an outsider of that unity threatens sense of righteousness and becomes scapegoat.
we need affirmation of our participation in group unity. once the frenzy starts, it is self-sustaining and seeing others hardly matters, until we feel alone or abandoned or left behind.
thinking for ourselves is dangerous to that unity, again threatening sense of righteousness.
when i was on twitter, the 'ganging up' on 'the other' was so ugly and unnerving, i couldn't stay on the platform.
this little clip was highly unnerving to watch, and all too real feeling :(
I was in the sixth grade at Parkview Jr. High when I read “1984.“ I had a subscription to “Analog”, a science fiction magazine, and “1984” came up a lot in the various articles. It was in the school library. I vividly remember that library as being quite advanced for our age group. I could check out “Brave New World” there, but at the town library it would have required my parent’s permission because of “adult content.” I was assigned to library study at 3PM, the last hour of the day, so I read, or used the turntables to listen to the libraries collection of classical music or plays.
I actually remember getting to the ”hate” ritual. I thought it was a silly and childish thing for adults to be doing. Then at 4pm the bell rang, but we weren’t dismissed because there was a mandatory “pep rally” in the gym. There was a basketball game against hated rival St. Francisville that night and we had to get everyone whipped up for it. I remember sitting in the gym as we were led in cheers and I realized we were doing what I had just read about. I think that was the first time in my life that I started looking at it all as an outsider and determined I may well be a player in it all, but I would never be played.
I didn’t fully understand ritual then, or how it functions as social glue. But life was all ritual, all the time. The Pledge of Allegiance first thing in the morning. The oath we recited in Boy Scouts. The confessions we repeated in church that no one but the minister remotely understood. The national anthem we sang before Little League baseball games. In school we watched films about the Nazis, all filled with ritual. The anti-communist propaganda films we were frequently shown depicted the commies doing the same sorts of things. It was all about social glue, conformity, group think, and though we were all told only communists demanded everyone think and do the same, we were constantly demanded to think alike and do alike by everyone and everything. Looking back, it’s laughable, but not funny.
As an adult with a sociology and theological education I understand ritual quite thoroughly now, both in how it can promote good behavior, how it promotes really bad behavior. Whether it’s a Billy Graham altar call, or the Trump rally before the January 6th attack on the capitol. It’s all about controlling the crowd and manipulating their emotions. Done it myself many times as a teacher, a public speaker, most especially as a former pastor, invoking symbolism, rules, leading a congregation through the unvarying and mindless performative sequences of a Sunday service, or even worse, a revival meeting whose aim is provoking an emotional breakdown followed by a profession of sin, a plea for forgiveness and a pledge of obeisance.
Ritual shapes literally everyone’s experience. It’s to a very large degree how we perpetuate knowledge, truth and falsehood. And it is 100% about social control. It creates a shared notion of the sacred and profane, the acceptable and the contemptible. I’ve studied it in archeology, anthropology, sociology, psychology, theology, and the more I know, the more I distrust everything about it.
We are all living in "Oceania." All of us. Wherever we live in the world.
What would happen if more folks understood the game, and decided not to play? How lucky were we to recognize what " '84" was trying to show us at a young age, and then to continue practicing critical thinking later in life? "I love the stupid ones," he said.
The old adage of ' power in numbers' occurs to me. Winston's motivation is fear, he doesn't want to be targeted. I think this phenom is definitely already playing out on social media, and it's extremely disconcerting. What occurs to me (not in your questions) is that Elon had a horrible experience with his Dad and he's setting himself up for another one with Donald. History repeats, especially psychological history.
1. Goldstein forces a single point of focus. They are not relating to each other; they are letting loose the rage/feelings they either feel or think they are supposed to be feeling. Sort of like the first time one sits at a table with numerous silverware and looks around to see which utensil others are using in order to appear knowledgeable and belong there.
2. Watching it alone would serve no purpose. Watching it together ratchets up the emotional response as they try to out scream each other. Apparently volume is an indicator of the degree of faithfulness— certainly something we have seen on social media and in various groups. As people experience being in the midst of such anger, vitriol, and belief in the object of their emotions, they become more and more involved in the moment and perhaps the movement. We humans generally want to belong, want to be accepted, want to be right. Being a contrarian is not a comfortable stance for many people. “Go along to get along” seems to be a common mindset.
3. An immediate benefit is to appear to be one of “them.” At the same time, if faking it, there is a cost in betraying one’s beliefs. Being true to one’s self, however, does not necessarily pay the bills. If Winston can seem to agree in this group setting, he lives to fight another day. People end up on the same side for various reasons, not a unified one. Sometimes people simply fall into thinking “can they all be wrong?” And ignore their own values/beliefs.
4. 😂😂😂😂 I think you have first hand experience in what that looks like. Social media is the perfect weapon since a number of accusations and grievances can be launched and adjusted as needed to stoke the various reasons people are on the bandwagon.
I am struck by the way rage is cathartic because there is the calming effect at the end of movie with the symbols of authority. The experience of being part of a herd is an additional source of safety, so that experiencing an "enemy" with others strengthens cohesion. Social media enables a sense of being a part of a group even when alone. Especially when alone. and as we have seen, can be a precursor to action. I'm also relating to the way emotional release in a crowd is experienced by many of us as pleasurable, for example when are at a sports stadium. It is hard to feel hopeful about the future when people are so easily seduced into behaving as a group in ways they wouldn't individually.
3. Fear of ostracism. Being cast out as an "other".(See other, and tribalism, above)
4. It already does! Try stating the truth to "Goldstein- ers" on X, FB, or Trump Stinkhole...or sign your name in the local paper and get doxxed, insults, and threats!
All are Reptilian brain responses and evoke fight or flight responses.
Most are bravado, but J6, Bourbon Street, Las Vegas Trump Tower explosion are just a few of the more obvious related to this discussion.
My immediate reaction is horror, and I had no idea that movie existed. Anyway, being watched is the creepiest part. And of course we are all now under surveillance 24/7 by our own phones. Bringing people together in person multiplies the effect of the righteous anger. I spend time hollering aloud at the news by myself. Being with other people might temper my reaction (if I were not sure of their leanings) but it might also heighten my fury in a collective of like-minded people. On social media, we tend to reinforce each other and not interact with those with opposing views. If someone disagrees with a comment, I look at their profile in an attempt to discern why.
I was thinking about films that I have seen of Hitler’s speeches and the way the people fell in lockstep with their shouting Heil Hitler and saluting. Then I thought about Trump’s speech on 1/6/21 and his rally speeches. His flock acted the same way. That mob on January 6 was violent and destructive as a mob. I doubt many would have acted that way alone. The same goes for social media. They have a certain amount of anonymity so they can type things that they would not normally say in person. They feel empowered because no one can see them as they do this. It is a group mentality while being alone.
goldstein is "other" and thus a safe target. Watching at home, alone, the viewers might see how they are being manipulated, plus it takes a group to reach the appropriate level of hysteria.
Winston joined because he felt that failure to be "part of" might cause him to be diciplined. There were several other men who seemed appalled by the mobs hysteria and hatred...but who joined in at the end. No one can afford to be seen as resistant.
When I first read 1984 it was in the early 70s & I was in junior high/middle school. Then it strongly reminded me of the USSR & Mao's China.
Some go along out of fear as not only will their neighbors report them for improper response but also the State monitors will report them for interrogation & possibly "re-education ". Others respond because of successful buy-in to the group’s politics, policies & morals because they want what they perceived as a powerful, secure group & want the perks of being a loyal member.
Goldstein Is a traitor to society and the government in general. Therefore, the object of collective hate (rage) a necessary focus of an authoritarian regime.
2. Bringing the masses together for 2 minutes allows all to validate hate . Any doubt is relieved being among thousands shouting shared angry.
3. Winston joints in to avoid becoming a possible object of rage if Big Brother identifies his dissent. Obligatory compliance maybe.
4. Yes can happen digitally. I think more of Joe Rogan or Steve Bannon stirring up the faithful.
What role does “Goldstein” play in terms of how members of the crowd relate with each other?
a) Apparently, he is the external enemy they can all unite against. I have neither read the book nor have I seen the movie so there is probably more to it.
What is the purpose of bringing everyone together in the same physical space to do Two Minutes Hate? (In other words, why not just force each person to watch this video alone, at home?) What does being able to see others’ reactions change about the experience?
a) There is definitely some chemistry of the mob response. They amplify and reinforce each other's reactions/behavior. It reinforces that you are part of the larger whole, which is a basic human instinct.
Based on this scene (and the context), what are the costs and benefits of refusing to participate in this activity? We see for example, Winston (the skinny guy) not reacting, until he notices he is being watched. What do you believe is his motivation to join in?
a) As I mentioned, I don't know much about the context, but if you agree with the larger group's feelings about Goldstein you get positive reinforcement when you join in. If you disagree you can preserve your personal integrity by not joining in, although this is a pretty riled up mob and there is the potential for violence. The larger group could also exact other social penalties for not going along that could make life difficult. So, self-preservation may motivate Winston to play along.
Do you think this kind of dynamic can play out in the digital sphere? For instance, what would a “Two Minutes Hate” look like on social media (like X/Twitter)?
a) I have not engaged on the social media sites, but I assume the group think mob mentality could easily take hold there.
Asha -- even more interesting is not watching the clip. But, then coming here to gain so much more insight from all of the learned comments. Good stuff. : )
Goldstein represents the other. As in he's not one of them. He's older, stubble on his face, represents the worst epithet America’s working classes can smear one with, thr pointy headed intellectual (Goldstein, Silverman, Rosenberg…you get my drift). It what Nixon and Joseph Mcarthy smeared Adlai Stevenson with in the 1950’s.
There is power in the group versus having individuals watch it alone. The virus of hate grows exponentially when the haters see the other haters a la Nazi rallies at.Nuremburg. Hitler’s propaganda film maker Leni Riefenstahl brought this concept to new heights. If you haven't seen it, watch her film Triumph of The Will. You’re way to nice a lady to watch that vile filth but it makes your point about getting people to watch it together. She was the thinker planner of Hitler’s Nuremburg rally in 1934 or 36.
a scapegoat is necessary for unity.
we need unity to feel righteous.
an outsider of that unity threatens sense of righteousness and becomes scapegoat.
we need affirmation of our participation in group unity. once the frenzy starts, it is self-sustaining and seeing others hardly matters, until we feel alone or abandoned or left behind.
thinking for ourselves is dangerous to that unity, again threatening sense of righteousness.
when i was on twitter, the 'ganging up' on 'the other' was so ugly and unnerving, i couldn't stay on the platform.
this little clip was highly unnerving to watch, and all too real feeling :(
I was in the sixth grade at Parkview Jr. High when I read “1984.“ I had a subscription to “Analog”, a science fiction magazine, and “1984” came up a lot in the various articles. It was in the school library. I vividly remember that library as being quite advanced for our age group. I could check out “Brave New World” there, but at the town library it would have required my parent’s permission because of “adult content.” I was assigned to library study at 3PM, the last hour of the day, so I read, or used the turntables to listen to the libraries collection of classical music or plays.
I actually remember getting to the ”hate” ritual. I thought it was a silly and childish thing for adults to be doing. Then at 4pm the bell rang, but we weren’t dismissed because there was a mandatory “pep rally” in the gym. There was a basketball game against hated rival St. Francisville that night and we had to get everyone whipped up for it. I remember sitting in the gym as we were led in cheers and I realized we were doing what I had just read about. I think that was the first time in my life that I started looking at it all as an outsider and determined I may well be a player in it all, but I would never be played.
I didn’t fully understand ritual then, or how it functions as social glue. But life was all ritual, all the time. The Pledge of Allegiance first thing in the morning. The oath we recited in Boy Scouts. The confessions we repeated in church that no one but the minister remotely understood. The national anthem we sang before Little League baseball games. In school we watched films about the Nazis, all filled with ritual. The anti-communist propaganda films we were frequently shown depicted the commies doing the same sorts of things. It was all about social glue, conformity, group think, and though we were all told only communists demanded everyone think and do the same, we were constantly demanded to think alike and do alike by everyone and everything. Looking back, it’s laughable, but not funny.
As an adult with a sociology and theological education I understand ritual quite thoroughly now, both in how it can promote good behavior, how it promotes really bad behavior. Whether it’s a Billy Graham altar call, or the Trump rally before the January 6th attack on the capitol. It’s all about controlling the crowd and manipulating their emotions. Done it myself many times as a teacher, a public speaker, most especially as a former pastor, invoking symbolism, rules, leading a congregation through the unvarying and mindless performative sequences of a Sunday service, or even worse, a revival meeting whose aim is provoking an emotional breakdown followed by a profession of sin, a plea for forgiveness and a pledge of obeisance.
Ritual shapes literally everyone’s experience. It’s to a very large degree how we perpetuate knowledge, truth and falsehood. And it is 100% about social control. It creates a shared notion of the sacred and profane, the acceptable and the contemptible. I’ve studied it in archeology, anthropology, sociology, psychology, theology, and the more I know, the more I distrust everything about it.
We are all living in "Oceania." All of us. Wherever we live in the world.
What would happen if more folks understood the game, and decided not to play? How lucky were we to recognize what " '84" was trying to show us at a young age, and then to continue practicing critical thinking later in life? "I love the stupid ones," he said.
The old adage of ' power in numbers' occurs to me. Winston's motivation is fear, he doesn't want to be targeted. I think this phenom is definitely already playing out on social media, and it's extremely disconcerting. What occurs to me (not in your questions) is that Elon had a horrible experience with his Dad and he's setting himself up for another one with Donald. History repeats, especially psychological history.
1. Goldstein forces a single point of focus. They are not relating to each other; they are letting loose the rage/feelings they either feel or think they are supposed to be feeling. Sort of like the first time one sits at a table with numerous silverware and looks around to see which utensil others are using in order to appear knowledgeable and belong there.
2. Watching it alone would serve no purpose. Watching it together ratchets up the emotional response as they try to out scream each other. Apparently volume is an indicator of the degree of faithfulness— certainly something we have seen on social media and in various groups. As people experience being in the midst of such anger, vitriol, and belief in the object of their emotions, they become more and more involved in the moment and perhaps the movement. We humans generally want to belong, want to be accepted, want to be right. Being a contrarian is not a comfortable stance for many people. “Go along to get along” seems to be a common mindset.
3. An immediate benefit is to appear to be one of “them.” At the same time, if faking it, there is a cost in betraying one’s beliefs. Being true to one’s self, however, does not necessarily pay the bills. If Winston can seem to agree in this group setting, he lives to fight another day. People end up on the same side for various reasons, not a unified one. Sometimes people simply fall into thinking “can they all be wrong?” And ignore their own values/beliefs.
4. 😂😂😂😂 I think you have first hand experience in what that looks like. Social media is the perfect weapon since a number of accusations and grievances can be launched and adjusted as needed to stoke the various reasons people are on the bandwagon.
I am struck by the way rage is cathartic because there is the calming effect at the end of movie with the symbols of authority. The experience of being part of a herd is an additional source of safety, so that experiencing an "enemy" with others strengthens cohesion. Social media enables a sense of being a part of a group even when alone. Especially when alone. and as we have seen, can be a precursor to action. I'm also relating to the way emotional release in a crowd is experienced by many of us as pleasurable, for example when are at a sports stadium. It is hard to feel hopeful about the future when people are so easily seduced into behaving as a group in ways they wouldn't individually.
1. The "other", aka outsider, alien, foreigner...
2. Tribalism, reinforced by auditory cues.
3. Fear of ostracism. Being cast out as an "other".(See other, and tribalism, above)
4. It already does! Try stating the truth to "Goldstein- ers" on X, FB, or Trump Stinkhole...or sign your name in the local paper and get doxxed, insults, and threats!
All are Reptilian brain responses and evoke fight or flight responses.
Most are bravado, but J6, Bourbon Street, Las Vegas Trump Tower explosion are just a few of the more obvious related to this discussion.
My immediate reaction is horror, and I had no idea that movie existed. Anyway, being watched is the creepiest part. And of course we are all now under surveillance 24/7 by our own phones. Bringing people together in person multiplies the effect of the righteous anger. I spend time hollering aloud at the news by myself. Being with other people might temper my reaction (if I were not sure of their leanings) but it might also heighten my fury in a collective of like-minded people. On social media, we tend to reinforce each other and not interact with those with opposing views. If someone disagrees with a comment, I look at their profile in an attempt to discern why.
I was thinking about films that I have seen of Hitler’s speeches and the way the people fell in lockstep with their shouting Heil Hitler and saluting. Then I thought about Trump’s speech on 1/6/21 and his rally speeches. His flock acted the same way. That mob on January 6 was violent and destructive as a mob. I doubt many would have acted that way alone. The same goes for social media. They have a certain amount of anonymity so they can type things that they would not normally say in person. They feel empowered because no one can see them as they do this. It is a group mentality while being alone.
goldstein is "other" and thus a safe target. Watching at home, alone, the viewers might see how they are being manipulated, plus it takes a group to reach the appropriate level of hysteria.
Winston joined because he felt that failure to be "part of" might cause him to be diciplined. There were several other men who seemed appalled by the mobs hysteria and hatred...but who joined in at the end. No one can afford to be seen as resistant.
Exactly…We need to make it painful for those who do not wish to take the (deadly) [experimental gene transfection product thing stuff]
When I first read 1984 it was in the early 70s & I was in junior high/middle school. Then it strongly reminded me of the USSR & Mao's China.
Some go along out of fear as not only will their neighbors report them for improper response but also the State monitors will report them for interrogation & possibly "re-education ". Others respond because of successful buy-in to the group’s politics, policies & morals because they want what they perceived as a powerful, secure group & want the perks of being a loyal member.
Goldstein Is a traitor to society and the government in general. Therefore, the object of collective hate (rage) a necessary focus of an authoritarian regime.
2. Bringing the masses together for 2 minutes allows all to validate hate . Any doubt is relieved being among thousands shouting shared angry.
3. Winston joints in to avoid becoming a possible object of rage if Big Brother identifies his dissent. Obligatory compliance maybe.
4. Yes can happen digitally. I think more of Joe Rogan or Steve Bannon stirring up the faithful.
Omigosh, it’s just like what’s happening on x. Only the hate period on x lasts longer.
What role does “Goldstein” play in terms of how members of the crowd relate with each other?
a) Apparently, he is the external enemy they can all unite against. I have neither read the book nor have I seen the movie so there is probably more to it.
What is the purpose of bringing everyone together in the same physical space to do Two Minutes Hate? (In other words, why not just force each person to watch this video alone, at home?) What does being able to see others’ reactions change about the experience?
a) There is definitely some chemistry of the mob response. They amplify and reinforce each other's reactions/behavior. It reinforces that you are part of the larger whole, which is a basic human instinct.
Based on this scene (and the context), what are the costs and benefits of refusing to participate in this activity? We see for example, Winston (the skinny guy) not reacting, until he notices he is being watched. What do you believe is his motivation to join in?
a) As I mentioned, I don't know much about the context, but if you agree with the larger group's feelings about Goldstein you get positive reinforcement when you join in. If you disagree you can preserve your personal integrity by not joining in, although this is a pretty riled up mob and there is the potential for violence. The larger group could also exact other social penalties for not going along that could make life difficult. So, self-preservation may motivate Winston to play along.
Do you think this kind of dynamic can play out in the digital sphere? For instance, what would a “Two Minutes Hate” look like on social media (like X/Twitter)?
a) I have not engaged on the social media sites, but I assume the group think mob mentality could easily take hold there.
Asha -- even more interesting is not watching the clip. But, then coming here to gain so much more insight from all of the learned comments. Good stuff. : )
Goldstein represents the other. As in he's not one of them. He's older, stubble on his face, represents the worst epithet America’s working classes can smear one with, thr pointy headed intellectual (Goldstein, Silverman, Rosenberg…you get my drift). It what Nixon and Joseph Mcarthy smeared Adlai Stevenson with in the 1950’s.
There is power in the group versus having individuals watch it alone. The virus of hate grows exponentially when the haters see the other haters a la Nazi rallies at.Nuremburg. Hitler’s propaganda film maker Leni Riefenstahl brought this concept to new heights. If you haven't seen it, watch her film Triumph of The Will. You’re way to nice a lady to watch that vile filth but it makes your point about getting people to watch it together. She was the thinker planner of Hitler’s Nuremburg rally in 1934 or 36.
Powerful scene. Now I understand why political rallies are scheduled and are such important methods of influencing voters.