in theory) not really keen on capitalist imperialism. So, it must be cloaked in rationalization. An ideology of a savage, primitive, "kill or be killed" reality, fostered by frequently-used themes, or frames, developed in popular culture, serves to activate the RWA's authoritarian/religious dogmatism triggers which, during a time of great nationalism, naturally leads to imperialism, ultimately benefitting the ruling class.

In a similar post from Time for change, I posted an excerpt from a essay I wrote for school in which I examined the invasion of Iraq to determine if it followed the tenets of realism (national security) or if it was an act of capitalist imperialism (economics). Here it is:

It is those who govern, partnered with titans of industry, suggests Schumpeter, who now
make up the ruling class.(37) This belief is supported by socialists who see the ruling class as those
in direct command of the government.(38) Menon and Oneal identify three domestic groups
responsible for imperialism:

those motivated by the prospect of economic gain;
agents of the state- particularly those responsible for national security- who may
see imperialism as a means of advancing their own careers;
and ideological, religious, or cultural groups who believe that expansion is
desirable in principle or even inevitable.(39)

Capitalist societies oppose imperialism, asserts Schumpeter, and argues that to avoid the
disdain society has for imperialism, “It must be cloaked in every sort of rationalization.”(40) From
Schumpeter’s research a theory was derived that society’s impression of the motives for
imperialism had descended from a ruthless time in history when “kill or be killed” was necessary
for survival.(41) Schumpeter notes that these beliefs are fostered by the ruling class, which they
find serves their needs.(42)

The bourgeoise class crafts a mythos of primal savagery and disseminates it to the other
classes to encourage support for its agenda.(43) Addressing the necessity of an informed populace
to prevent war, Miller proclaims that “Ignorance of the desires, aims, and characteristics of other
peoples leads to fear and is consequently one of the primary causes of aggression.”(44) Waltz also
acknowledges that war can be the result of a failure to properly educate the proletariat, “Their
instincts are good, though their present gullibility may prompt them to follow false leaders.”(45)
Yet Waltz, ever the realist, dismisses reason in favor of force.(46)

According to Gramsci, this ideology becomes the base from which politics and
economics arise.(47) The “Gramscian Inversion” sets Marxism on its head. The state becomes the
educator, a hegemonic force which constructs the views, ideals, and beliefs of the society it
governs.(48) “The State is the entire complex of practical and theoretical activities with which the
ruling class not only justifies and maintains its dominance, but manages to win the active consent
of those over whom it rules.”(49)

The state professes an ideology that convinces the proletariat that it is operating in the
interest of all.(50) Bergesen suggests that, “With the success of this belief comes the ability of that
class to continue its privileged position while other classes consider this to be a state of affairs to
which they can aspire.”(51) Quoting Bodin, Waltz suggests:

(T)he best way of preserving a state, and guaranteeing it against sedition,
rebellion, and civil war is to keep the subjects in amity one with another, and to
this end find an enemy against whom they can make common cause.(52)

Gilpin addresses the need for common cause by noting that “Nationalism, having attained
its first objective in the form of national unity and independence, develops automatically into
imperialism.”(53) And it is Waltz who observes that to set this belief system into motion, a
profound and powerful catalyst is necessary: “In every social change... there is a relation
between time and force. Generally speaking, the greater the force the more rapidly social change
will occur.”(54)

37 Winslow, E.M. (1931). Marxian, liberal, and sociological theories of imperialism. The Journal of Political
Economy, 39 (6), p. 749.
38 Menon, J. & Oneal, J.R. (1986). Explaining imperialism: The state of the art as reflected in three theories. Polity,
19 (2), p. 180.
39 Ibid. p. 192.
40 Winslow, E.M. (1931). Marxian, liberal, and sociological theories of imperialism. The Journal of Political
Economy, 39 (6), p. 752.
41 Ibid. p. 751.
42 Ibid.
43 Ibid.
44 Waltz, K. (1954). Man the state and war. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 48.
45 Ibid. p. 17.
46 Ibid. p. 120.
47 Bergesen, A. (1993). The rise of semiotic Marxism. Sociological Perspectives, 36 (1), p. 2.
48 Ibid. p. 3.
49 Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. New York: International Publishers, p. 244 as cited in
Ibid. p. 4.
50 Bergesen, A. (1993). The rise of semiotic Marxism. Sociological Perspectives, 36 (1), p. 4.
51 Ibid.
52 Waltz, K. (1954). Man the state and war. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 81.
53 Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 54 as cited in
Menon, J. & Oneal, J.R. (1986). Explaining imperialism: The state of the art as reflected in three theories. Polity, 19
(2), p. 179.
54 Waltz, K. (1954). Man the state and war. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 58.

Research has shown that those who score high on indices of authoritarian/religious dogmatism support war and have less anxiety than those who don't. The "new" neoconservatism uses language of morality ("Axis of evil"), partnered with brute force, to achieve its objectives. Rummy biblical quotes, anyone?

Fear of an attack can also be used to persuade. Fear causes "bottom up" thinking, whereby individuals rely on basic instincts for survival. Fear in political campaign ads can be used to persuade a voter to vote for the candidate who made the ad, even if they were leaning toward the other candidate. Crosstabulations I ran in SPSS to determine who were the "security moms" responsible for the 2002 elections showed that Democratic women had a greater fear that they personally would be victims of an attack, and had greater support for security measures like domestic surveillance.

Bushco and the Pentagon pundits were a mass-marketing campaign to gain support for the invasion of Iraq; Good & evil for the authoritarian/dogmatic, fear for the secular.

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." --Hermann Goerring

[Larry Ogg]

66. Might you consider that Capitalism is product of Social Dominators? n/t

[EFerrari]

3. Imho, this post speaks to the core of the problem Zinn identifies.

We're beyond fight or flight but in order to live in society, we've relinquished independent thought while still nominally worshiping individuality or, as Mom says, Americans do exactly the same thing at the same time and alone. It's like the worst of all worlds.

Somewhere between fight and flight, there has to be the skill of negotiation. And real negotiation, not capitulation to authority dressed up in perfunctory theatrics.

K&R

[Time for change]

42. "Real negotiation, not capitulation"

I'm currently reading "JFK and the Unspeakable -- Why he Died and Why it Matters". So far it's one of the best books I've ever read. There is so much about JFK and what went on behind the scenes, that has only come to light recently with the availability of previously unseen documents -- on how JFK defied the PTB. He probably would have ended the Cold War 25 years before it ended, had he not been cut down by a "lone assassin's bullet".

I often wonder how many of our elected leaders have this in their minds when they decide on their courses of action. I especially wonder if and how it influences Obama's decisions.

[EFerrari]

45. It has to be. He knows there's threat. Something else, too.

The danger to leaders such as Kennedy or Reagan, for example, didn't occur in a vacuum. The 60s was a period of increased extra-legal violence including assassination, so were the 80s. Imo, we're in another one now. I don't have a model for it but the threat our government poses to others is a threat that, once activated, can be turned back on it. It's hard to say if it's simply consequence or backlash or inertia or what. But once that type of behavior is ratified as Bush/Cheney ratified it, the risk of that violence coming right back to our own leaders becomes possibility. We'll be dealing with that risk for many years, imo.

[vixengrl]

4. Very thought-provoking post--

The Milgram experiments, as well as the Stanford prison experiments (http://www.prisonexp.org/) have been on my mind lately as I've been thinking about what it is in human nature that leads to the sorts of criminal behavior that has occured throughout history--but especially in the War on Terror. Obedience by some, but also, a domineering will to power that fills the void whenever too many people are in "need" of someone to follow (such as after a crisis situation--like 9/11), seems largely at fault. People "just following orders" carry out a lot of damage. But people just giving them, opportunistically, are also a problem. It would be ideal if both sets of people were more capable of looking at the consequences of their actions, than at just filling roles.

It's a lot to think about.

[EFerrari]

5. Authoritarian personalities, leaders and followers, think consequences

are for the other, "wrong" people. It's quite a sturdy little narcissistic bubble.

[vixengrl]

7. The Bush Administration cronies, esp. the Cheneys, and the

Washington "village" media elite are very representative of that dynamic. The Authoritarian leaders from the administration are shocked, just shocked at the prospect of being held accountable for innumerable misdeeds (I believe La Liz called the accusation of torture--"libelous") and the position of many of the "followers" in the media is, "It would be so disruptive to prosecute." As in, "It would be unthinkable that leaders could be shown to do wrong, or pay for it."

[EFerrari]

9. " Caesar never did wrong but with just cause" -- WS

[Time for change]

73. Yes

A major problem is that those who give the orders, the "social dominators", tend to lack consciences. Therefore, looking at the conseequences of their actions is not likely to help. I think that the great need is for the rest of us to gain better awareness of what is going on.

Given the thoughts that you have had about this, I strongly recommend Altemeyer's book, which I link to in the OP. I think you'd find it very interesting.

[midnight]

8. So many reasons why mind control and cookie cutter

robotic allegiance is a sign of mental illness. Our minds were created to explore and live in peace. The right wing authority take on life removes the responsibility and autonomy to discover our uniqueness. It is such a cop out.

[Critters2]

10. Me, I blame the mirror neurons.

They do lots of things, including getting us to form into crowds and mobs.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3204/01.html

[canoeist52]

34. that Nova video was the most enlightening 14 minutes of my week

I've always suspected we were more connected than we ever knew.

[Critters2]

58. It has deep implications. nt

[Mythsaje]

11. This is why I stress questioning authority at every turn...

I know a lot of people buy into the "respect" thing to the point that, even if they were rebels themselves in their youth, they don't want their children following in their footsteps. Thus they strive to teach their kids to follow the rules and not make trouble--or, at least, be very careful HOW they make trouble.

I, on the other hand, was raised by someone with basically no respect for authority, so determined to go his own way that once I was a teenager I had very few rules imposed upon me by him. I had to learn to deal with the rules from the schools, and mastered a kind of passive aggressive resistance to the point I was more of a frustration than anything they could fight head-on. I obeyed the rules I couldn't avoid or the ones that made sense. All others I ignored or side-stepped.

It was a different time. We had a smoking area, a square fenced-in area where the teachers and administrators never tread. We could wear tee-shirts advertising beer. We didn't have school shootings and even a fight between two students rarely came to anything serious. And then, as more rules came into being, things got more dangerous.

Schools are different now, and far more jealous of their authority than they used to be. The kid I was then would never make it in today's high schools. A good thing? Who's to say?

Not me.

[Time for change]

76. I'm much the same way

I've had a very strong anti-authoritarian mode of thinking for as long as I can remember. I find authoritarianism soooooooooooo repressive.

[puebloknot]

12. As the daughter of a WWII veteran, I heard all my young life ...

... (not so much from my father, but from the American culture that existed after the war) -- that the downfall of the Germans and the Japanese was that they were followers, that they followed orders, did as they were told, believed in Kinder, Kuche, Kirche, and were what *we* were not.

And now, we are that!

Thanks for another in-depth article TfC. Much appreciated!

[annabanana]

23. I had forgotten that!. .You are right. It was the ability and

propensity of Americans to 'THINK FOR THEMSELVES" that made us so strong. It was a boost to the whole concept of "rugged individualism" that was used later to atomize us economically and socially.

[bvar22]

48. Ironic.

"Rugged Individualism" has been packaged by Madison Avenue Media to sell cigarettes and votes for Republicans.
"If you want to be a "rugged individual", you have to follow this large herd of sheep."

[twitomy]

81. Reminds me of a cartoon I saw yesterday...

A guy looking at this tattooed up woman with rings hanging off every appendage and saying:

"You non-conformists are all alike"...Got a good chuckle out of that one.

[Time for change]

78. Thank you puebloknot

As I recall, my parents always told me that we should not be so smug as to think that it couldn't happen here. My dad was a psychologist, and it might have been from him where I first heard of the Milgram experiments.

[jotsy]

13. Authoritarian Assault

PTB has created a masterfully intricate program to create what I call a Pavlovian public. By the time we reach adulthood, we are either quite well indoctrinated and functioning as part of a collective, or we live on the fringe, isolated and frayed.
Everything thing from how we learn growing up to the envy all advertising tries to create has been designed to keep us broke, stupid and tired. We're easier to control if they can make us believe they know what we want more than we do. From the looks of things, they haven't much to be concerned about for the moment, but sooner or later the pendulum will swing.
The nation's citizenry requires simple viability to feel valuable and visible, yet the elites seem hell bent on keeping any but their own separate from that particular euphoric notion. I think the society that would allow itself to bleed so profusely from the mid section is a shortsighted one.
We all owe it to ourselves and one another to be ever so much more than they have programmed us to be. Up and coming generations may be counting on us to defy PTB and RWA conditioning. Let history tell our future that some of us understood the power of independent thinking.

[AdHocSolver]

15. Big pharma sells a lot of drugs to help people "fit in" and "function properly". nt

[spoony]

19. That isn't fair

There are lots of people like myself out there who take medications to "function properly"--not because of our relationship to society but because of what goes on inside us. You may find some instances of eccentricity or "abnormal" behaviour being treated as a mental illness, but that doesn't mean that most or even many of us benefitting from "big pharma" are taking medications to "fit in".

[tavalon]

28. Actually, your answer and the one you were answering are likely both right

I'm a lifer on an antidepressant. I take it to not let my emotional self go down a black hole and yet, I've come to realize over the years that what caused my set point to be wrong wasn't all genetics. I don't fit in this world well, nor frankly, should I. I also work in one of the most dysfunctional groupings on earth, a highly codependent group when I've worked on and mostly conquered my own codependence, making me an even poorer fit for the group. My set point is now set, though, so I continue the medication because I don't want to live in hell, nor do I want to go on disability and give up my lifework, which, while somewhat toxic in some ways is also incredibly fulfilling.

[Time for change]

94. Yes, I think they're both right

There are lots of people who benefit greatly from drugs and need them to function properly -- either their body or their mind. But that doesn't negate the fact that pharmaceutical companies have been guilty of a number of predatory practices.

[tavalon]

100. Absolutely!

They are jackals. That I have personally benefitted is not of interest to them, just the almighty dollar.

[conscious evolution]

30. absolutely right

welcome to du.

[Time for change]

79. "We all owe it to ourselves and one another to be ever so much more than they have programmed us"

Well said.

Welcome to DU :toast:

[AdHocSolver]

14. A handful of interlocking corporate monopolies control the U.S. economy, media, and education.

Years ago, there were numerous corporations competing with each other for markets in manufacturing and services. Most products sold in the U.S. were manufactured in the U.S.

To stay competitive, companies had to attract and keep skilled workers using pay, benefits, and good working conditions as lures. If a company fell down in any of these qualities, there were enough jobs for an employee to look elsewhere.

Nowadays few goods are manufactured in the U.S. By importing just about everything, the corporations were able to eliminate many skilled jobs, and replace skilled jobs with small numbers of low paying clerical jobs. People who fear losing their jobs, and have few few opportunities to find a replacement job, are less likely to question their corporate masters.

With fewer skilled jobs available, there is less need for an educated work force, so the right wing can promote policies to take money away from education.

Then the corporations fund think tanks and economists who spout a lot of nonsense about how things work, and most people stop thinking, and just accept the crap they are told by the "experts".

It is a vicious circle and requires constantly pointing out reality to get people to question what they have been told by so-called "authority" figures.

The "controversy" about torture is an example of authoritarianism at work.

[Lyric]

17. Another thing that adds a dimension of complication to fixing this problem

is the interplay of ideology versus reality. For example--we all know that authoritarian and authoritarian-responsive personalities exist on BOTH sides of the political spectrum. There are lockstep, rigid, defend-the-authority-at-all-costs types on our side of the aisle. This is not JUST a problem of the right-wing.

However, because it is perceived as being shameful, deficient, and pathetic/weak-minded to be submissive to/defensive of authority, ESPECIALLY when ones political ideology is liberal and/or progressive, people will fight tooth and nail against EVER admitting such a thing. If you ask around here at DU, very few people (if any at all) are going to come right out and say "Yes, this is how I am. I follow my leader without questioning or criticizing too much, and I get defensive when other people question/criticize him/her substantively," where "substantively" is defined as "in a way that could potentially lessen the authority's political viability if the criticism is taken seriously." The same is true for Freeperville--they'll never admit to blindly following a leader, because it would make them seem weak, stupid, or even (in THEIR sicko view, anyway) "effeminate" to submit like that. When people refuse to even acknowledge that a problem EXISTS, then there's no way to even begin to try and solve it. In fact, some people probably have their hackles up just reading this post, thinking "Ooooo, she better not be talking about ME!!!!" and are considered laying into me for saying it out loud--which would be a perfect example of EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

It's difficult to have a serious discussion about this very REAL problem when the premise of the forum in which the discussion is taking place is one of obedience to/adherence with/support for authority. Many people simply cannot and WILL not believe or accept that they might actually be part of the problem. Only by pretending that this is a right-wing problem can we even have this discussion at ALL. That leaves those of us who advocate for vigorously questioning ALL authority in a bind; when we argue that regular, mostly-unquestioning obeisance to authority is a Bad Thing, our words are twisted and we are accused of "bashing," "hating," "pouting," and "trolling." Instead of judging what is said by the content, or debating the merits of the content, the defensive ones direct their energy toward tainting and discrediting the speaker. It's incredibly frustrating, and it leads to a lot of hard feelings.

This drama plays out on DU almost every day. People are sensitive about it. I really wish we could talk seriously and constructively about it, but human nature forbids it. We will never admit that we are part of the problem. It will always be those Other* People--never, ever us.

* Freepers, Republicans, Sheeple, DLC'ers, Blue Dogs, "The Far Left," Lefty "Extremists," Bashers, Morans, Anyone But Us.

[Time for change]

37. Today's political landscape as I see it

I see today in our Congress a far right wing party and a centrist party, composed of center-left, center, and center-right members. I certainly don't think of the Democratic Party as represented in Congress as a left party. The American people are far to the left of our government. In other words, I don't see all sides of the political spectrum represented in the OP. That's the way that the PTB wants it and fights to keep it.

And, as I said in the OP, almost everyone has some RWA in them. I think that the good majority of us have at least some unhealthy tendency towards obedience to authority. That's not to say that I'm in favor of anarchy, or that I don't recognize the need for laws. I do. But people need to think more about the authorities that they submit to.

[ChiciB1]

39. I Agree With All You've Said... But WHAT Can We Do??? I'm At My Wit's End &

I just want to GIVE UP!! I KNOW it's affecting my health and I REALLY need to STOP coming here for my news, but I don't watch MSM anymore and if I don't I won't know anything!

I've always tried to be a part of the political process here in America since Viet Nam, but I'm so LOST & CONFUSED as to WHY we no longer are affective in any way!! Believe I've tried in my own community and Nationally, it's NOT WORKING!!

I live in a very Red county and fighting back here is a REAL JOKE!! I think there are time I think I'm going crazy!

Gotta go clean a house for some "extra" cash... at least I HAVE that!

[Time for change]

52. History is full of cycles and ups and downs

And it is much broader than any individual's life span. All we can hope to see from our own individual efforts (with some rare exceptions) are small victories. But at least we should take hope from the fact that individually are part of a much larger movement, and be proud of our small individual contributions.

[ChiciB1]

103. I've Stopped Using The Word HOPE... Again!! Used It For A Little While

during the campaign and election, now I'm back to "wishing" but thinking that's NEVER going to be an option!

[truedelphi]

95. Boy does your post resonate with me.

Just read through a link that MadFloridian had up-- it went way back to a post made in Fall 2007. Apparently back then, Rahm was in Florida and saw to it that a very conservative person
was seduced into the Democratic party. (Jennings someone) Then the party dumped a long time Dem who was against the war in Iraq and was for immediate withdrawal. (Can't have a liberal Democrat running as a Democrat, can we?)

The Dem party then asked Barbara Boxer to do a fund raiser for the conservative Jennings - and to get Boxer to do this, they LIED and didn't let her know that there was a more liberal Dem out there wanting to run. So Boxer was able to raise a full 300K for the conservative Dem.

That's what we are up against. The DLC leadership (now in occupation at the WH) could care less about most of us in this nation. So what if there are no jobs? So what if they made campaign promises ensuring that Wall Street gets the last buck owned by Main Street? It is no skin off their noses.

[ChiciB1]

102. Her Name Is Christine Jennings... She Lives In MY COUNTY & She's the One

who lost the closest thing this county had to electing a Democrat in 2006! She lost by 369 votes, but somehow 18,500 plus got lost somewhere. The challenges went on FOREVER and in the end it was a USELESS waste of money. Almost every week I got emails asking for MORE money to fight the seating of Vern Buchanan as our Representative! In 2008 even Rahm blew her off and she lost the election horribly. She never was my first pick, but she was the candidate! Now I hear that Buchanan is thinking about running for Governor or maybe Senator!! Not sure which. What a HORROR!!!

Jennings herself had always been a Repuke, but the PTB decided she "could" win if given enough money! Didn't happen! Our Supervisor of Elections who just got re-elected AGAIN is a WITCH, but she had a GOOD TEACHER! The Representative we had BEFORE Buchanan was none other than Katherine "Cruella" Harris! Like them apples?? It's almost torture living here when it comes to politics! We did have MORE Democrats running in 2008 than ever before, but I think with ALL the races only ONE got elected and I don't think it was a POWER position!

I worked hard for Dems here, but most of them are so very "lite" I feel like a white seed in a watermelon! The watermelons that have mostly black seeds, so that's not a racial comment... just watermelons with seeds are mostly black! Getting involved with local politics is a hair pulling effort and most others look at me or perhaps think of me as some kind of a kook! I don't know, but I've stopped going to meetings here, it takes time away from things I need to do here at home and for my family. Only if you lived here could you understand what I'm saying! Could I move, not really! Both of my kids live here and almost all of our extended live here or near by. My husband was born in Tampa and is a real FL native!

I've lived in THIS county since 1978 and I have yet to see ANY Democrat with ANY power! Obama lost this county by about 112 votes! And that's saying a lot!! He did come here and got GREAT receptions, but it's gone now. Democratic Presidential candidates don't come here! Most people I talk to now say they thought it was going to be different, I don't argue anymore... it is what it is!

I too am disillusioned with issues that Obama has changed his mind on, so I find it hard to argue something even I don't agree with! I just posted elsewhere... guess it's time to pass the torch, I just can't take what it's doing to me!

And yes, my thoughts about Rahm go back a long time ago... I've NEVER been one of his "fannies!"

JMHO!
:shrug:

[truedelphi]

105. Likeyou say - BOHICA!

After growing up in Cook County Illinois, which felt to me like being in an Eastern Eurtopean nation, I moved around to college towns. The first time I voted for mayor in Madison WI, I got misty eyed when I left the voting booth. It was the first time I had voted and NOT KNOWN who the winner of the election would be!

Then from 1984 to 2005, Marin County CA. One of the scummier places election wise. The
then-Registrar of Voters called himself an "indie" but somehow the vote tally for the 2004 Pres. contest was 10% lower than in other Counties not known for being as liberal.

And the guy made sure that anyone running lcoally who was progressive got screwed. When Friedman, one of the people running for the Hospital district lost by 600 votes, he would have been required to pay $ 101 K for the cost of a recount - this for a position that did not pay anything!

Yet that Registrar kept bragging about how neat it was that the OptiScan system had paper ballots backing it up.

[voc]

18. You have just described

How ordinary people can inflict pain and cruelty on innocents. Hell of a post. It is disheartening to realize that we
have been so cleverly and collectively brain washed.

[conscious evolution]

31. scary,huh?

Compete Conform
Consume Create

With such programming its no wonder we are such a sick society.

[Time for change]

82. Thank you

Yes, it certainly is disheartening. Now the challenge is to figure out what we can do about it.

[Fumesucker]

20. This is why the "Dirty Fucking Hippies" are perceived as such a threat..

By "The Establishment"..

To an extent the drug war is being used to identify and punish those in our society who do not buy into the government/corporate propaganda.

Make up a set of more or less random laws with draconian punishments far out of line with the severity of the "offense" and see who offends against those laws anyway. A good means of identifying those who do not follow authority blindly.

Not to say that everyone who does "drugs" is an anti-authoritarian but I'd be willing to wager that a far higher percentage of DFHs are resistant to authoritarian propaganda than are Joe and Jane Sixpack, it more or less comes with the territory so to speak.

And looking back over the last forty years it turns out the the Dirty Fucking Hippies have been right about almost everything while the authoritarian followers have been wrong about almost everything.

[Echo In Light]

26. There's always been an underlying anti-Left ideological bent to the phony "war on drugs."

That it it's also lucrative for the prison-industrial complex, and serves to facilitate the police state infrastructure is the icing on their cake.

[The Bakery Wagon]

29. an underlying anti-Left ideological bent to the phony "war on drugs." What The F?

You might want to tell that to Joey Biden

You know, the guy that helped create the "drug czar". And you might want to look into the history of the drug war in the '80s when both (R) and (D) were virtually falling over themselves to pass new laws and chip away at the 4th amendment. This caused many to look at the Libertarians, who are hated here. What a disgrace this party scam thing is. Anti left? The Clinton administration (with the help of "General" Barry McCaffrey) locked up more herb smokers than Reagan and Bush1 COMBINED. Carry on with delusion, its the special of the day.

I can not wait to leave this land of confusion. Very soon you'll have 1 less left leaning libertarian to pay the interest on the debt that the crooks have saddled your grandchildren with. Be happy.

[Echo In Light]

33. So, you considered the Clinton admin to actually be Leftist? I don't

Moderate republicans, that's the dem party.

That aside, yes, there's always been an anti-Left ideological underpinning within the motive fueling the phony "war on drugs."

[NoPasaran]

35. Need any help packing, dogbreath?

[Fumesucker]

46. I for one do not hate real libertarians..

But a big percentage of "libertarians" these days are simply Republicans who have become aware that the Republican brand is remarkably tarnished and wish to avoid that odious cachet, they are libertarian RINOs.

In fact a great many DFHs are more libertarian than anything else, if you look around DU you'll see a great deal of friction between the "Clintonite" or "moderate" Dems and the more leftist libertarian leaning Dems.

Keep in mind that "The Establishment" is almost equally split between Dems and Reps when it comes to politicians, they are two sides of the same statist, authoritarian coin in many regards.

[Mythsaje]

101. I'm a left libertarian

I don't want to impose my rules on anyone else. They're MY rules, the ones I live by. As long as people stay off my toes and don't harm people who can't defend themselves, I'm okay with just about anything. I'm suspicious of authority, which means ANY authority, from government to corporations (and any RW "Libertarian" who thinks corporations are any more efficient or benevolent than government obviously have never worked for one--at least government has to behave as though it's answerable to the people to some extent).

[bvar22]

49. The Right Wing of the Democratic Party....

...The Wing you are describing is very authoritarian.
That's why they had to excommunicate Howard Dean.
Dean was working to empower the grass roots.

Election 2008 was a crushing defeat for the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.
The "Centrist" (Half Republican) authoritarian Wing is firmly in charge.

[Lyric]

59. Libertarians are "hated" here because their philosophy

of laissez-faire business and government would leave millions of poor people literally starving in the streets, while working-class people died in droves due to unsafe work conditions and forced overtime.

Libertarians willfully blind themselves to the inequalities in the system. Their philosophy ONLY WORKS if we all start on a 100% EQUAL playing field. The fact is, we do NOT. We are not all given $50,000 at the age of majority and told to make the best life we can. Some of us get billions, some of us get nothing, and some of us get debt.

Unequal educations, unequal opportunities, unequal EVERYTHING--how can anyone with half a brain claim that, with these conditions in place, we should "leave the government out" and "let individuals do for themselves." Dog-eat-dog doesn't work out well when some dogs are born ten feet tall and some are born the size of kittens. If you REALLY want the whole society to devolve into a clash of the titans, where only the wealthiest have survived and prospered, then by all means, continue deluding yourself into thinking that the government is the problem.

:eyes:

[anonymous171]

54. *sigh* DFHs and their unwarranted self-importance.

The drug war is simply a money making scheme devised by the Prison Industrial Complex. It has nothing to do with hippies.

[bertman]

64. The drug war has been around for many years. . . even before the PIC reached its current

state of political dominance.

There's lots of money to be made when things that people want are declared off limits. There's also lots of money to be made if you're selling pharmaceuticals that must be prescribed and cost lots of dollars, when relief can be found by inhaling the smoke of a weed that anyone can cultivate for free in their back yard.

The first drug war was lost on the alcohol front. It created such violence and corruption that even the PTB had to give in. But they learned the lesson on how to make money and gain power and authoritarian control on BOTH ends of the deal: production-transport-sale versus law enforcement-education-incarceration. Don't think for a minute that our politicians aren't making money on their decisions to keep Demon Marijuana illegal.

This is a BUSINESS decision that has been in effect since the early part of the century.

[Fumesucker]

71. The drug war started in the very early years of the last century..

And pot has been illegal and demonized since 1937, primarily for racist, bigoted reasons. Indeed, the very term "marijuana" was coined for cannabis because too many Americans were familiar with cannabis and not afraid of it, Washington and Jefferson both grew hemp (a form of cannabis) on their plantations.

There was also a business reason, having to do with newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst owning a great deal of pulpwood forest and not wanting competition from the far easier to grow and harvest hemp.

The history of the drug war is far longer and more complex you know, those familiar with that history find statements such as yours to be amusingly misinformed.

Perhaps you should stick to subjects about which you have a clue.

[Greyhound]

99. So speaks one of our very own RWAs.

And I'll bet serious cash he thinks he isn't.

[anonymous171]

104. "RWA"?nt

[Greyhound]

107. Didn't read the piece did you?

It's a great read, as all of his pieces are.

[Time for change]

84. I abhore victimless crimes

We should be ashamed that we have by far the highest incarceration rate in the world. And yes, the authoritarians were able to accomplish this partly because they sterotyped segments of our population as being dangerous and of no social value.

[truedelphi]

110. DFH here reporting for duty!

We really have been right about everything.

Except perhaps back in the good ol' days, we were optimistic, and never saw this coming. I mean, I was sure that marijuana would Be legal by 1980! And this world is one I never envisioned. A world in which the middle class is obsolete by age fifty - a world where the jobs are off shored.

And where those who ruined the economy get our money to ruin the economy all over again.

It is very puzzling to me.

:shrug:

[Bonn1997]

21. As a Psych Professor, I find it incredibly frustrating that...

Americans are so ignorant of most social science research.

[conscious evolution]

32. Who is publishing

the latest research on social sciences these days?
Any tips or pointers tha may help break the programming?

[Bonn1997]

36. What happens is that

plenty of stuff gets published in academic journals. It then occasionally (but less often than I'd like) makes it to the mass media. (I often show such coverage in my classes.) But I suspect it goes in one ear and out the other of most of the public because:

(A) they don't have the necessary background knowledge to understand the research;
(B) the research does not fit comfortably with their current worldviews and they're unwilling to abandon or modify their current worldviews.

What's the solution? That's a hard question and as only a 2nd year professor, I don't think I know the education system well enough to fully answer the question. But I would like to see
(A) the social sciences given as much educational priority in high school as the natural sciences;
(B) a college education become universal or at least much more common. It's well documented that a college education in general (not just taking social science courses) pushes individuals in a liberal direction. Any government funding to help make education more affordable at least helps in this regard. It's not merely coincidental that Democrats tend to support and Republicans to oppose funding for education; and
(C) more social sciences added to the core (i.e., required) curriculum at all colleges. I'm sure I sound like the typical professor who just wants to give his field a privileged status, though.

[wuvuj]

22. In all these responses I see no mention....

...of the most glaring example of "authoritarianism"...the military.

Is this because of the continual theme of "support the troops"?


And the Patriot Act and the "fear of terrorism"? Another glaring example?


The same people who occupy Iraq and Afgan...occupy the US? Doing it all on borrowed $...and probably borrowed time?

[Time for change]

24. No mention of the military?

What about this from the introduction?:

"They worked us into a fit of hysteria over the 9/11 attacks on our country (before that it was Communism and the Cold War), and used that to justify an invasion of a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with those attacks; they do everything in their considerable power to prevent Americans from learning about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis whom we have killed in the ensuing invasion and occupation of Iraq; and few Americans are aware of the multitude of covert actions in which our government has overthrown sovereign governments for a variety of nefarious reasons.

A prerequisite for these action is story line in which we are the good guys, and all those who get in the way of the PTB’s goals are the bad guys. Such was the case with the Native Americans who occupied our land before the first European-Americans arrived; as it was with the African slaves who so much improved the financial lot of the slave masters; and the Mexicans who occupied territory that the PTB wanted; and a multitude of individuals and peoples over the years who were inconvenient to the PTB; and on and."

That's mostly about the military.

[Echo In Light]

25. Zinn is completely against militarization, and he served as a much younger man

It helped to open his eyes

[Time for change]

87. I love the quote of his that I used at the end of the OP

That is so on target.

[truedelphi]

109. Not sure what you mean about borrowed time.

I mean, I think that Obama will be there for two terms, meaning Geithner, Bernanke and all the other Oligarch's will continue to bleed the working stiffs dry.

I do like the idea of it being borrowed time, just not sure how the overthrow of the Oligarchs would come about. In a one party nation, there isn't mcuh of a way out. Especially not with elections being controlled.

[Wednesdays]

27. K&R

:kick:

[Grins]

38. John Dean & Bob Altemeyer

I first learned of Bob Altemeyer though one of John Dean's books, "Conservatives without Conscience". Altemeyer has been researching this for about 30-years, as I recall. The book is a real great read, and the part that really caught my attention was the research of Bob Altemeyer and his connection to authoritarians that Dean linked directly to Reich-Wing conservatives - by name!

Dean used quite a bit of Altemeyer's research, and actually quotes him, but Dean also wrote that the real good stuff Altemeyer had was held back because Altemeyer was coming out with his own book.

[Time for change]

88. That's how I first learned about him too

Dean should know about RWAs and authoritarian leaders. He certainly had enough exposure to them in the Nixon White House.

[Moral Compass]

40. Excessive Obedience - To Whom Do We Obey?

I agree with the essential premise of this piece--too many reflexively follow any authority. The truth is that most of us are followers. I've always been a natural leader and have always been amazed at how easy it is to just tell someone to do something and then they will do it.

So, I don't need studies to tell me of this dynamic.

However, the author doesn't go into to a key issue--one that he briefly touches on in the first paragraph. And I think it is THE most important problem facing our nation today: There is a power structure in this country that is almost invisible and it is a permanent power structure. The bureaucracy, the military leadership, the lobbying/think tank industry, and the mainstream media remain regardless of the outcome of any election. This is the permanent power base and they are almost immune from influence, protest, or pressure.

Because, officially, this power base doesn't exist. Yet, it is very, very real. And it has far more power than our President and our Congress. You see its existence only indirectly and it is most evident during the first days of any new Presidency.

We are witnessing this now. President Obama came in with a whole armful of election promises and initially was doing his damnedest to deliver. Now, all of a sudden we are seeing odd reversals that don't fit the character of the man. He has run into the real power of the nation. And they don't want most of the things that many of us are demanding: true economic reform, public health insurance or single payer health care, closure of Guantanamo, prosecution for war crimes of the leadership of the previous administration, true governmental transparency, a real 9-11 investigation, immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan etc.

My point is this--many of us are not following. But we are fighting shadows. There is and has always been a shadow government. What we see is like a puppet show. We are constantly going after the puppets, but not the puppeteers.

Witness the right wing cable shows or even the "normal" mainstream media--we spend our time attacking Rush, Beck, and Hannity, or Fox in general. But these are the puppets. Until we spend our energies going after their masters we are not even engaged in battle.

Until we can force the people pulling the strings to bend to our demands we will remain impotent-- regardless of how strongly we rebuke and refuse to follow authority. We are resisting the image of authority--not the actual authority.

The only way to find those at the end of the strings is to follow the money--because in our world that is what it is all about.

[glitch]

41. Well said and welcome to DU.

An excellent coda to an excellent OP.

[Dubiosus]

47. I would say

we are in the middle of bad cop good cop. If you doubt the system, doubt the fucking SYSTEM.
Way out? First step: Through the HDhypnotist out of your house. That is much more about technics than
contents. After that you will enter a new and different world. The chain of command in your
head gets out of order your intuition kicks back in and you can/will wake up. For example as a beginning the ads in the
streets make much less sense because the preconditioning isn't effective and after a while you see the boring infinite loop called our "culture". And with that knowledge grows responsibility which has to be handled wisely. I for my discredit have to say that sometimes I just would love to hit somebody and scream in his/her face to wake him/her up. They are stereotyped answering machines telling me the bullshit they are supposed to tell. The harder and longer a war is fought shows you the importance of it for the PTB. So I guess they are pant shitting right now about the green revolution going on slowly but surely

Own experience. NICE!! :popcorn:

[Time for change]

50. Yes, I agree with that for the most part

But I believe that the PTB is even more shadowy than you suggest. I talk about it more in this post:

"The GAME"
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/411

And this one:

"President Obama and the Power Behind the Throne"
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/449

But there is so much about it that I don't understand.

Welcome to DU.

[ProgressIn2008]

51. Well, Obama never promised or wanted those "things that many of us are demanding"

that you list. You and I and many people here did, but Obama never suggested that he wanted that very fine list you mentioned. I don't think he ran into the real power of the nation -- he was just the next elite being put into the figurehead position for the shadows. This year's model: GQ friendly to appease the American Idol loving masses. But the military-industrial complex and the corporatist empire grinds on, as we holler about tweaks at the edges and as we tell one another in the other "legitimate party" that they're lacking moral values and should be rounded up and shipped out. It's all bread and circuses. And you and me and even the Republican down the street we haaaaate, we're all screwed.

And our masters on Wall Street and in Washington eat cake.

[flyarm]

56. absolutely ProgressIn2008 !! eom

[Raksha]

69. Great post, especially the part about the puppets and the puppeteers.

Re Witness the right wing cable shows or even the "normal" mainstream media--we spend our time attacking Rush, Beck, and Hannity, or Fox in general. But these are the puppets. Until we spend our energies going after their masters we are not even engaged in battle.

They are very powerful puppets because they have so much influence over the authoritarian follwer types, but they are puppets all the same. It's so easy to forget that, even when you're aware of it. But that in itself is part of their function for the real PTB...to serve as convenient, highly visible targets as well as propagandists. It's important not to get distracted by them.

[L0oniX]

43. “Blind obedience to authority is the enemy of the truth.” Albert Einstein

[ro1942]

44. thanks

your artical was as revealing as a chekhov story, also harold pintors noble acceptance speech on amy goodmans show comes to mind. americans have become greedy and spoiled as pintor said they look at the world from a propped up pillow, another reason for doing nothing.

[Mithreal]

53. Give Americans 4 to 5 weeks paid vacations and

they won't need to look at the world from a propped up pillow anymore, they can go experience it.

[Time for change]

89. Glad you liked it

I think that a major underlying problem with our country right now is arrogance. We think that we're so much better than other peoples that we have the moral right to invade them and otherwise tell them what to do. And we should not be subject to international law. That attitude could very well be our undoing -- and the world's as well.

[ooglymoogly]

55. To have this become a reality as it has become

First you must rob a person of his decency by mind numbing slaughter and remove common sense from the conversation of a civilization and that is the necessity of wars. The more common death and brutality are the more the mind numbs to it. We do not teach, Do unto others etc. Propaganda is the first step to an authoritarian state and we have long past the Rubicon of thinking for ourselves, or cutely put "outside the box". This site is a good experiment of the blind followers and those who think for themselves and those who get angry at those who think for themselves and are happy to apply the voltage.

[Octafish]

61. 'Law controls the lesser man. Integrity controls the greater.' -- Confucius

We live in interesting times. Humans have been reduced to sheep, citizens to consumers, and empaths to suckers.

There is NO difference between authoritarians -- Hitler, Mao, Stalin or Bush. They want to control what we think and what we do and who we are. The question each of us faces is: "What will I do about it?"

Agree completely, Time for Change. "Civil Obedience" IS our problem.

[Time for change]

93. That's the big challenge Octafish

What to do about it. We're running out of time, and we (humanity that it) need to figure it out before too long.

[Larry Ogg]

65. I am no expert either but then;

society looks at experts as being the ones who get paid large amounts of money for what ever craft their selling; I guess that’s why lobbyist pay politicians so much money. Ooops, did I say “pay”? Sorry, I meant to say “donate too their campaigns!” The funny thing is that, when I was in my early twenties; circumstances - that I found appalling - dictated that I should learn about how power structures and politics worked, and one of the first things I learned was that the so called experts were the ones that knew the least about what was going on, but they were also the ones who got the pat on the back and big bonuses when some lowly peon non-expert like myself solved huge expensive problems that the experts created in the first place. I guess you could say that this was my first cognitive look at how the real world worked, and for some reason it pissed me off more so than anyone I knew. Although trying to discus the issues with people would draw the typical responses; “all politicians are corrupt”, “it’s a dog eat dog world”, “you can’t fight city hall” and my most favorite, “You are going to drive yourself crazy worrying about it.” Of course I had no real perspective back then as to why people felt the way they did and I didn’t have a clue as to where the answers were, needless to say that I was eventually forced to give up on trying to find any solutions; that is until 911 happened and I had internet access…

I like what you said, “The PTB strive mightily to create an alternative reality which people can accept.” Coincidently that’s a big part of the plot behind the movie called “The Matrix”, (I know, you don’t like movies…) in which machines took over the human race and hooked their minds up to a virtual reality world. It’s a great metaphor and I can easily believe that the author got his ideas from simply looking at the real world and seeing how the PTB controls the minds of the masses and their perceptions of reality through the M$M. Also as part of the storyline; there was a small group of humans that were trying to defeat the Matrix so as they could wake up the human race and free their minds from the machines (My guess is that they were probably liberals; Just kidding!) And in a way, that is what people like you and I are doing; we are trying to wake people up to the very real fact that their minds are being controlled and manipulated so as they view reality as the PTB see’s fit, and we are showing them how this process works through the understanding of psychological research done on both psychopaths and authoritarians.

Of course this subject offers a new premise to the reader, as well as some useful tools that we can integrate into our thought processes, such as, we know by what we have learned and by our own experience that some premises are uncomfortable, and if we look we can watch the internal battle within our mind as we search for a palatable substitute for something that is to painful to believe because that’s what are brains have been taught to do, this is the “conventional” way of thinking. But we can fact check a premise and see if it is true or false, and then excepting it for what it is, this is a new way of thinking, and as more people discover and can observe both ways of thinking in themselves and in others, they will recognize that these social dominators are very much so a part of both political parties and they are taking advantage of peoples ignorance towards this subject.

Alas, they say a picture is worth a thousand words, but I say a picture with a quote in it is worth much more…




K&R Dr. Dale, its OP’s like this that will help change the world, and I’m no expert but I think that’s doing a lot...

Larry

[Demeter]

72. There are also a lot of phony authorities out there

and too many people willing to bend knee to them.

I think this is a consequence of those with authority failing to use it wisely, or at all.


After all, if authority is unwisely used, the failure is dethroned...

[Time for change]

90. That picture plus the quote is worth 10 thousand words

Thank you for providing the quotes that gave me the idea for this post, Larry.

[MisterP]

96. who's it by: is it "Winston Smith"? (also in Palast books)

another altnerative, BTW, is to declare that protestors and investigators are really manipulators: hence the Cold Warriors' "Moscow is in control of the media and the ban-the-Bomb movements" (though another reason for that was that conservatives live in an Orwellian world: a good chunk of Salvadorans believe the 1932 massacres of Indians by the military were an Indian uprising against the middle class--it's like Bluto's Pearl Harbor speech, but scary-real)

[bertman]

75. This blind obedience to authority meme is not a recent phenomenon. It has been cultivated

by the aristocracy and the priesthood for millenia. We are just living on the finely-honed, technological edge of it.

Every major civilization, and probably most that we would consider minor, had to have a way to make the rabble follow those who were "ordained by god/the gods" to 1) defend the wealth, property, person of the ordained; 2) expand the wealth, property, influence of the ordained; 3) protect the honor and status of the ordained against slander by other ordained. So, some brilliant individuals came up with the idea of deifying the nobility. That idea has been crafted, tweaked, modified, manipulated, and enhanced with every generation by the ordained who ruled over the lower orders. Only now, it's not the nobility we deify so much as the powerful, be they rulers, financial magnates, politicians, or religious leaders. The "alternate reality" is just the template they use for their purposes.

I'm not a psychologist, so I'll leave it up to others to elaborate on the psychological aspects of population manipulation. But I would like to state that the ostensibly benign uses for influencing our purchasing habits (marketing) are probably those that are best known by the populace at large, but the more insidious and dangerous aspects, as practiced early on by the Nazis and now by many governments (including and especially, our own), are less well-publicized and hence are "hidden" from the public's view--except for those among us who choose to explore into the "forbidden zones".

It occurs to me that we humans are probably genetically-programmed by nature in different ways. Most of us are sheep-like despite our omnivorous physical characteristics. We are driven by a desire to be accepted by the group and to follow the leaders wherever they may lead us. The sheep don't care why the leaders make certain decisions. They just accept that someone is going to tell them what to do, and mostly try to go with the flow. Others of us are more predatory--or at a minimum, are dominant, aggressive members of the herd--and are driven to lead and hold sway over the more docile types. And then there are the pure predators, those who have been genetically-programmed to get what they want and if that means screwing the rest, well, it's a dog-eat-dog world out there. But, just like lions, tigers, or other top-line predators, the PTB don't feel the pain of their victims and have no empathy with them. They only see them as means to an end. The alternate reality that they impose upon the lower orders is their way of keeping the human social order in a stable state. Or, in some cases, for de-stabilizing it so they can accomplish some other element of their plan for control.


The PTB are the predator class and use their wealth and exalted positions in society to ensure that their positions are secure. But because they are so far above those of us in the lower tiers of the hierarchy, we really have no idea who these people are or exactly how they maintain their control. But we certainly do see and feel the effects. And we love to speculate about how it's done.

Excellent thread. Recommend.

[Time for change]

91. Thank you bertman -- I like your analogy to the herd of sheep

I think that most Americans don't really think much about how it's done. Here on DU we certainly do that a lot, but I think that it's more because we feel the NEED to do it than that we love it.

[lib2DaBone]

77. Control the dialog..control the media..control the "perception"

Our media is under complete control of government agents.

16 year old kids who smoke a harmless joint are labeled "Meth Addicts". 50 year old adults who smoke a harmless joint are labeled "Junkies".

One company owns all radio stations in America... public opinion has no chance.

One corporation owns all TV stations... public opinon has no chance.

The debt is is socialized.. the profist privatized. Wall Street and Washington Insiders rule. If you say anyting.. you can be cut down in your tracks.

It's getting worse by the day.

[FlyingSquirrel]

80. There are, unfortunately, MANY authoritarians on DU

who try to force their views on those who are following their conscience and daring to question President Obama on this site. (Those who, essentially, consider their first allegiance to be to the U.S. Constitution, and above that, to basic human morality.)

Here are a few rules that IMO get over-used by those authoritarians:

Do not post messages that could be construed as advocating violence or military defeat against the United States, the U.S. military, US service people, or the people of the United States.

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

Do not quote or link to "conspiracy theory" websites, except in our September 11 forum, which is the only forum on Democratic Underground where we permit members to debate highly speculative conspiracy theories. A reasonable person should be able to identify a conspiracy theory website without much difficulty.

I'm not directly challenging those rules - I actually understand and generally agree with them, although the third rule seems especially questionable - and in general I usually follow the rules to the best of my ability (subject to my higher allegiance to the U.S. Constitution and basic human morality.) But I think they get used to beat others into submission here. Then again, the site does have the word Democratic in its name - so perhaps those who refuse to march in lockstep with the DU authoritarians (such as myself) really should look at finding different forums to frequent.

[Time for change]

92. I'm with you on the third rule

I am totally against using the term "conspiracy theory" as a pejorative term -- as if history isn't filled with conspiracies. I've had a few of my posts transferred to the dungeon.

With regard to criticizing the Democratic party or Democrats, I've never been given any trouble for doing that. I think that we just need to do it in constructive terms.

[Richard Steele]

83. K&R

[Prometheus Bound]

85. Every OCTer I know has the classic authoritarian personality.

"I'm a strong law and order type" to use their own words.

[Indy Lurker]

86. Too much TV

I think commercialism is to blame.

For at least the last decade, we've been told in the commercial we see on TV that we can't handle our problems ourselves, that we need expert assistance. This includes everything from changing the brakes on your car to doing your taxes, or repairing a dishwasher (better buy a home warranty).

This helps to create a nation of "Followers"

I work with a couple of volunteer organizations, and I have a heck of a time finding any "leaders" No one wants to take any responsibility, or risk being wrong.

I on the other hand take on many challenges where I have little experience, I make a lot of mistakes, but rarely the same one twice.

I have enough self confidence to realize that the mistakes I do make will be understandable, and that I have enough skills to remedy any problems I create or encounter.

[undergroundpanther]

97. right wing personality

from the OP"Altemeyer provides a 22 question personality survey that measures a person’s right wing authoritarian follower propensity. He calls it the right wing authoritarian (RWA) scale because in the United States the great majority of authoritarians are politically right wing, and even if they are not politically right wing, their personality is right wing."

And as far as I can tell social dominator's are the fake alphas, the abusive assholes,the bullies or a bully's defenders that enable a bully to abuse.They are the 1/4 of humanity's monsters with toxic personalities.By toxic I mean narcissists,sociopaths and authoritarians.It is these toxic personality types people need to be taught how to disobey,who need to be contained or somehow dis empowered or wiped away,the cold blooded selfish "game players" causing unnecessary strife among us.

[Greyhound]

98. Damn, too late to recommend. Excellent.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

[emsimon33]

106. Thank you. Critically important.

[NJCher]

108. teaching nonconformism

People need to be educated in school and in their personal lives that obedience to authority is not the virtue that the PTB make it out to be. For the sake of a better country and a better world, it is far more important to question authority than it is to offer blind obedience to it. But the PTB have control of our educational system.

I'm a professor at a public university who teaches people how to defy authority and do it skillfully and in such a way as to empower themselves. I have been teaching students how to do this for decades now and here's the good news:

People love to learn how to do this!

Here's an example. Since I teach communication, I bridge the classroom to the real world by telling my students that now that they know how to write, research and speak in public, they can take their own cases to court.

Then I whip out court papers I personally have written and filed that show how I sue big corporations when they get out of line with me. I tell them how they can do this easily and show them where to get the forms online, how to look up the law, and how to file their own papers.

At this point the students almost always gasp and in some cases they burst out laughing. The latter is because it has never occurred to them to go kick some big corporation in the shins by taking them to court. It is nervous laughter, perhaps, or maybe it is laughter at the idea of their teacher taking Verizon to court over a few hundred bucks.

I say, "You have to know how to do this because big corporations just might restrain their greedy behavior when they know there is that one guy lurking out there who can bite back." I tell them that if they don't do it, who will?

I show them how to protect themselves in the rental market by learning the law for landlord/tenant court. I show them how to use the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I show them how to take speeding tickets to court.

When I show people these practical ways to defend themselves in this predatory capitalist country, their eyes light up and they really are on the edges of their seat. It is an amazing thing to watch: I can see their minds racing with the possibilities. People want empowerment.

Interestingly enough, I also teach Milgram in my classes. I always find a way to bring this material in. Students really need a teacher to understand Milgram. So often they aren't able to contextualize without help from the instructor--but when they do, I can see the pieces of the puzzle falling into place.

On another topic, resistance to authority has to do with personality type. Early in my career, I recall taking a personality profile. The profile represented the results in a circle graph. Mine looked like a pie with a big piece taken out of it. The psychologist explained that chunk by saying that the profile revealed that I had "no need for authority." He also explained that I had no respect for authority, either. In other words, it would have been very easy for me to make that decision the OP cites with the soldier and the reporting of the disease.

Now here's the sad part--people with that makeup are, as the makers of the test say, only about four per cent of the population. So it seems the odds are stacked against us when it comes to having people who come by this naturally teach it to others.

Anyway, thank you so much for your post. It really has me thinking of ways that I can expand my teaching. Before I read your post, I just did this because I think it's a smart way to operate. Now I see that it's not only a smart way to operate, it's a necessary skill our citizenry needs. I feel a new sense of purpose now that I have read your post and the many thoughtful comments on this thread.


Cher

[MikeH]

111. Alice Miller discusses origins of excessive obedience to authority in childhood upbringing

I indicated in a http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5692371&mesg_id=5710315">response to one of your earlier threads about the Swiss writer and psychotherapist http://www.alice-miller.com/">Alice http://www.naturalchild.com/alice_miller/">Miller, and her documentation of childhood abuse and mistreatment, and the long term effects of such abuse and mistreatment. She documents, for instance, that excessive obedience to authority is something that is learned in childhood, and is a natural result of childhood mistreatment, and fear of offending or displeasing one’s parents (or caretakers).

According to Alice Miller, it is essential for both individuals and society as a whole to become aware of and to take seriously the actual sufferings of children from abuse and mistreatment, much of which is done in the name of upbringing, and the long term damage as a result of such mistreatment.

What is essential for an individual person, according to Alice Miller, is to become aware, at the feeling level (as opposed to just intellectually), of what really happened to the person in childhood, and especially to dare to go against the deep-seated societal taboos about holding one’s parents (and other early caregivers and authority figures) accountable and responsible, rather than protecting them or exonerating them from any and all blame, or “forgiving” them. The commandment in the Bible to “honor your father and mother”, which in the biblical text does not make any exceptions if one’s parents are abusive or are otherwise not worthy of honor, and which unfortunately lies in the heart of traditional Judeo-Christian morality, is one such taboo.

If as a child one is mortally afraid of displeasing or offending one’s parents, then an obvious natural consequence is that the person as an adult will not be able to disobey authority figures.

As I have explained in http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5692371&mesg_id=5705941">this post in your earlier thread, I myself had a very difficult father, who did many very good things, but who also was often very overbearing and judgmental, and sometimes bordered on being abusive. I consider it to have been a very healthy milestone in my life to come to fully realize, a little over a year after my dad died, that some of his behavior was actually abusive at times. I.e. it was not just something wrong with me that I had problems with him. One of the major regrets and disappointments of my life was that I was not able to confront my dad or stand up to him the way I would have wanted to while he was alive.

Along with the realization that my dad had sometimes bordered on being abusive, I also came to realize that my having been a Christian, and supposedly having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, had not been of help to me in enabling me to deal with my dad, or with any other problems that I had. I eventually parted company with the Christian faith, and feel as certain as I do of anything that doing so was the right and healthy thing for me to do.

A common example of excessive obedience to authority, in our society, is that of the fundamentalist Christian to the idea that the Bible is the “inspired and inerrant Word of God”, and is not to be questioned or challenged. Thus a person can only be “saved” by “accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior” in this present lifetime. If a person misses his or her chance in this lifetime, for whatever reason, or happens to guess wrong by adhering to a religion other than Christianity, tough luck for that person. If a murder victim is “unsaved”, tough luck for the victim. However if the murderer later “repents” and “accepts Christ”, the murder is let into heaven. That is what the Bible says, that is what God says, and God’s ways are higher than our ways, and past finding out. Who are we to question God?

It is not surprising that fundamentalist Christians, notably http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Dobson">James Dobson, advocate physical discipline (spanking) of children, and that fundamentalist Christians come from backgrounds where that is practiced. It is not surprising to hear about fundamentalist Christian families that are very dysfunctional. It is not surprising that somebody like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Yates">Andrea Yates, who drowned her five children in a bathtub, had felt very inadequate and unfit as a Christian mother, and had felt that it was necessary to kill her five children in order to save them from hell.

It is not surprising to hear of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull">Quiverfull movement, in which couples consider it to be a matter of obedience to have as many children as God would choose to bestow, and consider even contraception, not to mention abortion, to be wrong.

It is not surprising that fundamentalist Christians want to display the Ten Commandments in public places, one of which says to “honor your father and mother”, and makes no exceptions if one’s parents are or have been abusive or are otherwise not deserving of honor.