off-guardian | The mask-wearing phenomena is interesting on several counts; one is
that it seems to be a completely artificial concoction. Another is the
opposing idea that there is good logical argument for wearing one.
It does look as if there is a conscious manipulation of an archaic
psychological complex (the innate fear of “different” deeply seated in a
very old truth about neighboring tribes), i.e., “taking advantage of a
psychological, although illogical, propensity” in order to push along
the agenda of the manipulators — but who or what is the manipulator? I
leave that question up to the reader, and other authors, to contemplate.
We again have seen historically the manipulation of a populace to
hate “other” that is fabricated by the state. The most obvious in recent
years is the Nazi vilification of the Jews. Even more recently Muslim’s
have been similarly targeted as “other to be feared” by the US
Government. Mexicans and immigrants in general have been as well.
Many people believe that other marginalized peoples, races, people of
certain sexual orientations, other religious groups as well as women,
have been purposely and maliciously marked as “other” by the state. The
rationalization for this action generally comes under the insistence
that it is for the “good of the people.” Therefore the groups identified
as dangerous are to be avoided, chastised, abused, shamed and even
violently harmed for being the “enemy.”
This all may seem like a stretch to some people, and yes, it can be
subtle—at least a conscious and nefarious intention or agenda behind it
can be subtle. With regard to the mask-wearing/not wearing phenomena the
process has happened so quickly it is relatively easy to follow its
progress. In the beginning, mask-wearing was considered unnecessary in
the effort to minimize disease transmission.
In fact, several official reports were clear that masks simply could not prevent the tiny virus particles
to reach the inner sanctum of the human body where it would wreak
havoc—a popular analogy was the dubious efficacy of throwing dirt at a
chain-link fence in order to reach the other side. Then the tables begin
to turn, as “case” numbers began to escalate during the horrid spectre
of “the second wave” — mask-wearing became a new focus.
However, an interesting thing happened with the public. They began to take it all very personally.
Seeing someone not wearing a mask did not translate to a logical
response such as avoiding that mask-less person to lessen the
possibility of infection, but rather the response was to mark that
person as the selfish enemy who was purposefully trying to spread
disease, or at least didn’t care about that possibility. Again, it
didn’t seem that people even considered the person a physical threat,
but more an emotional one, as someone that isn’t decent.
Vilification became the weapon to attack this marked enemy with, that and shaming, as well as denigration. “They are out to destroy us, the decent people who care about life, grandma, community and what is good in the world.” That is what marking “other” is all about—identification of the enemy, either moral enemy, or physical enemy.
The eminent Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung made popular a phrase,
“participation mystique,” which had already been invented by Lévy-Brühl,
a French scholar and philosopher who lived in the early part of the
20th Century.
Roughly, and simply speaking, “participation mystique” refers to a
collective human compulsion to project an identity on to a group of
people that is largely imaginative or symbolic. This is probably where a
concept like “herd mentality” originates, or even a more common phrase
we are hearing these days, “sheeple” — people who seem to follow blindly
an official narrative.
It also applies to “conspiracy theorists,” “tin foil hat wearers,”
and in the context of this article, “selfish no-mask-wearers.” This
projection that Jung speaks of is generally unconscious, or at least the
impetus for it is. What becomes the basis for fear, hate, disgust, or
whatever other derogatory term and emotion that sputters forth when
confronting the object of the projection is again unconscious and
archaic in origin.
If any group of people can be identified as other, and conscious
manipulative propaganda from a controlling entity has always been good
at marking groups that are unsympathetic to the entity’s agenda as
“other,” then it is easy to conjure up this magic of unconscious
projection in a group as they move against another, identified and
marked, group.
0 comments:
Post a Comment