How To Know You’re In a Mass Hysteria Bubble

Stretch said:
It's true then. You really didn't see the news!!! LOL
Kim blinked and backed off. Would you and the left have preferred that Trump kept on "pissing" on him as you call it? Mannnnnnnnn, I could see the headlines now in the fake media....
KIM BACKS DOWN AND BIG BAD MEAN TRUMP STILL BULLYING HIM!

:rofl2:
Click to expand...

[h=1]Whatever Trump May Believe, North Korea Didn't 'Back Down' From Its Guam Threat[/h]That North Korea has not yet launched missiles toward Guam does not mean that Kim Jong-un has backed down

"... More concerning, the tweet hints at Trump’s possible belief that Kim’s “well reasoned” decision was a result of successful deterrence by the United States — presumably borne of Trump’s own threats of “fire and fury” last week for continued threats from North Korea. While coverage of recent events may lead some to this conclusion, nothing could be further from the truth. Kim Jong-un was not deterred by anything the United States did and he did not back down, as some mainstream sources in the U.S. suggested...


http://thediplomat.com/2017/08/what...h-korea-didnt-back-down-from-its-guam-threat/
 
More...

Instead of North Korea backing down from any of the above, precisely what Kim Rak-gyom promised occurred on August 15. Kim Jong-un inspected the Korean People’s Army Strategic Force Command, reviewing the plan to strike Guam along with Kim Rak-gyom. Pyongyang released images of this, showcasing a map outlining a flight path for the missiles from the coastal city of Sinpo in North Korea to Guam.

Put simply: what Kim Rak-gyom committed to last week happened; nothing more, nothing less. Kim Jong-un reviewed the plan to strike Guam. What was never promised in any statement was a decision or a deadline for a decision by Kim to strike Guam itself. What is left open is the possibility that after the August 15 review, Kim Jong-un may at any point make the decision to move forward with the salvo launch plan.


Much of this subtlety was lost in mainstream U.S. and Western media coverage of this episode. Above all, the KCNA statements included an important condition for any decision to move forward with the plan.
 
christiefan915 said:
Let's not rewrite history.

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities. Kaylon Johnson, an African American campaign worker for Obama, was physically assaulted for wearing an Obama T-shirt in Louisiana following the 2008 election. The three white male attackers shouted “Fuck Obama!” and “Nigger president!” as they broke Johnson’s nose and fractured his eye-socket, requiring surgery.

More frequently, Obama’s presidency was marked by effigies of our first black president hanging from nooses across the country, for example in Kentucky, Washington State, and Maine, or being burned around the world. What Trump supporters fail to remember is that following Obama’s election, property was destroyed across the country, for example in Pennsylvania, Texas, and North Carolina, and a predominately black church was torched in Massachusetts.
Click to expand...

Get over it. There were no organized daily thousands of emotionally disturbed, crying, bedwetting, marching, safe space-seeking, free speech-denying, msm-owning, assassination-promoting, mask-wearing anarchist nitwits disturbing your guy. He managed to slither through his 8 years relatively unscathed because he had the msm and swamp's backing at alllllllll times.
 
The mass hysteria has one root cause -- the election loss. Just imagine if conservatives/repubs had rioted for weeks when Obama won or resorted to mass hysteria.

I sort of enjoy their meltdowns and desperation because they are one hateful lot of people. Just desserts.
 
christiefan915 said:
More...

Instead of North Korea backing down from any of the above, precisely what Kim Rak-gyom promised occurred on August 15. Kim Jong-un inspected the Korean People’s Army Strategic Force Command, reviewing the plan to strike Guam along with Kim Rak-gyom. Pyongyang released images of this, showcasing a map outlining a flight path for the missiles from the coastal city of Sinpo in North Korea to Guam.

Put simply: what Kim Rak-gyom committed to last week happened; nothing more, nothing less. Kim Jong-un reviewed the plan to strike Guam. What was never promised in any statement was a decision or a deadline for a decision by Kim to strike Guam itself. What is left open is the possibility that after the August 15 review, Kim Jong-un may at any point make the decision to move forward with the salvo launch plan.


Much of this subtlety was lost in mainstream U.S. and Western media coverage of this episode. Above all, the KCNA statements included an important condition for any decision to move forward with the plan.
Click to expand...

Kim backed off...he'll never back down. This is the only way of life he knows.
 
Stretch said:
Get over it. There were no organized daily thousands of emotionally disturbed, crying, bedwetting, marching, safe space-seeking, free speech-denying, msm-owning, assassination-promoting, mask-wearing anarchist nitwits disturbing your guy. He managed to slither through his 8 years relatively unscathed because he had the msm and swamp's backing at alllllllll times.
Click to expand...

Damn, Stretch. You have lost your mind. There is none of that "daily" with the left, either.
 
Stretch said:
Kim backed off...he'll never back down. This is the only way of life he knows.
Click to expand...

He always does. All Trump did was CREATE a situation.

You're really way too in the tank for him. Try to think more independently. I was never like that for Obama; I didn't even vote for him in '12. When you have nothing but glowing words for everything that pretty much anyone does, you probably need to step back and re-evaluate a bit.
 
christiefan915 said:
His article could have been applied to all the Obama haters, too. The only change would be the issues he was talking about. This is like "fill in the blank with group name" psychology.
Click to expand...
Possibly but he only went down in my estimation when he screwed up Iraq and allowed IS to take over some of Iraq and Syria. If Trump does something like that you'll be the first to know.
 
Stretch said:
You're joking, right? Finally a non pajama boy stands up to him and it didn't work, right? Kim didn't back down, right? Guess they didn't have that on the msm you watch.
Click to expand...
I'm sure lil Kim would have launched missiles into the Pacific just as he did into the Sea of Japan without Trump calling him on it
 
Corazón said:
Possibly but he only went down in my estimation when he screwed up Iraq and allowed IS to take over some of Iraq and Syria. If Trump does something like that you'll be the first to know.
Click to expand...
if he starts that interventionism/regime change neocon junk - i'm gone
 
Thing1 said:
He always does. All Trump did was CREATE a situation.

You're really way too in the tank for him. Try to think more independently. I was never like that for Obama; I didn't even vote for him in '12. When you have nothing but glowing words for everything that pretty much anyone does, you probably need to step back and re-evaluate a bit.
Click to expand...

Trump created the situation lol?

The much vaunted intelligence apparatus claims Kim will soon arm an IBM and they likely can now arm a conventional missile with a small nuke.

What was Trump supposed to do? Keep doing the same thing that got us to this point?
 
Darth Omar said:
Trump created the situation lol?

The much vaunted intelligence apparatus claims Kim will soon arm an IBM and they likely can now arm a conventional missile with a small nuke.

What was Trump supposed to do? Keep doing the same thing that got us to this point?
Click to expand...

You really miss a lot of history.

"Fire & Fury" = escalation to threatening Guam.

Yeah. Created the situation.
 
Thing1 said:
You really miss a lot of history.

"Fire & Fury" = escalation to threatening Guam.

Yeah. Created the situation.
Click to expand...

Yes, Trump threatened Kim. It made the Chinese nervous and the Sanctions are history, as you say.

You didn't answer the question.
 
christiefan915 said:
His article could have been applied to all the Obama haters, too. The only change would be the issues he was talking about. This is like "fill in the blank with group name" psychology.
Click to expand...

nah, under obama conservatives view of underlying reality wasn't shaken it up like it was for you guys
 
Literal Vampire Potbelly Goblin said:
Excellent Article. I am posting the whole thing. I suggest you read the whole thing. Conservatives here will readily notice the signs of mass hysteria present with our JPP liberals.

=================================================================================

History is full of examples of Mass Hysterias. They happen fairly often. The cool thing about mass hysterias is that you don’t know when you are in one. But sometimes the people who are not experiencing the mass hysteria can recognize when others are experiencing one, if they know what to look for.

I’ll teach you what to look for.

A mass hysteria happens when the public gets a wrong idea about something that has strong emotional content and it triggers cognitive dissonance that is often supported by confirmation bias. In other words, people spontaneously hallucinate a whole new (and usually crazy-sounding) reality and believe they see plenty of evidence for it. The Salem Witch Trials are the best-known example of mass hysteria. The McMartin Pre-School case and the Tulip Bulb hysteria are others. The dotcom bubble probably qualifies. We might soon learn that the Russian Collusion story was mass hysteria in hindsight. The curious lack of solid evidence for Russian collusion is a red flag. But we’ll see how that plays out.

The most visible Mass Hysteria of the moment involves the idea that the United States intentionally elected a racist President. If that statement just triggered you, it might mean you are in the Mass Hysteria bubble. The cool part is that you can’t fact-check my claim you are hallucinating if you are actually hallucinating. But you can read my description of the signs of mass hysteria and see if you check off the boxes.

If you’re in the mass hysteria, recognizing you have all the symptoms of hysteria won’t help you be aware you are in it. That’s not how hallucinations work. Instead, your hallucination will automatically rewrite itself to expel any new data that conflicts with its illusions.

But if you are not experiencing mass hysteria, you might be totally confused by the actions of the people who are. They appear to be irrational, but in ways that are hard to define. You can’t tell if they are stupid, unscrupulous, ignorant, mentally ill, emotionally unstable or what. It just looks frickin’ crazy.

The reason you can’t easily identify what-the-hell is going on in the country right now is that a powerful mass hysteria is in play. If you see the signs after I point them out, you’re probably not in the hysteria bubble. If you read this and do NOT see the signs, it probably means you’re trapped inside the mass hysteria bubble.

Here are some signs of mass hysteria. This is my own take on it, but I welcome you to fact-check it with experts on mass hysteria.
1. The trigger event for cognitive dissonance

On November 8th of 2016, half the country learned that everything they believed to be both true and obvious turned out to be wrong. The people who thought Trump had no chance of winning were under the impression they were smart people who understood their country, and politics, and how things work in general. When Trump won, they learned they were wrong. They were so very wrong that they reflexively (because this is how all brains work) rewrote the scripts they were seeing in their minds until it all made sense again. The wrong-about-everything crowd decided that the only way their world made sense, with their egos intact, is that either the Russians helped Trump win or there are far more racists in the country than they imagined, and he is their king. Those were the seeds of the two mass hysterias we witness today. Trump supporters experienced no trigger event for cognitive dissonance when Trump won. Their worldview was confirmed by observed events.

2. The Ridiculousness of it
One sign of a good mass hysteria is that it sounds bonkers to anyone who is not experiencing it. Imagine your neighbor telling you he thinks the other neighbor is a witch. Or imagine someone saying the local daycare provider is a satanic temple in disguise. Or imagine someone telling you tulip bulbs are more valuable than gold. Crazy stuff.

Compare that to the idea that our president is a Russian puppet. Or that the country accidentally elected a racist who thinks the KKK and Nazis are “fine people.” Crazy stuff.

If you think those examples don’t sound crazy – regardless of the reality – you are probably inside the mass hysteria bubble.

3. The Confirmation Bias

If you are inside the mass hysteria bubble, you probably interpreted President Trump’s initial statement on Charlottesville – which was politically imperfect to say the least – as proof-positive he is a damned racist.

If you are outside the mass hysteria bubble you might have noticed that President Trump never campaigned to be our moral leader. He presented himself as – in his own words “no angel” – with a set of skills he offered to use in the public’s interest. He was big on law and order, and equal justice under the law. But he never offered moral leadership. Voters elected him with that knowledge. Evidently, Republicans don’t depend on politicians for moral leadership. That’s probably a good call.

When the horror in Charlottesville shocked the country, citizens instinctively looked to their president for moral leadership. The president instead provided a generic law and order statement. Under pressure, he later named specific groups and disavowed the racists. He was clearly uncomfortable being our moral lighthouse. That’s probably why he never described his moral leadership as an asset when running for office. We observe that he has never been shy about any other skill he brings to the job, so it probably isn’t an accident when he avoids mentioning any ambitions for moral leadership. If he wanted us to know he would provide that service, I think he would have mentioned it by now.

If you already believed President Trump is a racist, his weak statement about Charlottesville seems like confirmation. But if you believe he never offered moral leadership, only equal treatment under the law, that’s what you saw instead. And you made up your own mind about the morality.
The tricky part here is that any interpretation of what happened could be confirmation bias. But ask yourself which one of these versions sounds less crazy:

1. A sitting president, who is a branding expert, thought it would be a good idea to go easy on murderous Nazis as a way to improve his popularity.
or…
2. The country elected a racist leader who is winking to the KKK and White Supremacists that they have a free pass to start a race war now.
or…
3. A mentally unstable racist clown with conman skills (mostly just lying) eviscerated the Republican primary field and won the presidency. He keeps doing crazy, impulsive racist stuff. But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge. It was mostly luck.
or…
4. The guy who didn’t offer to be your moral leader didn’t offer any moral leadership, just law and order, applied equally. His critics cleverly and predictably framed it as being soft on Nazis.

​
One of those narratives is less crazy-sounding than the other. That doesn’t mean the less-crazy one has to be true. But normal stuff happens far more often than crazy stuff. And critics will frame normal stuff as crazy whenever they get a chance.

4. The Oversized Reaction

It would be hard to overreact to a Nazi murder, or to racists marching in the streets with torches. That stuff demands a strong reaction. But if a Republican agrees with you that Nazis are the worst, and you threaten to punch that Republican for not agreeing with you exactly the right way, that might be an oversized reaction.

5. The Insult without supporting argument

When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.

For the past two days I have been disavowing Nazis on Twitter. The most common response from the people who agree with me is that my comic strip sucks and I am ugly.

The mass hysteria signals I described here are not settled science, or anything like it. This is only my take on the topic, based on personal observation and years of experience with hypnosis and other forms of persuasion. I present this filter on the situation as the first step in dissolving the mass hysteria. It isn’t enough, but more persuasion is coming. If you are outside the mass hysteria bubble, you might see what I am doing in this blog as a valuable public service. If you are inside the mass hysteria bubble, I look like a Nazi collaborator.

How do I look to you?

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/164297628606/how-to-know-youre-in-a-mass-hysteria-bubble
Click to expand...

BRAVO
 
Literal Vampire Potbelly Goblin said:
nah, under obama conservatives view of underlying reality wasn't shaken it up like it was for you guys
Click to expand...

Numerous times you lectured us on how and why trump was elected, that we don't understand his voters, that we believe everybody should think the same as us, etc.

So how about giving us your "expert" analysis of why we despise trump without referring to Hillary, Bernie or the election?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top