Monday, December 30, 2024

When Intellectuals Have No Valid Points-Rumors, Hate and Injustice (Dehumanizing Thought Experiment)

Thinking through how to create the best systems we can what typically comes to mind is the many different stakeholders of society and understanding what everyone wants and needs. That doesn't mean that we should agree or disagree but simply understand for our own enlightenent. Seek to find the universal principles that should apply to all people. Exploring what  a default in justice looks like is important so we can create mechanisms to avoid such situations in the future.

I have been using a hypothetical thought experiment to explore a logic of hate and its destructive pathology that can lead to default, dehumanization and whatever stages come after (still thinking of what those stages might be). Hopefully, not collective hate. Mental exercises like this have highlighted how these things happen in history when we don't have effective backstops to protect the rest of the system from a default. 

In this learning example, a group of bigots and bullies spread false rumors about an out-group member (typically minorities but could be others or someone they can financial gain off) in hopes of causing serious harm to them socially. This misbehavior attracted the interest of corrupted officials that were associated with the clan (The particular persons were part of a homogeneous hate group from a good old boy network. These groups might not see themselves that way but their behavior is part of the problem) who then misused their authority to threaten the targets and seek to strip them of their rights and dignity. 

The rumors caused employment rejection, harmed children, exploited elderly, vets taken advantage of, and has been a tool used by this group for many years. Make up stories and damage people because the homogeneous clan never truly left high school in their minds. They tell each other how to act and think like a cult and they are not allowed to talk or be friends with the victims because they will risk ostracization themselves. They want the targets gone and will continue to push for it. Laws are easily warped.

Worse is when you know those who were supposed to protect us knew of these crimes and rumors were occurring but gave them a "free pass" (It's not about getting people in trouble.it is about correcting and protecting the integrity of the system. We don't need more victims.). Even when they told the targets why they were going to harm them (i.e. religion, race, etc.) they still felt compelled to wink and nod to embolden the perpetrators. People are aware that some people are immune and have a history of mistreating others. They talk about it and some of the victims have connected. 

No one wanted to investigate or correct the misbehaviors and that caused more harm to those who raised a concern (the dehumanization process through complacency on corruption and hate). Whistleblowers were retaliated against and complaints ignored until something happened that couldn't be ignored. It was in black and white and in their face! The judges had no wiggle room with the law this time (clearnly a clan member did wrong.). They had to hold at least one person to account for other misbehaviors even though similar behaviors by this network were prior reported. From chatter networks there are likely other victims out there.

A complete default in justice. Embedded into the group who feels compelled to talk about others and continue to foster a segregated society. Let us take Peggy for example who is a socialite within the clan. She knows nothing of the victim’s dating life, is not the victim's friend, has little knowledge of the target, but yet feels comfortable to take the initiative to warn people that this person "gets around" (defamation of character) and encourages others to run from the person (ostracization). She may not believe it but she is part of the hate narrative that has conjured stories that are part of the story such as crazy, violent, etc. in a way that has fostered open aggression (In this example the person has friends of the opposite sex but those are only friends, has a history of being a descent person to others, but cannot shake the dangerous rumors because they are easy to create as a tool.). 

All legal and normalized hate narratives with follow up mistreatment and microaggressions to keep the harm ongoing and try and make targets intimidated (The victims take precaution because they have never seen this on this level but they persist in striving for something greater. Something our judges and leaders should do.). Most people rejected the hate narrative and know the targets to be descent people. They like the targets but are afraid of the clan (The risks of rewarding poor behaviors and teaching people about unwritten expectations. i.e. unwritten laws). Good people, good souls, doing the absolute best for their community. That doesn't stop the clan from doing their very best to continue to harm others. You scratch your head at the blatant grotesque nature of events and how it has been promoted through misapplication of laws.

Some people have no right to talk about hate and some officials have lost their moral conscious, so they further have no deep insight into the purpose of our laws or the people they judge (This does not take away from good people doing the right thing no matter their position in society.) This is precisely why we haven't solved this problem. The people with the least amount of knowledge judging others about things they don't know anything about (They were never victims, so they have no clue what it is like to be targeted by a large group of people. They also don't know what it is like to be part of a minority group that others seem to love to hate for ideological purposes. i.e. any out-group treated with disdainThus, there are different lenses at play of which different people are going to see them differently. A rare few may have gained the knowledge through exposure to switch through all of the lenses.). 

Hate is not an insurmountable problem and solving it strengthens our social contracts. This is where you see the deep dark hate that is the reality of modern life. We can speculate all day but its there in our face and you can't get rid of it, you can't run from it and you either cower in a corner or you go after it! Higher moral orders should occur and that comes from learning and discussing (I'm sure the hate group has their versions as well.). That requires mature minds and mature leaders.

The author of the following article makes a good point that discussing issues leads to insight but I believe only if all actors have the same long term goals (maybe its life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness). Intellectuals should work against injustice and intolerance for normal variances of life. They help us preserve our republic for all people. That should be a true discussion that is neither liberal or conservative but one based on seeking truth and the solutions that come from that truth.

Intellectuals should be able to discuss issues without having their freedom of speech violated or the games that harm those seeking to improve society. We are seeing more of this in modern times. You say something someone doesn't like, and that person quickly feels the rath of the lack of critical thinking and commitment to our values. If we lose our freedom of speech and our intellectuals the rest of the system starts to break down. The Role of Social Research in Opposing Injustice (I need not agree or disagree with the article but simply understand it.)

If you’re asking me, I believe we must be the most enlightened people we can be and if extremism and bigotries have made their way through bad actors into the system we should think of redesigning some of its aspects. That is not for or against any political perspective but for a greater cause and the cause of freedom. We have to be able to discuss these issues and find solutions. If we don't, we do run the risk of the worst of us making decisions that do not foster the best of us or the best outcomes.

This quote by John Adams helps us think about our rights as people and how there has been a long line of development to protect those rights. Dropping the torch is not an option (Why I encourage the youth to learn about freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the Constitution, and our history.)No one has the moral authority to upend sacred laws and no one should harm other people for superficial reasons. Further, no one should encourage such poor behaviors, but we can't control everything. Justice and liberty belong to all of us. The intellectuals have a purpose in society.

"Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood." (Notice how a lot of the discussion so far in this thought experiment is anchored back to our founding fathers/mothers and encourages people to solve problems and think of the big picture? There is a greater truth to why this nation was started and aligning around that can help secure a strong future.)


Murakami, S. (2023). The Role of Social Research in Opposing Injustice. Civil Sociology, 4 (1). https://doi.org/10.1525/cs.2023.77386

*This is a hypothetical thought experiment for learning purposes so take with a grain of salt. A hypothetical exploration for philosophical purposes. There is a positive result but we are just exploring the dark side of things at the moment. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Louisville Bridge Over Water-Does it go Nowhere? (Art and History)

As I move pictures from one gallery to the next, I'm listing them for people to see. I'm using Red Bubble to host some of my picture...