A reminder one way how propaganda works

[Craig234]

Studies have shows that if people see something that they recognize as something they have a 'partisan' view on - for or against - the rational part of their brain doesn't actually function, and a different emotional part does.

In other words they don't see it and ask, 'is that true?'; they see it and just feel anger or positive, and that's it. This is why it seems so hard to 'get through' to people, why two sides feel they waste their time trying to talk.

The example I'm thinking of here is the conditioning of people to create such a reaction on 'race offense'.

If you actually sit someone down and get them to think about a given incident and have some empathy, they might be able to say they understand why something is offensive. But that rarely happens.

Instead, people on the right hear thousands of times, that there are false attacks on them about race, that they are called racists, they are encouraged to call everyone of them 'playing the race card'.

This conditions them to react immediately to any claim regarding something being racist with instant dismissal, the brain not rationally looking at it, not considering whether it has truth - just an emotional response they are conditioned to, 'race card, dismissed, angry'. That's an example of how propaganda works, where they effectively don't even hear the information.

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

 

[Yakshi]

Over course it's a generalization, but I think that liberals and conservatives think differently as well.

Conservatives by and large seem to be have their moral outrage triggered far more quickly and easily. It also seems to happen with issues of patriotism, race, their conception of fairness, most types of change, what it means to be a "real American," and religion. They seem to have additional rules in their heads about what is morally correct and what is morally wrong. And they seem to see fewer shades of gray.

Anyway, once their moral outrage is triggered, they quickly leap to a decision, and as you point out, the basis of that decision is rarely rational. That kind of emotional instability doesn't really seem to help them.

I think the basis of a lot of it is fear, although lately they have been pushing hard to make their vices seem like virtues--anti-mask, dismissive of dying people, anti-vaxxers, etc. Too often when I engage with a Trump supporter or a diehard conservative, I walk away thinking that I just had a conversation with a coward.

Here, it's easy to observe and memorize a few forum tactics. Once they do that, they can deflect and type "ironic" and do a few more meaningless tricks, and in this way they can convince themselves that they know how to hold an argument.

They might actually believe that they're rational people.

 

[Lovebug]

Studies have shows that if people see something that they recognize as something they have a 'partisan' view on - for or against - the rational part of their brain doesn't actually function, and a different emotional part does.

In other words they don't see it and ask, 'is that true?'; they see it and just feel anger or positive, and that's it. This is why it seems so hard to 'get through' to people, why two sides feel they waste their time trying to talk.

The example I'm thinking of here is the conditioning of people to create such a reaction on 'race offense'.

If you actually sit someone down and get them to think about a given incident and have some empathy, they might be able to say they understand why something is offensive. But that rarely happens.

Instead, people on the right hear thousands of times, that there are false attacks on them about race, that they are called racists, they are encouraged to call everyone of them 'playing the race card'.

This conditions them to react immediately to any claim regarding something being racist with instant dismissal, the brain not rationally looking at it, not considering whether it has truth - just an emotional response they are conditioned to, 'race card, dismissed, angry'. That's an example of how propaganda works, where they effectively don't even hear the information.

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

Both ways, both ways.

 

[Razoo]

There is a generous level of ignorance among ALEC Right Wing Nuts that have been getting elected ........ and among their worshippers.

Always question authority it's patriotic .........

 

[Crovax]

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

Apparently this phenomena only effects people with a brain so only the right need be concerned, correct?

 

[Phys251]

Both ways, both ways.

No, it's not.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Studies have shows that if people see something that they recognize as something they have a 'partisan' view on - for or against - the rational part of their brain doesn't actually function, and a different emotional part does.

In other words they don't see it and ask, 'is that true?'; they see it and just feel anger or positive, and that's it. This is why it seems so hard to 'get through' to people, why two sides feel they waste their time trying to talk.

The example I'm thinking of here is the conditioning of people to create such a reaction on 'race offense'.

If you actually sit someone down and get them to think about a given incident and have some empathy, they might be able to say they understand why something is offensive. But that rarely happens.

Instead, people on the right hear thousands of times, that there are false attacks on them about race, that they are called racists, they are encouraged to call everyone of them 'playing the race card'.

This conditions them to react immediately to any claim regarding something being racist with instant dismissal, the brain not rationally looking at it, not considering whether it has truth - just an emotional response they are conditioned to, 'race card, dismissed, angry'. That's an example of how propaganda works, where they effectively don't even hear the information.

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

LOL

That is a nice bit of sophistry, but like all such it is full of fallacious reasoning.

1. Part of what you are describing is known as confirmation bias. This viewpoint is not limited to those on "the right." It is shared by pretty much anyone who chooses to see only what supports their own preconceived views.

2. Part of what you describe is the effect of arguments based on emotional appeals and ad hominem attacks. That includes usage of labeling terms (like your example of racist/racism) designed to incite emotional responses, and prevent rational thought.

The main problem with your thesis is the fact that you presume simply labeling something racist makes it both true, AND that those who don't see it your way are the ones who fail to see the truth.

Thus you assume that since you "see the truth" of your assertion (in this case whenever "racism" is invoked) then anyone else who cannot see things your way must be irrational, emotional, and "conditioned" to see it the wrong way.

IMO your assumptions in this regard leading to your conclusion are neither sound nor valid, but simply a form of circular reasoning.

Try again?

 

[Phys251]

How to destroy a glass house by throwing stones in it, brought to you by Captain Adverse:

LOL

That is a nice bit of sophistry, but like all such it is full of fallacious reasoning.

1. Part of what you are describing is known as confirmation bias. This viewpoint is not limited to those on "the right." It is shared by pretty much anyone who chooses to see only what supports their own preconceived views.

2. Part of what you describe is the effect of arguments based on emotional appeals. That would be arguments designed to incite emotional responses, and prevent rational thought.

The main problem with your thesis is the fact that you presume simply labeling something racist makes it both true, and that those who don't see it YOUR way are the ones who fail to see the truth.

Thus you assume that since you "see the truth" of your assertion (in this case whenever "racism" is invoked) then anyone else who cannot see things your way must be irrational, emotional, and "conditioned" to see it the wrong way.

IMO your assumptions in this regard leading to your conclusion are neither sound nor valid, but simply circular reasoning.

Try again?

 

[ecofarm]

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

You believe there's an aspect of life, even any single historical event ever, unaffected by racism? Racism permeates society. No one and nothing is unaffected by racism.

 

[joluoto]

There was a man who explained it like this: " If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

 

[nvflash]

Studies have shows that if people see something that they recognize as something they have a 'partisan' view on - for or against - the rational part of their brain doesn't actually function, and a different emotional part does.

In other words they don't see it and ask, 'is that true?'; they see it and just feel anger or positive, and that's it. This is why it seems so hard to 'get through' to people, why two sides feel they waste their time trying to talk.

The example I'm thinking of here is the conditioning of people to create such a reaction on 'race offense'.

If you actually sit someone down and get them to think about a given incident and have some empathy, they might be able to say they understand why something is offensive. But that rarely happens.

Instead, people on the right hear thousands of times, that there are false attacks on them about race, that they are called racists, they are encouraged to call everyone of them 'playing the race card'.

This conditions them to react immediately to any claim regarding something being racist with instant dismissal, the brain not rationally looking at it, not considering whether it has truth - just an emotional response they are conditioned to, 'race card, dismissed, angry'. That's an example of how propaganda works, where they effectively don't even hear the information.

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

Propaganda, like rat poison is 95% truth, it's just the other 5% that will kill you, and it doesn't care if you are right or left.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Studies have shows that if people see something that they recognize as something they have a 'partisan' view on - for or against - the rational part of their brain doesn't actually function, and a different emotional part does.

In other words they don't see it and ask, 'is that true?'; they see it and just feel anger or positive, and that's it. This is why it seems so hard to 'get through' to people, why two sides feel they waste their time trying to talk.

The example I'm thinking of here is the conditioning of people to create such a reaction on 'race offense'.

If you actually sit someone down and get them to think about a given incident and have some empathy, they might be able to say they understand why something is offensive. But that rarely happens.

Instead, people on the right hear thousands of times, that there are false attacks on them about race, that they are called racists, they are encouraged to call everyone of them 'playing the race card'.

This conditions them to react immediately to any claim regarding something being racist with instant dismissal, the brain not rationally looking at it, not considering whether it has truth - just an emotional response they are conditioned to, 'race card, dismissed, angry'. That's an example of how propaganda works, where they effectively don't even hear the information.

It can happen on the other side as well, that every claim of something racist is instantly accepted, not rationally questioned, at times.

But it'd be nice if the right could learn how it affects them before just wanting to deflect.

Like when you have liberals setting their own terms and conditions of many discussions in order to maintain control of a narrative/premise?

Just like what you are doing here?

I see it all to often from the right and left.

 

[nvflash]

The modern media, left and right, does not seek to inform you, it seeks to trigger your sense of outrage.

When you are outraged, the bodies response is to send endorphins to the brain, trigger this sense often enough, you become an addict to these endorphins.

The more you watch your favorite, outrage driven "news" outlet, the more addicted to outrage you become. You are no longer acting in a logical manner, and your own thought processes are no long sane, but it does keep you watching, and to the for profit, paid by eyeballs on the screen commercial "news" outlets, the fact that you are watching to get your daily fix of outrage is all that matters.

Enjoy, just don't say you were not warned.

 

[Rexedgar]

LOL

That is a nice bit of sophistry, but like all such it is full of fallacious reasoning.

1. Part of what you are describing is known as confirmation bias. This viewpoint is not limited to those on "the right." It is shared by pretty much anyone who chooses to see only what supports their own preconceived views.

2. Part of what you describe is the effect of arguments based on emotional appeals and ad hominem attacks. That includes usage of labeling terms (like your example of racist/racism) designed to incite emotional responses, and prevent rational thought.

The main problem with your thesis is the fact that you presume simply labeling something racist makes it both true, AND that those who don't see it your way are the ones who fail to see the truth.

Thus you assume that since you "see the truth" of your assertion (in this case whenever "racism" is invoked) then anyone else who cannot see things your way must be irrational, emotional, and "conditioned" to see it the wrong way.

IMO your assumptions in this regard leading to your conclusion are neither sound nor valid, but simply a form of circular reasoning.

Try again?

I see you found your missing Thesaurus!

 

[HK.227]

Apparently this phenomena only effects people with a brain so only the right need be concerned, correct?

Recognition before analysis is literally how brains work, including animal brains.
For sapient creatures, subconscious/instinctive analysis occurs before any analysis that uses abstract thinking.

In sports, we call it "muscle memory" when you train yourself to recognize and react to something before you have a chance to analyze it sapiently.
In politics we call it "business as usual".

 

[Yakshi]

Like when you have liberals setting their own terms and conditions of many discussions in order to maintain control of a narrative/premise?

Just like what you are doing here?

I see it all to often from the right and left.

Instead of whining about what you just read, you could summon your intellect and craft a response that disputes the points in the OP, and in that way you'd be participating in an actual conversation, instead of doing what you normally do, which is this silly horseshit.

 

[Torus34]

The educated consumer of 'news' does so through a filter. The filtration process makes use of such tools as a good knowledge of logical fallacies, sensitivity to emotional adjectives and adverbs, instant identification of 'cherry picking' and a disregard for 'blanket' statements.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Instead of whining about what you just read, you could summon your intellect and craft a response that disputes the points in the OP, and in that way you'd be participating in an actual conversation, instead of doing what you normally do, which is this silly horseshit.

100% of your posts are silly shit. You're always on your A game when it comes to silly shit..

 

[Yakshi]

100% of your posts are silly shit. You're always on your A game when it comes to silly shit..

Or you could finally have manned up after all this time and made a substantive response.

No one is surprised anymore by your replies.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Or you could finally have manned up after all this time and made a substantive response.

No one is surprised anymore by your replies.

I made a retort.

You cut bait.

 

[Yakshi]

I made a retort.

You cut bait.

What I'm about to tell you is a true thing about you. Your imagination alone is what keeps you trying.

 

[Port & Starboard]

What I'm about to tell you is a true thing about you. Your imagination alone is what keeps you trying.

More bait.

 

[Yakshi]

Compared what you write. Then compare what you are responding to.

Then think.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Compared what you write. Then compare what you are responding to.

Then think.

Leftist narcissism threads?

I made a retort.

You go straight to bait.

 

[Torus34]

Somewhere around post # 16, the topic of this thread was misplaced.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.