Please get involved to stop the end of Net Neutrality – Today – or never again

FX-1-600x330.png

I have posted before about the coming concern of net neutrality ending … but to date, the American people have not stood up. Freedom has not been fought for, and now, it will be lost – even though more than 22 million people have spoken up already and were already outright ignored.

A Petition Against the FCC: Do Not End Net Neutrality

For anyone who has paid for internet service, you are already aware that the major corporations, including (but not limited to), Comcast, Time Warner, and others, have gone through the process of purchasing the smaller, independent providers in a manner which is in direct contrast to the anti-trust laws established in America. To better understand this, please read this website from the New York Times about how and why the U.S. Government is [once again] spending an incalculable amount of taxpayer dollars to stop AT&T from once again trying to buy out all of the small, internet and cable providers to create a massive monopoly.

The results of these buyouts has resulted in an American internet basis which is, on average, only 18.7 Mbps (which comes out to barely double the speed of third-world, impoverished countries), where only 1 in 5 have connection speeds of “up to” 25 Mbps and only Washington D.C. had the fastest internet speeds available (Forbes). For all of you who have internet, you are also aware that connection speeds are rated in an “up to” basis. In other words, you are never, and will never, be guaranteed or given the connection speed for which you pay. Centurylink users often find that a simple 12 Mbps connection, or even a 24 Mbps connection, is no more than an average 2.4 Mbps connection. This is because your internet connection is shared with others in the area in which it is installed (read more here). You do not pay for internet, you pay for the right to share internet with others – at the same time. Imagine if this were used in your homes, your bathrooms, or other places where you expect privacy and freedom?

net-neutrality-1-620x400

If you use the internet, you know that your internet is throttled (which again, is against the law as per Net Neutrality, and I personally have evidence of CenturyLink actively doing this to people). The more you use, the more the provider spikes your speeds up and down – against the law (and for no reason, there are additional load times, things don’t load right, delays kick in, etc.).

If you use the internet, you know that you are forced into unreasonable and complex tier packages that are unscrupulous and you are forced to pay double what even third world countries might pay (PBS). Bend Broadband (for example), offers you an “internet only” connection with the claim of a reasonably high speed (up to 40 Mbps), for only $69.99 per month – but you cannot use more than 200 GB, just bare above the “average” U.S. household of 190 GB. However … if you want to pay $59.99 per month but get shoved into one of their crappy television streaming packages for another $199.99 per month, you can get your 40 Mbps and have unlimited. And … that’s how it works. Period:

Why? Power. In America, it is no secret that the biggest and baddest corporations with the most money have the power (thus, my background discussion on Anti-trust laws). Their end goal, to be as cheap as possible and control / force you into spending more (thus my background discussion on limited speeds, shared internet, and costs).

And, now, those same corporations have lobbied the government, paying off the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) to end Net Neutrality (the only barrier left between the last ounce of freedom for the internet, knowledge, entertainment, and a complete and utter crushing of the souls of all Americans online). Don’t believe it can happen? The FCC has already voted to end supporting internet for low-income communities (The Hill). This means that low-income families in America, with impoverished children who barely have enough computing power to gain any knowledge (as there is not enough for things like “video games” or “movies”), will have LESS OPPORTUNITY than children in the MIDDLE OF AFRICA! And, to those who do not believe that the FCC is motivated by lobbyists of large corporations, the FCC is NOT funded by taxpayer dollars. They are funded ENTIRELY by the “FEES AND FINES” they collect (read more here).

net-neutrality-lanes.png

Even MIT’s technology review wrote an article on this (subscription only), addresses the fact that Ajit Pai, chairman for the FCC, has been a harsh critic against the “Open Internet Order“. The Open Internet Order is the basis that America is founded on freedoms. Antitrust laws stop large corporations from illegally monopolizing industries and taking advantage of people. The poor have just as much right to services as the wealthy. And, the internet belongs to the people, since it is comprised of the computers connected around the world and AT&T, Comcast, and other corporations do NOT have a right to package and market these services as their own. The foolish argument of Pai is that the internet was classified from an “information service” to a “telecommunications service”. This means that the FCC could regulate it like a utility, thus forcing corporations to offer the freedom of knowledge and information to everyone.

The problem here is that while Net Neutrality allows the government to micromanage ISPs (the argument against net neutrality), it forces ISPs into an equal and fair method of data management, pricing structures, and no specialized interest censorship or marketing. While Ajit Pai argues that government regulations are over burdensome and prevent small, independent ISPs from competing, he is also lending support to large ISPs that have already bought out the small ISP competition market? Pai also continues to argue that ISPs will have to be “transparent” about their services so customers can “choose the plan that’s best for them”. That is the most bewildering and idiotic statement ever made. ISPs are clear about their tiered and specialized pricing structures that tell you to pay up – or get lost. Making them “more” transparent basically just tells the ISPs to further “flaunt” their power over the people. What kind of a *$&@*#$ says this and thinks it’s just an okay blanket statement that nobody would notice?

I try to avoid conspiracies or drawing conclusions (so that others may draw their own), but I shall step away from the person I am, to be the person who is not naive. Ajit Pai, is not only unusually positioned against the American people, but the only “people” support he has ever provided was to prisoners and low-cost calling (although this is an important issue). This brings into question what prisoners he specifically supports. Worse, he has been recently brought under scrutiny (and potentially investigation), for using his position as the Chairman of the FCC to push a private, financial endeavor for a specific, lobbying corporation. You have not heard about it in the news or been privilege to it on a wide-spread basis in America … but then again … he “IS” in charge of the FCC. I am sorry to make this connection and I apologize to the person for whom I write this (as this is not something typical of me) – but no one other than a completely evil, greedy, and corrupt whore monger would endeavor his life’s career to build up corporations, censor information to the public (taking away free speech, free religion, and knowledge), and is someone who is completely Anti-American.

2435556186_1d9eaafe36.jpg

Thus, I am reaching out to you, the American people. There are many fights, issues, and matters in our everyday lives that are out of our reach. There are many matters in our everyday lives that may drive us to frustration, anger, and a desire to stop what’s happening, yet, not be matters in our own neighborhood for which we have control. However, we do have control over this matter, and it does impact us. If you do not comprehend the consequences of letting Net Neutrality come to an end, then you should read this article from Quora. What is coming is not an “if”. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, other Universities, researchers, and the public, can not only quote what has happened, but what the large conglomerates are gearing up to do – to tell you in advance what will happen.

And, what’s barely discussed, is the so-called “open transparency” – which COULD be enacted without ending net neutrality, but is supposed to give corporations the ability to “better” cater their services to you. In other words, they get to monopolize their information online, their commercials online, and if you ever thought smart phone pop-ups and Youtube ads were annoying – well – hold on – it’s about to get a WHOLE lot worse. Now, the government will watch you more closely … and so will the big companies who are legally allowed to use “knowingly” deceptive and manipulative means to force your shopping habits to their benefit. America isn’t hurting because of the people – it’s hurting because of big companies manipulating people in unhealthy ways. But – that’s only my opinion. Just remember to think about it the next time you’re slamming your mocha latte or energy drink or fast food meal that you *suddenly realize* you didn’t need or want, but here you are, spending money on it, again.

comcastroturf.png
Comcast’s Request to just “shhhhh”

At no time in American history has the corporate management and monopolization of any service, commodity, or other public matter not come with serious consequences that hurt both individuals and businesses alike. But, there have been few other times in American history when corporations held such power and sway over the U.S. Government. If you do not say anything and if you stand by idly, when you hear the streams of frustration pouring out over anti-Constitutional censorship, the mass anger over income inequality treatment, and watch the economy take another dive (as online commerce WILL be hurt) – remember that you had a chance – now – to do something.

Even some of the biggest players  in Congress are fighting this out. And, if you don’t understand what happened to E-Commerce in the 90’s (because somehow, history keeps repeating itself), then read this article from Fast Company. Large corporations were consolidating internet traffic into their own regime, placing huge amounts of control over it, forcing their brand into it, and up-charging for it. E-commerce all but died. Enjoy E-Bay, Amazon, or some other, online shopping service? Had companies like IBM not monopolized and done to the internet what will happen if net neutrality end, then there would be many, many other sites and prices WOULD have dropped!

Company-03-14-ISPInterconnect.PNG
Netflix

Don’t just contact your Congressman and Senator and say “I don’t want it”. Do more. Be more. You have power (without the internet, of course – as no net neutrality will exist to stop you from being censored). But – vote. Vote those representatives who betrayed the trust of the American people, OUT of office. And, if you are so inclined, everyone should call for the immediate suspension and removal of Ajit Pai (including an investigation into potential Department of Homeland Security concerns and anti-Constitutional violations of office).

What else can you do? Simple – contact the FCC and tell them what’s going on! And, you can then contact your cable provider, internet provider, and a few networks, and inform them that if the end of net neutrality passes, you will shut off your televisions and end your service. No termination fees will be paid (hard for them to enforce it if 100 million people simultaneously do it). And, what’s the worse thing that happens?

Advertisers don’t get paid. Hollywood actors don’t make money. You get a few months of freedom “jonesing” on your favorite show (which will probably be on Hulu or Netflix soon, anyway). In the meantime, your representatives fight back because businesses are losing money. Hollywood stops putting out for the big corporations because they’re not getting paid anymore. And, suddenly, the nation wakes up and says, “Oh yeah … forgot that we weren’t supposed to SCREW the people we’re already driving nails into… Oops!”

At least, change will happen. But, it can’t just be you. you have friends. You have neighbors. You can wear buttons (I am now … a homemade cheap sticker – but it’s all I have and it gets my point across). You can go to events. You can make phone calls. And, if you get 2 people … and they each get 2 people … and they each get 2 people (and so on), and we use Facebook, Twitter, and all these other stupid social media outlets for some good (for once) – at least you’ll get to see what happens! It’ll be fun!

But, remember – even if you do this – this is America. Money wins. Not freedom. Not Democracy. And, not a Republic. Let the world know, while the internet is still available to you – don’t bother coming here. This isn’t the freest nation on Earth.

If net neutrality goes – this post will probably be banned (or charged for, with no credit to the creator), too. After all … changing history for big money lets it happen over and over. Of course – please do your own research and homework and come to your own conclusions. I can talk about this all day long – but to make an educated decision – you must give yourself an education. This is the base for free choice – which is your right.

Hope I used your time wisely.

Thank you for reading.


Sorry. No quote this post. Nothing to say. Nothing to do now but wait for the voice of freedom to begin ringing out … stretching out … and hopefully keeping some, small faction of America intact.

Advertisements

Collusion Confusion: Reinforcing the Social Media Injustice Framework

collusion
Ethics

Many media sources already recognize the recent “newsmedia” upheaval regarding collusion as a diversionary tactic to get attention away from the main issues regarding passing end of year bills by Congress, and more. However, there is another, unfortunate consequence in a world where social media and mob mentality rules the masses: confusion of the real issues / the “blame” game (or “social media / mob mentality” justice).

Would you be upset at an officer of the law that worked undercover to locate a murderer, knowing that he worked with some of the nastiest, cruelest, and most vile of other murderers to do so?

Would you be upset at two, government agencies (even international ones who were enemies) that worked together to stop a terrorist from hurting innocent people?

Nope, you wouldn’t. No one, would. Why? Because someone broke the law and did something wrong. Being okay with it is not just because the bad guys were caught, but more importantly, it primarily rests upon the fact that the bad guys were, in the first place, “bad”. Duhh? After all, if a person doesn’t actually break the law in the first place, then uncovering the truth is not an issue. So, how is the current situation different?

According to the dictionary, collusion is:

“Secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose” – MW

Is campaign smearing illegal? Well … technically … not since the START of politics. Every Senator, Congressman, Governor, Secretary, President, and ANY other person who has run for office has in some way or another, said something negative, derogatory, and insulting about their competition (aka “smearing”), true or not. No one person, as far as I am aware of (and please, anyone out there who knows the 1 or 2 exceptions, please feel free to comment), running for any office, has done so solely on their own, two feet. Therefore, gathering information against the competition is not illegal or deceitful. It is “campaigning”, and like it or not, the American government prides itself on creating its own, special sets of rules to do as it pleases.

Guaranteed, during the media circus of this last campaign, both sides received an incredible amount of negative and damaging information about the other from a variety of sources. How do you think Hillary knew so much about the way Donald ran his hotels … or his school? But, now, because it’s Russia who provided information … it’s a conspiracy?

rusamer

Folks, hate to break this to you, but the great, red, communist party that was once a world-threat to the USA (in media only, since Russia has RARELY fought directly in a country-country, face-to-face with the USA … except for 1 or 2 sidequest ops like those in WWI (in which the current administration blamed the previous … of course), and a few other minor skirmishes), is not a direct enemy (in the sense of “impending doom” … at least). That’s not to say that Russia, like any other country, isn’t someone with whom we should be careful (and I trust management of that issue to Homeland Security … hopefully), but it’s not a conspiracy or concern that they are out to “get us”. Again, to be clear … I’m not discounting the concern about Homeland Security, only addressing the fact of where the attention of U.S. citizens (and the citizens of any country), should be.

No. The truth … the one that people don’t want to admit, is that America is doing itself, in (whether or not others are helping it along the way). I’ve written plenty of articles on the stupidity going on in America. The biggest enemy the country has right now is itself. Whether it’s big corporations stomping around on the people like the Gods of old, the government forgetting who it’s the government of, authority figures getting smeared for a small group of fools, America forgetting its own history, or the people and the Youtube / Social Media “justice” system that’s developing … America is in need of help.

Claiming that anyone in Trump’s (or Clinton’s) campaign worked with ANYONE elseRussian or not … to simply get dirt on their opponent, is just a distraction. It plays on “fears” and media-driven, old-school hatreds (like the “Russians out to get us” nonsense), to ensure that you don’t pay attention to what’s really going on. Just look at this article by CNN and you’ll see that the Liberal media is working in massive overtime to create “confusion” about what isn’t collusion for their side … but is for the other (and no … I am not taking Liberal or Conservative sides, just making a statement based on historic context).

  • It seems like the U.S. Congress doesn’t want to make effective changes to health care or the economy right now … probably because it endangers their position for re-election … no matter how badly it’s needed.
  • The truth about Clinton and some of the fake information spread (which is closer to collusion), could be interpreted as illegal, and the people already let her slide on the email scandal, and they now want that to go away, too.
  • The Russian hackers / Hillary Clinton email scandal is still out there and they would like it to die. (Especially since most of the foreign Prince’s who need our names, bank account information, and other identification so they can transfer $10 million dollars into our accounts right away are from Africa …. o.O).
  • And so on.
evolutionofsheeple
Sheeple, bewytchme.com

You see, the point is that this collusion confusion is designed to keep you distracted by using you, the People, as nothing more than a throw-away, one-time use tool, to engage in social media justice based on your fears and the nonsense being thrown at you. By pulling you left (Clinton), then right (Trump), and then back, and then forth, and so on and so on – you are being influenced and used like a herd of cattle.

The tendency for people’s behaviour or beliefs to conform to those of the group to which they belong” – OD

Herd mentality, or mob mentality, describes how people are influenced by their peers to adopt certain behaviors. Examples of the herd mentality include nationalism, globalism, stock market trends, superstition, and even home décor. – Wiki

Look, to the person I am writing this for, these distractions are designed to hurt you. By pulling the wool down in front of your eyes, it’s impossible to see where you’re going … or what’s coming at you. It’s easy to get upset about all you hear and see going on in the media just as much as it is to get overwhelmed and shut down on these topics (forgetting what’s most important like family, freedom, life, love, and even happiness). But, you mustn’t let that happen. This confusion is just the man behind the curtain … and nothing good or effective will get accomplished until you call the guy out and put him (or her) to task.

All of that aside, there is one more, terrible result of this “everyone protecting their own rear ends by trying to throw everyone else under the bus” routine:

Reinforcing the framework of Social Media Justice.

No, it’s not “social justice“. It’s Social “Media” Justice. There is a BIG difference. Social Media Justice is mob mentality by manipulation in spite of the facts or the majority. It is the inherent danger of Democracy (even over pure social justice) that gave rise to the Salem Witch Trials and forced the founding fathers into a Republic. This is the same, social media style justice that has women coming forward, 20 – 40 years after something terrible happened, and obscuring the truth for what may be nothing more than abusive mob mentality. Now … you may find what I just wrote a little harsh … so let me ‘splain:

When a guy does something sexually inappropriate, wrong, or illegal … there are consequences (whether those consequences manifest themselves now … or in 20 years). End of story.

However, the use of social media to retaliate vs. the justice system, is the birth of mob mentality. Case in point: Bill O’Reilly. His life has been destroyed because of social media. We are not talking about a “20-year after the fact consequence” because we are not talking about a legally investigated and validated claim. If, in fact, there was a legal investigation that substantiated a claim, everything he has gone through up until now, should happen and there should be legal consequences. That’s why we have a “legal” system. Otherwise, we allow people to make accusations against someone they don’t like for any reason (including political), and create a nation of fear, hatred, deviancy, and disparity by reinforcement of the uninformed and mislead. It is wholly inappropriate to to ever allow a mob to decide the fate of the innocent (especially as the justice system already has its own share of problems).

Hry4PDh
The Orville – a GREAT show (IMHO), with a recent episode focusing on what the severe and very real dangers of social media justice are.

Another important, and deafeningly terrifying consequence of social media justice is that mob mentality is NOT limited to the majority. Mob mentality may be limited to a few. It doesn’t take an entire nation to destroy the lives of individuals. One wrong statement from an idolized media icon (a whole different topic of issues to be discussed in another article), and the life of one, or even dozens of people can be destroyed. In the case of O’Reilly, advertisers pulled their support, Fox Networks cancelled his show, his publisher shut him out, and a stream of knowledge and information that was intended to keep balance was lost. In the current campaign, names are being plucked out of a hat, the social media votes are being cast, and whomever has the most down votes by the uninformed, will hang at the gallows.

AdobeStock_54019632-small--696x450
Philcooke.com

Was it good or bad? I don’t know. Now, we may never know. The same, limited mob stupidity that justifies destroying public monuments when the rest of the world (for whom those monuments should remain available) disagrees, has already played judge, jury, and executioner. Whatever O’Reilly says now, right or wrong, is skewed. He may say he did just because he’s broken and destroyed. It’s no different than torture. Torture is considered to be the absolute pinnacle of idiotic information gathering (next to Twitter and Facebook, albeit both are torturous to endure entirely on their own) because, after enough time, you can force anyone to say anything is true … even when it’s not.

The point of all of this is that the current “collusion” misinformation going back and forth is based on a small group of social media injustice supporters picking a word out of a hat and using it to distract from real problems while inadvertently reinforcing a growing problem in legality and justice. And, the initial results, when it backfired on them, demonstrated just how quickly this is becoming a problem as they quickly threw more water on the electrical fire and now the media has exploded in a blaze of stupidity. The real victims in all of this are the American people. Although we should hold people accountable and responsible for their own decisions (and choices to act upon those decision)s, the problem is that the truth just keeps getting buried further and further underground, the definitions of words are changing to fit a momentary need, and the opportunity to lift the people up so they can think … is lost.

Just remember that if we continue down this path …

It won’t be about whether or not you did something wrong …

Or you intentionally meant to hurt someone’s feelings …

It will be about the “other” golden rule:

“He who has the gold, makes the rules.”

But, this time … worse than it being some big corporate conglomerate … it’s going to be your next door neighbor and you will get to spend everyday living in fear as the “norm”. Because, hey, you can please all the people all the time … right? *wink wink*

I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound very, “American”, to me.

Thanks for reading.


Halloween is the most awesome time of the year!

eydwhps1

Isn’t Halloween, great? It’s that one time of the year when you can come out of your shell and be the person you want to be. It’s the one time you’re allowed to act like a child, free-spirited, excited, terrified, and it’s okay! In an article I wrote a couple years’ back now (here), I said:

Every year there is one holiday that brings people together for the sole purpose of bringing joy to others, sharing the spirit and love of protection, and putting a smile on the face of children … but it’s not Christmas. What was once an ancient tradition of celebrating the dead and the end of a harvest season has gone through tens of thousands of years of transformations from one culture to another.

My point was simple: Halloween is essentially one of America’s most culturally valuable holidays, ever. And, that is just as true now, as it was then. While America’s most unique holiday (arguably) is Thanksgiving, Halloween is not a holiday based on some terribly misrepresented historical events that were abusive (as America has a very dark and long history of abuse … no matter how much “snowflakes” want to pretend it doesn’t exist or hide it). Sure, Halloween has many iterations around the world, but the current cultural development of how Halloween is celebrated (corporate-greedy whore mongering aside), is unique to this country. Candy given for free, in parties, to strangers, and in good faith. Adults getting to be children and let their imaginations soar! Other adults, who are stingy and self-absorbed get to turn off their lights and wake up to rotten eggs! It is an incredibly unique, diverse, and exciting holiday that has NO LIMITATIONS on religion, culture, color, gender or ANY other factor!

jackolantern

Think about it! The ONE holiday that everyone can celebrate for their own reason, together, in harmony!! (<= You are welcomed, and encouraged, to share that quote from me … over and over again, on facebook, twitter … and EVERYWHERE else … because America could use a little reminder that we’re all together in this thing called life and could use a little “common ground“).

And … what about the horror stories? The “poisoned” candy? The “cults”? The “stranger danger”?

killer_candy_corn_by_whitekirby.jpg
Danger Candy!

PLEASE. I’ve argued before about the STUPID lie that perpetuated this, and thanks to Adam Conover (man … there’s a guy I love to hate … then love … then hate again!), there is now a much more prevalent recognition in modern culture and by a much more widespread group that those were all lies. You can see the TruTV excerpt from the hit series, Adam Ruins Everything, here:

Does that mean Halloween is 100% safe?

Um .. duh?

No.

There is not 1 day, out of the entire year, that is 100% safe. The worst part is, most harm to children on any day of the year comes from family members … not strangers! But, on that unfortunate fact, I digress …

So, like ANY day of your life, just be conscientious, give kids some good guidance, maybe keep an eye on the candy (since we ALL KNOW that the ONLY reason parents go through the candy to “safety” check is so that they can pull out the ones they like! I mean … *ahem* for SAFETY! …. sort of … *humble blush*). And, the BEST part about letting kids roam neighborhoods together and in groups is that it’s easy to consolidated the effort by adults, utilize cell phones for what they SHOULD be used for (emergency contacts), and let kids have fun! And, if mom and/or dad are so inclined, dress up, smile, laugh, and be who you REALLY want to be all year long.

For me …

This will be the first Halloween in 14 years I don’t get to deck out my house in a “Haunted” motif, for “reasons” I can explain later (and I do some AWESOME work … which … by the way … anyone in the Pacific Northwest want to go in with me on a customized, bestest haunted house ever because I am the best of the best when it comes to it? You pay for everything and I make it awesome! No? Hmmm… sorry … I’ll stop advertising, now … but I am serious)!! And, while I was sad about it, it’s okay. Why? Because IT’S FREAKIN’ HALLOWEEN, BABY, YEAH!!

Halloween.jpeg
Halloween – colorful, fun, exciting, happy, sad … a little bit of EVERYTHING!

So, hey! It’s the weekend, before … why are you just sitting there? Do you have everything ready? Bowls of goodies for the kids? (And if they don’t come … snacks for a week or so). Got some sugar-free stuff, too (for them non-sugar kids?). What about some fruits and stuff for the Lactose intolerant kids? Ever thought of that? Nope … best almost all of you didn’t! How cool is it to put up a sign on the door that says: “Beware … sugar free and lactose intolerant goodies are available here, too … so ask if you dare … muwahahahahaha!” See? It can be fun. It can be new. And, you can be creative … no matter how big, or small.

Well … up to you. It’s a free country. Just remember that it doesn’t matter what your faith, color, gender, background, or any other personal status information is. What matters is that you can be who you want to be, this one day of the year.

(For those “bleeps” that build haunted houses with morons jumping around in clown masks physically molesting people or have to have some sort of a guide with exhaustive, fake, and annoying exposition, or screaming music, etc. … just a heads up … that wears out quickly and sucks. If you don’t know how to be scary … then stop watching crap like “saw” or “jigsaw”, and take a couple psychology classes … because “scary” is NOT a screaming weirdo in a mask who touches or grabs people, or some tied up girl being raped or tortured (that … is utter garbage) … it’s a very silent, unknown, terror that recognizes the real, built-in human fears that are universal in everyone and knows how to draw out … *ahem* sorry … got caught up in the moment. The point is … don’t ruin the holiday. It’s “fun”. Keep it fun. Scary … but fun! Why? Being who you are … and facing your inner self … and having one night to be stronger, better, freer, and happier than any other day of your life … is what makes Halloween in America … “splendiferous”! There’s my “PSA”)

Thanks for reading


Of course … this is a repeat for me … but can you go wrong with this?:

Darkness falls across the land
The midnight hour is close at hand
Creatures crawl in search of blood
To terrorize y’awl’s neighborhood
And whosoever shall be found
Without the soul for getting down
Must stand and face the hounds of hell
And rot inside a corpse’s shell
The foulest stench is in the air
The funk of forty thousand years
And grizzly ghouls from every tomb
Are closing in to seal your doom
And though you fight to stay alive
Your body starts to shiver
For no mere mortal can resist
The evil of the thriller

The K-Alzheimer’s Theory … Is There A Reasonable Solution?

_77140079_c0177401-brain_activity,_artwork-spl

So, there I was, working on these constantly changing numbers, trying to memorize them from one source and record them in another and I thought: “Isn’t this a good thing … you know, keeping the brain exercised?” After all, that is what the current, medical science claims. But, I wondered, “How could I be benefiting my brain with all this additional information when I am potentially faced with two problems: overload and emf?” I’ve previously covered the problems with memory overload in another article. However, I’ve only scantly covered the idea of electromagnetic interference (emi) (and electromagnetic frequencies (emf)), and the potential harm on human beings because frankly, that has not been in my scope. But, I wondered about all the “apps” and programs being offered on computers to “enhance” brain function with electronic learning. It can’t be that good for people, could it?

The two questions I had were:

  • When was Alzheimer’s and its symptoms officially recognized? And,
  • Was there artificial emf before or during the time it was first officially recognized?

My main premise was this: if Alzheimer’s (and other neurological disorders) could be linked to emf radiation, then there might be more to what’s happening in the world and a new way to approach a solution.

alzheimer
Doc Alois Alzheimer

I was not disappointed. Not only were my initial presumptions validated, but I was not the first to recognize this.

Alzheimer’s was first “officially” diagnosed in 1906.

The first radio broadcast was in … (drum roll, please): 1906. (<= “Creepy!”)

Some of the first electric utility lines were used in California, in 1879.

(funny … that a lot of the largest neurological problems, and other biological issues like cancer, start around this time. I recognize that a lack of science before this time to diagnose these issues could be a contributor to that fact … but “rule 39” … there is no such thing as a coincidence)

The first person believed to have Alzheimer’s was Auguste Deter, a German woman, and yes, Germany was exposed to high voltage electrical transmissions by that time.

auguste-deter
Mrs. Auguste Deter

However, this is not a “blame electricity for all the world’s problems“, paper (I do that here). This is a discussion on a theory regarding Alzheimer’s and emi (since I will later discuss that there are potentially multiple contributors). The importance of recognizing a “more than coincidental” connection between the two starts by recognizing the fundamental concern about how emf radiation may be the single-largest contributor to Alzheimer’s disease. As I wrote previously, I am not the first to consider this. Others, like the folks at Earthcom, are trying to address the same matter. It is not a conspiracy because it’s not based on some big corporation trying to “get” anyone. The link between electromagnetic interference and Alzheimer’s is a concern based on some very relevant data. Let me start by giving you the background support for this theory:

The typical measure of brain waves are called “Alpha”, “Beta”, and “Delta” (anyone feel free to step up and correct me or elaborate if I am mistaken, please). These are electromagnetic wavelengths measured in the range of 0.5 Hz to 42 Hz. So, when you think of electromagnetic radiation, it doesn’t seem like brain waves even really fit in because they are so slow:

CNX_UPhysics_33_05_ESpectrum

Clearly, the electromagnetic transmission of radio waves starts at 4000 Hz and doesn’t present a clear and present connection with brain waves. Contrarily, the frequency of electric power lines is 60 Hz, much closer to the human brain, and yet, it is still outside of the range of brain waves. But, there’s the problem with this assumption. The frequency of “brainwaves” is measured based on the emitted wavelengths passing through other em fields and biological and chemical matter (and outside of the skull). The actual electrical conductance in the brain occurs within 5×10^-9 meters with only a 70 milliVolt potential difference. Even AA batteries are 5×10^-2 meters (and that’s a VERY big difference). In fact, neurons transmit at a rate of 200 times per second (that we know of), which takes 5 milliseconds, and on its own is already equal to 200 Hertz (without taking into consideration distance or any other factors). So, the 42 Hertz for brain waves is already not indicative of the actual frequency of neurons.

How does one accurately measure the frequency of a wavelength so short that it defies much of today’s technology (let alone in a single cell that cannot be accessed without dangerous, intrusive surgery)?

Neurons (transmitted via electromagnetic forces) move with a speed of 14 million volts per meter, which is 4 times the electrostatic force to produce lightning in a thunderstorm! Lightning produces frequencies starting at 3000 Hz!! Knowing this, we can begin to recognize that the actual “frequency” of electromagnetic waves in the brain are potentially higher-level frequencies (that occur on a super-micro scale in excessively short periods of time).

Based on this knowledge, here is my “K-Alzheimer’s Theory”:

The frequency of the emitted waves from the human brain are low only as a result of combining low frequency sensors with an infinitely short burst (duration) of transmission, contained within other em fields and biological matter that inhibit the true fact that the fundamental functions of chemical transmission in the brain are operating at a range of frequencies from .5 Hz to thousands of times faster than previously thought and are therefore susceptible to interruption from higher wavelengths of external electromagnetic radiation.

Maybe this idea is not completely “new”, but think about it and why it is significant! If people are less concerned about the interference of brain waves due to the significant difference in wavelengths (where most typically, frequencies of the same wavelength interfere with one another), then we are REALLY missing the big picture. Thus, the reason ‘brain waves’ in the Alpha to Delta range are not interfered with so predominately (as far as our understanding of em wave interference goes), that makes sense. But, what about the tiny, 70 milliVolts of electricity passing through that incredibly small 5×10^-9 meters? It IS operating at a significantly higher rate and therefore, it CAN BE SUBSTANTIALLY affected by cross-interfering em frequencies. Even if it only flows in short bursts, exposure to em radiation for any period of time can cross over and interfere with those few times that the bursts of energy occur.

brainalzheimerhteory
Black is the one-way path of electrons and red is the cross interfering electromagnetic wave

The brain works like a billion DC batteries all interconnected. DC current only goes one way. As part of this theory, I propose that reversing current in the brain has the same, damaging effect on brain cells as it does anywhere else: cells are overloaded, heat up, and die. Fortunately, the brain, when young, has mechanisms to build new connections, re-route power, and re-build its systems … but that doesn’t last forever. Concurrently, I also don’t believe that the brain has a “router” within each of its batteries [cells] (to save time and space, it just has more batteries). Thus, when interfering with the transmission of electricity, there is no “clock” or “CPU” to determine if the right number of bits were transmitted (allowing for no error correction and re-transmission, lest there be a huge build up of electrons, voltage, and heat), and therefore, in the real world, human beings can suffer “confusion”, “dementia”, and other problems. By understanding events such as hyperpolarization that “force” a resting period before neurons can fire again, we can see just how fragile the cellular structure of the brain is and why any increase or build up of added electrical energy would be excessively detrimental to the surrounding tissue.

neuron_parts
From this theory: Sufficient emi of energy moving through the nerves that stimulate movement in an axon can physically corrupt the axon from being able to transmit new signals. Long-term interference causes a “short-circuit” in the axon (constructive interference), which results in doubling the amplitude and an overheating / burning of the nerves and the axon. This may not be an instantaneous disaster and may take years for that axon to die (and issues like Alzheimer’s to appear).

This theory can be demonstrated by those moments when people get portions of songs stuck in their heads. Think about how destructive interference of a song playing in your mind might work. At some point, the interference is like a “scratch” on a record, and the needle can’t move forward. Once that connection is broken, the record will just keep playing to that point. The amount of time that the song stays stuck is the amount of time it takes for the brain to re-wire itself and move everything around, or just give up (and suddenly, you can’t even remember what song “was” stuck in your head). If it takes that long to rewire song lyrics, think about how long it would take to rewire an entire lifetime of memories. Thus, Alzheimer’s patients lose touch with recent and more significant memories, like loved ones, because the brain can no longer rebuild those connections (and the interference over and over again has literally caused an electrical short-out).

621e2b250a8d9b544d822a6a19e8b6cb--radiation-exposure-electromagnetic-radiation

Another demonstration to support this theory is that I propose that the thickness of the electrical transmission nerves (and different lengths), like wires, differentiates the individual frequencies. This means that memories can be triggered by, or be more susceptible to, emi. This is what makes memories seem to spontaneously appear sometimes, it is what interferes with simple functions on certain days (that you just can’t seem to get the energy to be motivated), causes headaches when staring at monitors, and so on.

Screen-shot-2012-01-07-at-12.38.32-PM
Evidence of EMI and the human heart

If we temporarily accept this principle, then we’re faced with a very, serious problem: we need to identify the range of frequencies and start building electronic devices, mechanical systems, and power transmission to work outside of it. That’s such a substantial (and financially overwhelming) undertaking that I doubt the world is non-apathetic enough to save itself. Unfortunately, this theory also leads to another very, unfortunate conclusion: a destructive, evolutionary turn of events.

Now, Alzheimer’s, and similar issues, may have existed before even the advent of artificial emf radiation because there other obstacles, such as natural radiation (although it raises a very dire concern about a solar flare and how that could cause wide-spread, catastrophic neurological damage). Additionally, hazardous chemicals could also contribute, but none of it on the same level as artificial emf radiation in the same frequency ranges as the brain. While I try to recognize the potential for the preexistence of some conditions, it should also be noted that the failure to diagnose a problem prior to the advent of new, scientific methods is not justification that a condition existed previously (the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence). The important and most relevant fact is the massive increase in occurrences of these disorders outside of any genetic disposition.

Fortunately, the positive takeaway from this theory is that there may be a very, simple answer for Alzheimer’s patients and others.

brainalzheimerhteory1
EEG cap – stylin’!

Unfortunately, there is a lack of technology specific enough to work at the incredibly small scale of the cells within the brain to single out areas of damage. If science could shift gears and focus on the higher frequency ranges of the brain (and it can be calculated based on known physics … and would be easier to work with), and set the emissions/measurement ranges higher to account for the biological and chemical blockers (that already slow down those same emf waves coming out of the brain), we could re-design the EEG cap and use it to control the flow of electricity. Of course, this would require micro-sizing each of the transmitters / conductors and then transferring a lot more power to them (within a 60 – 85 milliVolt range, but at slightly higher amplitude). That could be configured as one solution for ensuring that electricity flows in a singular direction (and potentially, forcibly rebuild connections where sections of nerves, axons, and synapses remain or once were).

Another possibility is to utilize the EEG cap (or even an MRI) to identify “short circuits” or hot spots in the brain (or potentially cold spots that should not be cold during certain mental activities), and do a much more introspective / intensive examination to identify where connections have been lost. I don’t know if a comparison can be done with a non-Alzheimer’s patient to help an Alzheimer’s patient (although with emf radiation having similar effects, there is room to argue that the similarities are strong enough for this), or if it would require a patient’s brain scan before and after symptoms. The purpose of identifying the locations is to pinpoint where we need to help rebuild matter (such as using positive electromagnetic energy to force healing as has been done in cancer).

Another consideration is to ensure that EEG caps with micro emitters set on a multi-frequency, highly focused transmission (by shape and manual modification of the electricity) must be designed to measure small bursts of energy. A 70 milliVolt burst of electricity across a gap as small as 5 x 10^-9, is very difficult to see without being up close … but it can be done. By emitting an emf pulse across different reaches of the brain and taking into consideration the the mass and electrical current interference, we should be able to use a highly sensitive receiver on the opposite end with a micro-second timer. Once a base-line is established (to determine the weakness and consistency of a signal from one side to the other), when asking an Alzheimer’s patient to recall specific memories, we can then look for those small “bursts” of electricity and where the “gaps” might be located.

eird-al-yankovic-tin-foil-hat-160x160
Yes, nutty … but the idea of needing to protect a person’s mind from emi has not been a well accepted, public issue. Science says to “cut back” exposure, yet people who work directly, close-up, with high-voltage and high frequency transmissions generally don’t wear em-field protective gear (let alone the general public). So, as silly as Weird Al is … there may be a serious takeaway.

Another potential fix based on this theory (and yes, this IS CRAZY), is to utilize the “aluminum” (or similar metal) cap that the so-called alien conspiracy theorists believe in (over the modified EEG cap).  However, it’s not because aliens are screwing up peoples’ brains, but for people whose brains are more susceptible to emi, this solution would stop any continuing damage (and Alzheimer’s patients do get worse over time), A healthy, constant dose of oxygen (keeping the blood fresh), and perhaps even the introduction of biological stimulation (in whatever form needed to promote growth and health, ie. sodium, protein, potassium, etc.), for the brain would give it a chance to repair some of the broken connections. On the other hand, by the time Alzheimer’s has taken hold, it may mean that these folks need to spend the rest of their lives wearing a special device … but if that’s what gives them the memories of their loved ones back, I’m not too sure that many of them would protest!

While it may be too complex scientifically to focus on a single, cell body, based on some alternate theories of memory formation, it may be possible to focus on specific sub-regions and promote the concentrated transmission of energy from one point to another across multiple cell bodies. Technically, as electricity through axons only flows in one direction (and in this theory, it has previously been disrupted and destroyed the connection in the axon or depolarized the neurotransmitters), matching the transmission frequency of the nearby cell bodies should force stimulated growth/activity (and the stimulated energy would still only flow in one direction based on the design of brain cells). This may have to be done in short, timed bursts to stay within the limitations of hyperpolarization and the need to give that micro-second resting period.

Of course, this is only a theory and although scientifically sound (given the empirical evidence of high-frequency transmissions in the brain, knowledge about emf radiation interference, and the historical context of the disorder), requires some preliminary confirmations. To start with, we’d want to walk through the memories of multitudes of healthy individuals, once having redesigned the EEG cap for high-voltage frequency measurement, to get an idea of different memory “lengths” (identifying potentially similar areas across multiple groups of how and where memories are stored). We could then use the same method to walk through the earliest memories of an Alzheimer’s patient to discover where the degradation occurs and more accurately determine which parts of the brain need to be given additional voltage, oxygen, or whatever chemicals (or technology), science is working toward. It really is, that simple. It’s not much different than trans-cranial direct (or electromagnetic) stimulation, but with a specific focus on disrupting external emf radiation and matching the frequencies of the brain in the right areas for repair (although TCDS may have some unfounded claims and some long-term limitations that still need regulated).

(And, I am fully aware that when I write “simple”, the solution is not so simple as writing, “build a warp drive engine and now we can discover new resources!” That is ludicrous (no, not really …). But, the base-premise starts with understanding that we may potentially need short-burst, high-frequency transmission stimulation, not low-frequency.)

To test this theory, a control group could be used to describe specific events from their childhood, using a high voltage, focused emf radiation cap (that will emit a wide range of frequencies in short-enough bursts that it doesn’t cause actual damage), and shift the frequencies during the course of the description to determine at what point there is a “short circuit” or frequency interference. The same could be done with test mice, although extremely complex as that would be given today’s technology, while running a maze, to determine which frequencies alter their memories.

neurology_2

There is another important reason to consider the “K-Alzheimer’s Theory”: how it affects other disorders … and I’m not even talking about the obvious ones like schizophrenia or narcolepsy. What about kids that become massively aggressive and there is little causality to link their behaviors; or criminals who have never done anything wrong before and suddenly “flip” like a switch? There could be significant links to emi and other disorders. Weight gain or even gender identity issues (in a country where this is becoming a rapidly growing phenomenon), where the hypothalamus may be operating at specific wavelengths that are being affected by emi may be one such example. An evaluation of different low to high-frequency transmission rates in connection with emf radiation and how people live their daily lives could reveal A LOT! Things like vaccinations with heavy doses of heavy metals could be a problem as well, but if this theory does offer solutions to realign and repair neurological components, then we can even overcome those obstacles.

Now, for the final and biggest concern that comes with this theory: evolution. How can the human body adapt to a constant barrage of artificial emf radiation and yet, not slow down the functions of the human brain in order to survive. Technically, the only viable solution is to become more and more averse to technology. Unfortunately, in a world that continues to push technology, people would rather suffer the consequences than surrender their “stuff”. “Idiocracy” may be the future. Why not? If emf radiation disrupts memories, it can also disrupt childhood development, good/deviant thought processes, and learning. It’s only been about 150 years … and evolution takes time. Maybe 10 years, 50, or another 100 … may be all it takes to see a more wide-spread consequence.

But, wouldn’t it be nice if you could have your cake and eat it, too? Construct power lines with better shielding. Use absorptive carbon backing in phones and televisions. Sure, the costs go up for big corporations, but the CEO having to give up an extra $0.003 cents in their overseas sweat-shop to start making healthier people, better workers, and equally more active shoppers, won’t lose much in the way of quality of paint on their new Mercedes. Yeah … corporations … *sigh*

In a world taking away your identity, parenting, family authority, and telling you how to think, feel, and act, gauging your every move, and now the possibility that you are hurting, suffering, confused, or having every-day small issues that you have to keep adapting to (albeit building up) simply because we need to change 200 year old technology … wouldn’t it be nice to see the change in our lifetime?

At least, this way, you would remember it!

If you found this interesting, pass it along.

Thanks for reading!


“Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most.” – Mark Twain (although presumably, there seems to be some discrepancy on this matter!!)

Disclaimer: I am not a doctor, specialist, or expert (outside my field of I.T, and business systems analysis). I am not qualified to make expert opinions medically or scientifically (or other, big fancy word that warrants a tax-payer grant draining PhD), and only offer theoretical ideas and solutions based on my own research. Theory, people … theory … not, “go out and try it on your own Mr. Youtube camera wannabe famous guy” … ’cause … reasons! Therefore, any reliance or use of this material that has a negative effect is on you … literally. However, any positive use of this material only requires that you let someone know, including me, that you saw it here, first 🙂 … and if you get a symposium or award, you gotta’ invite me, free of charge! HAHAHA … okay, no seriously … if this does help push research or ideas in a good direction (when you share it – and you know who “you” are) … awesome and good for you … if not … well … it was fun to theorize and share (so “you” know just how crazy my mind worked!!).

 

 

How in the Holy &$*# do ‘Photobomb’ and ‘Yowza’ beat Jedi?

636236431732119800-955816336_Words_Ofta_1.jpg

The American language is an interesting phenomenon. Throughout time, Americans have taken the once, proud English language and butchered it, mashing in words from around the world and in more recent times, including slang as part of common speech. Instead of an era where scientific discovery and new advancements contribute to the substance of human evolution, the dictionary has embraced its own apathy and finally given way to the idea that people are too stupid to change. Thus, instead of continuing to encourage children to strive for a higher state of awareness, you can now be a ‘buggered-up‘, ‘eccedentisiast‘ who is ‘toleratable‘ of ‘buzzwords‘ to which you can ‘twerk‘ and ‘squee‘ to your maximum delight and not be a ‘hatemonger‘.

If that sentence didn’t just pi** you off … it should have. That sentence was ‘dappy‘ ‘derp‘ and you should just ‘vom‘. No – I’m not writing Seussian’-style rubbish. According to both the Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionaries, these are acceptable words and they all have legitimate meanings. If I wrote a sentence in school with any of this nonsensical stupidity, I would have paid the price. Apparently, our society has spiraled so far down the shit*er that it’s easier just to add more stupid words to the dictionary than teach people to read or talk right! Think America’s doing well?

Think again.

You know what you WON’T find in the Merriam Webster dictionary?

JEDI.

That’s right – a fictional word born from the Star Wars movie series that has a more prominent and widely recognized meaning around the world, with a more profound spiritual and peaceful connotation than the idiotic term, “selfie” – and yet, it’s not in the dictionary. Of course, the Oxford “living” dictionary has it, but not the primary dictionary. Why?

Because it’s too full of words like “D’oh” and “Muggle“. MUGGLE? WHAT IN THE FU$#%^(@#$@ NO GOOD, STINKIN’ SASS A FRASSIN’ $%@$%#@# TAR-NATION IS THIS?

Here’s another one … the word: ‘Ginger‘, has become a derogatory slang insult toward red-heads in America and now, it’s in the dictionary under this very definition?! Wow … so … you know … when your kids are sitting in the school library, giggling around a table and randomly looking up words, and you suddenly get a call because some little red-haired kid got beaten up because they called him a ginger, shaming him, hurting his feelings, and he took offense … you can thank the dictionary.

Do you understand why all this ‘transgender’, boy-girl scout, hypersensitive, and educationally disparaging events are occurring? It’s not to make better people. Nobody gets better by being treated like a “special” snowflake. Nobody becomes more knowledgeable by having the word ‘dandelion‘ replaced by ‘chatroom‘ and only fools (in my opinion only, like this one) actually view cultural trends of stupidity as a positive movement! It’s not positive to make words archaic simply because kids are not learning them! That is the very demonstration of an IDIOT that makes excuses for their failures rather than sucking it up and working to make things right again!! Kids are NOT better off with chatrooms and facebook and social media. Drivers are not better off with distracted texting. Those are NOT good social trends. Those are the damaging results of a system that is being manipulated for reasons OTHER than helping people.

I know … I know … I’m a “truther.”

Yeah, well – you’re right. I am. I was NOT treated well as a child by bullies, apathetic teachers, distracted family members, and other problems. But, I was required to try. I was not given special ‘meds’ and the world told to change so it could accept me. I was forced to adapt. I didn’t get to be rich and famous. I didn’t get to be ‘special’. What I got were the skills needed to not be an idiot who falls prey to the manipulative idiocy that rules an idiotic nation. And, for that – I’m grateful – no matter how much hurt or pain, because I’m stronger. After all … learning what a Jedi is … a “code”, “faith” and “belief” had a huge impact on many of the positive decisions I made in life to make my own life better. It wasn’t the blasted foolishness of social media since that only makes children less intelligent with each passing day. So, “truther” or not … I will remain suspicious of the forces that are driving kids into a social-media / technology hysteria where they learn to be apathetic and accept the spoon fed garbage forced upon them. My vocabulary may not be vast, but it’s large enough to know bullsh*t when I see it.

If we are going to include pop-media/culture words in the dictionary, they should be words that belong in our society, not words like ‘emoji‘ just so kids can be knowledgeable enough to get addicted to their cell phones and eventually become ‘screenagers‘. I mean … if that were the case, someone might think this lead on vocabulary changes was being pushed by some big corporate scheme to manipulate …

*ahem*

Well, clearly, it’s not. Words like “Yolo“, “Noob” and other shaming / stupid words don’t push anyone to spend more time on video games just to not be shamed … (you know, because that’s just crazy!). *wink* We all just need to sit down and do some ‘blamestorming‘ on this one!

What do you think? Is it good to let education fall to the wayside and just make up a bunch of new words that focus solely on the electronic / social media age that funds super corporations? Or … is that a little “not okay”?

Thanks for reading.


“‘Cause, you know, ‘the struggle is real’, and that’s why we gots’ ta’ keep it 100! Amirite?” –This, and many … many other tragedies.

*Note: All fictitious sounding words that border-lined on being epic-ally stupid were actual words from the newest dictionaries. No other languages were harmed in the posting of this blog. Now, for a moment of silence for the American language, education, and a hope for the future … The management!

Adam Ruins Everything and Conspiracy Theories Make for Strange Bedfellows

adamconover

Last Tuesday evening, October 10, 2017, the show, Adam Ruins Everything covered the topic of conspiracy theories. Now, if you’re not familiar with Adam Conover’s show, the premise is simple: the truth that most of the general populous in the world knows about certain topics generally isn’t the “truth”. Using substantial, supporting data, Adam Conover provides honest and [mostly] factual information for people ranging from the truth about fingerprints not being unique to the U.S. corruption behind tax company’s keeping Americans from enjoying a more effective method of tax calculations. Whether it’s right or wrong (and the show has even presented itself as being fallible), the premise is similar to the reason I started writing here: presenting ideas, thoughts, and information that can lead to informed conclusions, effective discovery, and sometimes even the truth. But, how exactly do you “debunk” or “expose” lies in conspiracy “theories”?

This brings us to the next argument: what is a conspiracy theory? Merriam Webster says:

“a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators” –MW

The Oxford dictionary defines conspiracy theories as:

A belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event.” – OD

And, there are a “host” of psychological explanations to explain why people believe in conspiracy theories, although none of them support the simple premise that the so-called “truth” could potentially be wrong or that the providers of said “truth” are inconsistent and have been caught in lies (so that there is a justified reason to question what has been said).

conspiracy_0

But, do these definitions really cover “what” a conspiracy theory is? Well, a conspiracy is an action or a plot to undermine someone. So, does a “conspiracy theory” have to be limited to a powerful organization or a secret plot to get you? Is it possible to believe that your neighbor is secretly the person who has been using your garbage, stealing your newspaper, and siphoning water? Would that be a “conspiracy”? Technically, yes, since the basis of the argument is that the person’s actions are plots against you and that their covert actions are the cause of your grief (Darn you Sunday Crossword puzzle *shaking fist at sky* … how can I live without you!!!).

index

And, a “theory” is just that: a belief or “guess” based on the information provided. The “Big Bang”, is a “theory”. How our solar system was formed, is only a theory – and yet, no one is mocking those folks because they’re supposedly “smart” / “expert” scientists (well, except for me … I mock all equally!).

Unfortunately, the use of the term conspiracy theory has not only been applied to people who have substantially sound arguments, but also to the “less rational”  people who believe their cat is secretly plotting with the other cats around the world and just biding their time until the revolution (although … I’m not so sure that’s a conspiracy, considering that kitty tries to quash all my efforts to expose his plot by sitting on the keyboard while I try to type!). This has oft times led to a long-stream of insults, injurious commentaries, and slanderous public opinion of any person who has a conspiracy theory. It also leads to the condescending treatment of theories such as “Chemtrails”, when that is only a “pop-culture” name for geoengineering, which is very real. Of course, it doesn’t help when networks like the history channel report on “ancient aliens” and put this guy on the screen as the “expert”:

I-am-not-saying
Not being insulting, but this is the most condescending form of sarcasm, ever. “Hey … we believe you … but we’ll still mock you … heeee….”

I’m not implying that conspiracy theories are good, bad, or indifferent. They are, what they are: opinions. Each person is entitled to their opinion and there is no “real” standard by which to define one as crazy or less credible than another. Think I’m wrong? YOU believe that the piece of plastic or paper in your wallet or purse is money. It’s not. It’s a representation of currency whose value is solely dictated by what someone else tells you, and you’re okay with that. If there ever was an apocalypse, I’ll hoard toilet paper, you hoard money, and let’s see who’s “crazy” … ’cause, you know … just sayin’! In fact, most people believe in the “big bang” … but on what premise … ’cause one guy said it was so? Talk about crazy …

Now, let’s take the basis for the show, Adam Ruins Everything, which is:

“Host and investigative comedian Adam Conover reveals the hidden truths behind everything you know and love.” – TruTV

“Hidden truths” sounds a lot like “secret” and “covert”, doesn’t it? An assault on large corporations acting against the well being of the people almost sounds like the “powerful conspirator” or “influential organization” of which the dictionary applies to conspiracy theories. So, why is Adam Ruins Everything different than a conspiracy theory show, or is it?

AM3Ehhd
Truth? Yeah. A large corporation keeping information secret to manipulate the masses? Yeah. De Beers, like other manipulative corporations are a bunch of turds? Maybe. Either way, how do you differentiate “conspiracy theory”, “theory”, “conspiracy”, “cover-up”, etc.?

Well, for starters, Adam Conover and his team try to substantiate their facts through scientific or historical support. Of course, just as frequently as they identify scientific and historical context to support their argument, they have to fight against the fact that it was scientific and historical context that created the juxtaposition. So, in trying to evaluate the show and differentiate its “base premise” from the “base premise” of a conspiracy theory: is it true that fingerprints are not unique, or is that just another, “conspiracy theory”?

Well, if we look at the contextual evidence of just common sense, the answer is that fingerprints are not unique – “most likely“, based on reasoning and some historical context. Based on some scientific research, fingerprints are not unique. Yet, time and time again, people, even (later proven) innocent people, have gone to prison on nothing more than fingerprint evidence (and a little song and dance by the prosecution – but that’s for another discussion). So, was Adam Conover being a conspiracy theorist when he presented evidence that fingerprints were not unique based on a presumptive amount of evidence showing that they are, or does he truly deserve the classification of “investigative” comedian?

While I enjoy the show, Adam Ruins Everything, and truly believe it should be watched by all people (because people should know more facts about their world), in all sincerity, the show did not prove that fingerprints were not unique, it only pointed out the possibility that it was true. In other shows, the reason behind Theodore Roosevelt being on Mount Rushmore was a lot more revealing and had far more “substance” in its evidence. But, that doesn’t make it any less of a conspiracy. Why? Because it is still a “theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators” when there is evidence to the contrary. Again, this leads us to the point that we must be clear about the fact that conspiracy theories labeled as “crazy” (as dubbed by a society that believes electric cars run on magic and not coal), only leads to more problems: apathetic ignorance of the truth.

v2-TheDress-2
The dress that frustrated a nation of interneters! (yes, I just used the word “interneters”, you heard it here, first! muwahahahaha!)

Here is the dilemma: I say the light is red and you say the light is green; but if we’re both color-blind, who’s right? There is a truth – but only because science dubbed a certain wavelength of light to be “red” and another to be “green”, yet, it is still an opinion. There is a certain amount of “factually” provable scientific reasoning that can demonstrate the differences in wavelength, but to those who are not knowledgeable on the subject (in this case, “color blind”), they are solely dependent on the honesty and consistency of the people presenting the information. When the scientists say that “red is red” and “green is green”, every time, we accept that fact. However, when the people we rely upon for the truth are inconsistent, lack a foundation, or otherwise are just plain wrong, how do you establish trust?

warning

In an article I wrote a while back, I addressed the issue of inconsistencies in the theory of evolution. I am not the only person to find major faults in this theory as others have seen these contradictions, too. This begs the question: how do I trust an “expert” in any given field when I learn that the expert is making guesses (and by sheer common sense and reasoning, it didn’t make sense in the first place)? You’re either limited to blind faith (based on apathy and being overwhelmed with wrong information pushing you to ignore any other possibilities), or you’re overwhelmed by reasoning that opposes everything you’ve ever learned as true (I suppose there are other positions to take, but I’m trying to be simplistic for the sake of not writing an entire book).

So, when Adam Conover “ruins” or debunks the falsities of conspiracy theories and tries to establish that they are dangerous, it makes for some strange bedfellows. For example, he presented the argument about the moon landing. Was it real, or was it faked? Well, unless you were there, I suppose you would never know 100%. But, when NASA has repeatedly lied, out come the so-called “crazies” who rely on tremendous amounts of scientific, first-hand testimony and overwhelming data to say that some of Nasa’s claims are not true. Are they wrong? You can tell me they are, but unless you are the moon – it is still just your “opinion”. While Conover tries to establish that conspiracy theories are dangerous because people have wrongly been sent to jail, he leaves out some very important facts. Yes, it’s true that a media hysteria based on a conspiracy theory supported a movement that lead to some false arrests. Conversely, it wasn’t the “conspiracy” theory that led to people being jailed, it was the abusive and unjust acts of some very corrupt officials and authority figures that led to it (and has occurred for over a million innocent people sitting in American prisons alone). Case in point: Guns don’t kill people … stupid people do (and armed monkeys working for water-hating witches … but that’s another story entirely!!).

People-in-the-Moon-Landing-Hoax.jpg

It’s easy to blame conspiracy theories because they sparked some thought that led to another person taking egregious and harmful action. And, in part, there is truth in that. On the other hand, maybe it’s time to stop blaming the conspiracy theories and address the other, more important issues which are: 1) the mass amount of lying, cover-ups, false-flag operations and other inconsistent and deceitful behavior by scientists, government agencies, media, and other parties who should be accountable for causing dissension through lies, 2) holding people accountable for their behavior, regardless of their blame of some conspiracy (like the slender man trials), 3) holding people accountable for abusing conspiracy theories as evidence to incriminate another (or ignoring conspiracy theories that may hold a certain amount of truth), and 4) failing to address the fact that if the truth were solid in the first place, the conspiracy would have negligible to no influence and therefore, there is “something” there to be uncovered and not blindly dismissed. There is no excuse for ignorance, and blindly accepting a so-called “fact” on face value, is ignorant.

gravity-meme2

What’s not dangerous about conspiracy theories is the same premise that makes shows like Adam Ruins Everything, good for the people. While the news media keeps throwing out “fake” stories, and people rely upon them for the truth, it leads to incorrect conclusions, mass hysteria, and a nation that is currently in turmoil thanks to the constant barrage of lies. That … is VERY dangerous (as it destabilizes nationalism and national security). Equally as dangerous is failing to hold government agencies, scientists, law enforcement, and other “officials” or persons of influence accountable when they lie, are inconsistent, or contradict themselves. When that happens, we end up with a shooter in Las Vegas and nobody sure what story to believe about when police did or did not show up, what security guards did or did not do, and rather than solve a problem so it doesn’t happen again, we’re left with more questions and despair for families that deserve resolution. It further degrades the trust in law enforcement and other agencies that work hard, protect the people, and should not be treated poorly because of a few, bad apples. People make mistakes … and forgiveness is divine, remember?

YzQ1Zjg0YzU5ZSMvWVJ6RWRydVGlpN2dybnRvN3V1bnV

So, believing the Earth is flat may seem nonsensical to a lot of people – but unless you’ve physically been to space and seen otherwise, it’s solely based on the influx of information that has been fed to you. No, I’m not saying I agree or disagree … the privilege of free thinking and making your own decision is solely yours. But, recognizing that your belief is based upon what you’ve been told is an important first step in establishing a true foundation of beliefs, understanding, and a willingness to be more than a mindless zombie. Religions are a great example. Every religion contradicts the other in some fashion, no matter how big or small, but it all comes down to what people “choose” to believe. Choosing to believe in something because you have found a preponderance of evidence that satisfies your curiosity sets the standard by which you will believe everything else that follows. It’s what differentiates being gullible, or not … not some jerk that lied and convinced you to chase snipes (until that snipe comes true and bites them! Yay for alternate dimensions … you know … “if” they were real .. *ahem*).

Learning to distinguish the truth, and more importantly, “why” we believe some truths over others, is at the very core of achieving higher thinking (like the old adage, “There is your side, my side, and the truth.”). Sadly, when Conover argued that conspiracy theories were a bunch of “hooie”, he undermined this principal (and in some ways, discredited himself, at least in my opinion only). If people actually sold out to every lie and every falsity told to them by public officials, authority figures, Hollywood, the media, and other such propaganda, it is my opinion that the entire human civilization would literally collapse. Informed decision making is crucial for success in all areas of life. Lies lead people into war. False prophecies lead people into mass murder. Apathetically ignoring the truth leads to manipulative control and misery. Lies create fear and anger, not love and compassion. Inconsistencies create dissension, distrust, and divide the house that leads to the fall.

media-ethics-truthtelling-7-638
Maybe the value of full disclosure by those with a responsibility to do so is only a perception and an opinion on my part, but clearly, there is some “evidence” to the contrary.

This is what continues to hold humanity back because corrupt societies fall. This is what has cost so many their lives, happiness, and freedom. Terrorists lead by lies … should the leaders of free countries do the same? I’m not implying that everyone (or anyone) should believe in aliens or manbearpig (although, I’m pretty sure that in some reality, this one’s real because it’s just too funny not to be). But, failure to recognize a trend that undermines your ability to think (where true and successful thinking comes from a fully informed premise), is dangerous. Thus, actions like “net neutrality” (which I’ve covered before) and the ability for a government to control information when it is already demonstrated its willingness to run false flag operations against its own people and cover up facts (not as a conspiracy, but as a matter of fact), for reasons other than national defense, is equally as dangerous (and has led to a lot of deaths). In fact, believing that “conspiracy theories” are all the work of illogical and irrational people is in and of itself, a conspiracy theory. By having an adverse position to conspiracy theories, when you ask yourself where your rationale came from and you realize that it was passed on to you by the very same people that were the liars and manipulators in the theory, you should be concerned.

For example, the biggest proponent against “chem trails” (or geoengineering) is the government. Why? How does it hurt them that people simply want to see a live sample taken from a jet stream that stays in the sky and tested? Isn’t it good that people would be conscientious of that? After all, it’s the government that asks people to keep their eye on one another, looking for conspiracies?! Want to debunk a conspiracy? Just show the people what’s in the air and don’t suddenly ban live chemical testing of chem trails by the public, not blame it on climate change?! Otherwise … conspiracy theory or not … that just looks guilty. And, that’s the inconsistency and lie that perpetuates distrust. After all, they “told” the people it was just water vapor, and perpetuated it online. Yet, it’s those same people that passed the law that chemical testing on the public is permissible?!? Again – inconsistencies will lead to distrust, not just people “stuck” in a way of thinking. And, I’m not supporting or disavowing the concern, but when large, U.S. “environmental” agencies that are grant funded through taxpayer dollars look to treat the air with aerosols and sprays, and Oxford’s geoengineering program literally shows chemtrails as part of their atmospheric treatment, and all the while public officials are saying, “nope”, “noway”, and “not no-how” (whilst they turn their head and look in every direction except at the sky where everyone else is looking), it begs the questions: if you mock people concerned about chemtrails, are you working for the same team, are you willingly and knowingly trying to support harming people, or are you just that blind? You don’t have to believe in geoengineering, even if it is happening, just don’t be so ignorant that you mock people who do … since it involves your health, too. Do you see where I’m going with this?

There is a popular bumper sticker: “Love you country, fear your government.” While funny, and sadly true, it is wrong. The people who are elected into positions of office should do good … and many of them do! I don’t want to create a premise here whereby people distrust their leadership. In fact, that would be the undermining principal that makes people afraid of conspiracy theories (and there’s the “real” rationale behind insults and attacks on conspiracy theorists, no different than bigotry or other hatred born of the “unknown”). The rationale being that if the theories are true: then you really are screwed because you would need to fear your government. However, that’s not the premise of a free nation (and shouldn’t be for any nation). Hard working officials like Senator Dennis Linthicum, whether you agree with him (or like him) or not, do a fantastic job bringing the truth to the people with articles like his recent one: “Power Corrupts.” This is the evidence that there is hope. I’m not saying his article is “right” or “wrong” – again, that’s your free-will choice to decide. However, his presentation of corruption by large, influential bodies that lead to the harm of the masses, conspiracy theory or not, is backed by some pretty strong testimony and evidence that should never be ignored. Freedom is not “free” – we must earn that privilege, and diligence is one of the ways we can accomplish that.

Conspiracy-Theories-EMGN6.jpg
There’s a difference between believing aliens are reading our thoughts, and the government covering up illicit acts. The alien one … I can’t prove or disprove and it is beyond my rationale to address, although, like anything, I file it away for a rainy day (should aliens visit). But, I’d like to at least be able to trust the people who have the power to deal with these matters, like the CIA, and believe they would not do anything that could intentionally harm our own citizenry (or anyone else for that matter). Yet, when we find out “after the fact”, that everyone is being bugged, that not only justified a LOT of conspiracy theories that people mocked, but it added to the dissension that tears apart the trust of the people and their leadership.

I don’t know if Adam Conover fully considered the ramifications of his presentation on conspiracy theories, or if he did it for any reason other than every other show he does. But, it certainly border-lined on a wholly inappropriate action telling people that conspiracy theorists were all bad and dangerous and trying to convince people that no big corporation was out to get them (’cause, you know, that’s what he did when he exposed Luxottica and the conspiracy behind the monopolization of eye glasses). Maybe Conover rationalizes that his evidence is justified because it’s overwhelming or he presents it with a precept that his logic is important in persuading people to what he views as the truth. And, in some ways, he is probably very right. In others, his show is important to the public as it provides an invaluable service, letting people have that added information that was otherwise kept from them, so they can make informed decisions, and that privilege should not be taken lightly. But, his absolute dismissal of theories on such an epic scale was frustratingly misdirecting, at best.

If, for example, any government agency came forward, even years after the fact, and admitted to a falsification of information – whether it was for “public good”, “national defense” or other even loosely legitimate reason, I would be okay with that. Unfortunately, they also know that the majority of Americans don’t bother to “think” for themselves and would overreact. So, I don’t know where the balance lies, but it’s in there, somewhere. However, I have personally witnessed people I consider to be highly intelligent mock a “conspiracy theory” and dismiss it without even being willing to hear it or logically discuss it because of the abundance of “anti-conspiracy theory” rhetoric spewed by those who act more like they’re hiding something, than being rational. Anti-conspiracy theory topics that quash dangerous assumptions are one thing, but an assault on the entirety of peoples’ potential concerns about safety leads to outright ignorance.

So, attacking conspiracy theories themselves was an odd choice for Conover. I would still recommend the show to everyone, but I would say that with anything else, even this article, take it with a grain of salt. Because, whether or not the light is green or red, unless you happen to not be color blind, you’re still just shooting darts in the dark!

Hope you enjoy, dude. (And, yes, hopefully someone else out there gets something out of this, too).

Thanks for reading!


“Come now, we are men of action, lies do not become us.” – The Princess Bride (GREATEST movie of all time … ‘a thank you very much!)

 

 

Why Social Media Exploded – The Social Cognitive Dissonance Theory And How the Hierarchy of Needs May Need to be Remodeled

social_media.jpg

Social media: it’s everywhere you look, everywhere you go, and involved with everything you do. Social media has made pop-stars out of people who once thought themselves alone, and loners out of people who once thought themselves important. Social media has been the foundation for a world-wide apathetic approach to personal information security and has given rise to a new era (and industry) of hacking. It has lead to success, failure, suicide, and even murder. Strangely, in the less than 10 years, “social media” became a part of the modern world culture. Faster than the spread of Christianity, war, science, ideology and any other world-wide phenomena, social media rose to power in the blink of an eye. But, how?

The answer may very well lie in a well-established psychological concept known as cognitive dissonance.

CogDig.png

Cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual’s actions, thoughts, or behaviors contradicts the world-view (and, by world-view, this could be as simple as 2 people or as massive as the entire planet’s population). In the world of deviant behavior, cognitive dissonance is exhibited when a person does something contentious with the law or a moral or ethic code and tries to justify or make excuses for themselves. Not limited to just deviant thinking, cognitive dissonance is present in the everyday lives of every person on the planet. The premise is simple: people need to be right. In Maslow’s (and later on, more evolved models), hierarchy of human needs, from the very first stage of physiological needs, to belonging, and finally self-actualization, people have both a physical and neurological need to avoid pain. When questions arise that contend with our thoughts, actions, or behaviors (our internal world-view), it creates conflict. Conflict leads to added thinking processes, questioning ourselves (including our identities and belonging in the world), and as I’ve written about before, overloads our brains.

To better understand this, imagine the following situation:

traffic-light-red-dan-ge-01.png

It’s 10:00 pm and you are at a red light in your car, the roads are empty, and you’ve been waiting there for more than 3 minutes. After a while, most people would start to question whether or not the light is “ever going to turn green.” Soon, a stream of thoughts follow: “I want to get to where I’m going,” “It’s late and I am tired,” and so on. The red light has become a persecutor and the natural, human position to take is that of a victim: “This is unfair,” “I wonder if the light is broken,” “The stupid City needs to fix their lights,” and so on. This is painful. No one likes to be a victim. It feels unnatural, causes you to question your self-worth, and challenges the premise that you can be happy (or have a good day or whether or not you are even a good person). Almost everyone has gone through a situation similar to this.

Now comes the dissonance: By driving through the red light, knowing it’s illegal, you are suddenly faced with two, conflicting world-views: 1) you’re being victimized and need out of the situation by driving through the red light, and 2) driving through the red light is illegal and breaking the rules. If you want to see this on a more conscious level, check out this Youtube video demonstrating both consonant and dissonant music. Dissonance is inharmonious. It’s actually no different than chewing on tin foil, scratching nails across a chalkboard, or hitting your toe with a hammer. It’s unpleasant to the point of being unbearable. Remember, pain is only an interpretation of the brain to tell you that you’ve gone too far in one direction or the other. In this case, you know that breaking the rules (because you’ve learned this as a licensed driver), is going too far and will get you in trouble, but not doing is possibly pushing you too far in the other direction. Trouble is not good, it is the path toward pain, and thus:

Your decision to make things better could make things worse.

It’s this type of situation where a person is pushed to the extreme and needs temporary relief that forms the basis for addictions like smoking and drinking (where the temporary moment of relief has to be justified against the longer term pain that will probably be worse than any short-term pain). You can’t act on dissonance. This is why the human psyche has developed its own set of tools to overcome this problem (for example): “There’s no one here, I’m not endangering anyone’s life, and clearly, the only way out is to go!” This is called “justification” and it’s one small part of a long list of thinking errors that all work together to accomplish the unified goal of avoiding responsibility (or the longer-term consequences for the immediate relief). On the other hand, “justification” by itself is not wrong if it results in better decision making: “I know I need to get home, but I know it’s breaking the rules, and so, I can just be patient.”

However, when it comes to cognitive dissonance, it doesn’t matter which decision you made. It is the old adage: “You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.” Those who ran the red light and were pulled over by law enforcement get that immediate reinforcement that their own thinking was somehow flawed, further reinforcing a lifetime (growing) list of self-doubt that stays with them. Those who got home late may be glad they’re safe, but they never faced their victim (the red light), and remain a victim. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rules, but I’m addressing the majority of all human beings. Even the person who waited has thought in their head, “I hate that light.

Worse, for both people, they now have to contend with the fact that their enemy was an unseen and unknown force. The “light” didn’t assault them (it is only a light bulb, after all). What assaulted them was their own conscience and cognitive processes. Unfortunately, unless you’re “into” self-harm, that doesn’t work. “You” cannot physically, logically, or emotionally be your own enemy otherwise, you have no means of “fighting” back, since it still results in you being hurt (thus, the “blame” game begins!). To overcome this, a new thinking path arises:

worldview1.jpg

Confirmation of my world-view.

I hate it when I get stuck at that light – it never changes even though I just sit there and wait.

It was so unfair I got a ticket, I didn’t hurt anybody and that stupid light was clearly broken.

Two entirely separate paths came back to the same course: the need to be justified in your decision. If someone says, “Oh, that happens to me all the time and it doesn’t bother me,” what do you say? Here’s a response you’ll NEVER hear: “You know, that’s a really good point. I like that long red light and I’m going back there so I can be stuck in my car for hours because that’s a good thing.” Sound childish? It’s not. It is a perfect example of why we do not accept contradictions to our world view. So, when you hear, “Yeah, that sucks, it sounds like you didn’t deserve a ticket,” suddenly, your whole perspective changes. You are no longer a victim! It “WASN’T YOUR FAULT“. And, thus, your thinking was justified, you know you were in the right even if you do have to pay a ticket and you can get back on the road without having to stop at every red light feeling like a victim. Does it make sense now why you might hear an alcoholic say, “I just need a shot of tequila to ‘face the day‘,“? Even if you didn’t “beat down” your enemy physically, you were given a dosage of good old “acceptance” and a booster shot of “self esteem”, and it was a reward mechanism that made you feel better!

This brings us to a new theory I am proposing here (at least for me it is new): “The Social Cognitive Dissonance Theory.” Now, of course, the example I gave above is based on already well-established psychological principals. However, the Social Cognitive Dissonance Theory crosses the threshold into social media by addressing blogging, tweeting, Imgur, Youtube, Yelp, Pinterest, and other sources based on similar psychological principals of social networking … but rather than be about “why” people socially network, it’s more focused on “how” social media / networking exploded into the world scene almost overnight. It is the same principal that could be used to better explain the appearance of guests on shows like “America’s Got Talent”. The principal theory is this: the need to fit in, be love, be admired, and be wanted is more important than any other human need.

How does social media fit in?

The internet (which I will digress from expressing all my disgruntlement with for the moment in time), did something amazing (yet terrible) for individuals: it opened the door for one person to be in front of millions with the click of a button (and cheap enough that everyone could do it)! Justification of an individuals’ thinking (their world-view or position) by mom or dad is great … but the acceptance of millions is more addictive than any drug in the world. For some, this new media was an effective tool: in America, Ex-President Obama used Twitter to launch an expansive information campaign that literally won him an election (because he fed into an entire nation’s need to be accepted and recognized). For the rest of the world, services like MySpace, Facebook, and others allow people to post ideas, thoughts, and opinions for all to read (each being their own “important” person or “person of interest”). Even better than just getting to share with the world, opinions and responses came back live and in real-time. This type of immediate feedback was no different than the schemes used by slot machines in casinos. Whether the feedback was good or bad – it was immediate (meeting that basic primal need of instant gratification).

According to the Social Cognitive Dissonance Theory: justification and reinforcement of one’s world-view is such a powerful, primal need that the immediate gratification of online approval was more attractive, addictive, and effective than any drug on the market. At the onset of social media there was a lot of flaming and hatred mixed in with the good, resulting in ongoing, heated communications. The negative replies resulted in on-line verbal wars (and eventually the start of trolling), and positive replies reinforced the posters’ world-view. Suddenly, people felt justified that their opinions mattered, and if they didn’t, they could fight until someone finally agreed with them and select that feedback as the justification of their position. Facebook intentionally mislabeled “anonymous strangers who appear as though they happen to agree with you“, as “friends“, and not only were people finding their world-view justified, but the basic need for love and acceptance was being simultaneously fulfilled. Dissonance ends, resolution is reached, and the world is better … sort of.

People looking for information blindly accepted it, right or wrong, because these were their “friends” who justified their position and it’s all they needed to feel important (like the stuffed animal parent for Harlow’s monkey experiments). Even posting factual blogs or “how-to’s” reinforced the “need for acceptance” as posters were being accepted as experts, even outside of any area of knowledge or expertise they may have. Within a few years, it was no longer enough that a close-circle of friends agreed, people wanted more (power corrupts absolutely). While an over-packed world of people who somehow could not (seemingly) meet other people was separating the masses, the internet offered an alternate solution: “Stay at home and we’ll come to you!” It’s sort of a hard concept to object to: utilizing laziness and the “easy” road as a way to end dissonance and bring about joy.

Another major aspect of social media’s instant success was that the unimportant became important. Thus, the fact you may not be a rock star or famous Hollywood actor was no longer an issue. People could write about any stupid idea, thought, or perception that they had and everyone was interested (since even negative commenters, no matter how negative, were at least still taking the time to read the posters’ work and thus contributed to their self-importance). Acceptance reached all new levels (especially as the 80’s had worked hard to put a divide in people … but I will digress on that for now). People virtually went into the homes of others and it no longer required experience, skill, effort, time, or opportunity.

The result? There are billions of people online with an opinion. Every single one of those people want their opinion to matter so they belong and are justified in their world-view; and social media was the key. People do tend to group themselves together for the very same reasons of “need” and “belonging” and the internet offered some very large groups. What should have taken decades to infiltrate the whole of the world (cell phones, twitter accounts, Youtube video posters, and so on), sprang up in a few years’ time. This was accelerated by a compounding effect that came about because the commenters could also communicate to one another. Thus, a single post became a forum for thousands to each fight for the highest rating approval. Every blog, tweet, and yelp review was an opportunity to tear others down to fulfill the false ideals that lifted them up (filling that false sense of control, “being right”, and power over others). Posting any social media information suddenly resulted in commenting. Commenting resulted in more commenting which then resulted in more posting and … you have a digital phenomenon that moved at a pace so rapid that the world was literally blind-sided by it (and all because society may have failed to recognize that “attention” and “belonging” were more powerful than any other function in human development; although, in fairness, no other model has existed in history that could have supported this so well).

In steps Corporate America!

Opportunity was afoot. These folks saw what was happening WAY early on. Their “sheeple” (aka the “consumer”) were ripe for manipulation. Social media became integrated into cellular phones, tablets, and web pages (including printed media). The video camera industry took a decade of zero advancements and whipped out Go-Pros to boost their ratings. Worse, Hollywood had suddenly realized that its famous actors and actresses were beginning to take a back-seat to the ordinary, every-day people they had been trying to keep as media slaves. To combat this, the Hollywood “stars” joined the social media stream and suddenly:

It wasn’t just approval you could get, it was the approval of someone who already had the approval of a million other people and in minutes (thus the term, “trending”) you could have the approval of tens of millions. It’s no different than introducing children to candy and subsequently, Halloween. Even cocaine and heroine addicts get on routines which hold them over and then re-dose at a speed commensurate with their body’s rate of adaptation. Social media acceptance is a drug that seemingly has no limitations on the max intake. Thus, the more approval a person has, the more their drive (and there’s no “schedule”). This is the basis for megalomaniacs and even some serial killers (those who seek fame and recognition).

And, with corporate America shoving social media into everyone’s face, integrating into their digital lives, and manipulating the world with this drug, rather than being saturated with too many Facebook “friends” or Yelp “reviews”, people looked to the digital world for everything in their lives: humor, knowledge, science, and more. Why? Social media fed them what I theorize may be one of the most important human needs: “ego”. Vanity may be one of the single most powerful drivers in the universe, even over the physical needs of food, air, and water. People have even been known to surrender food and water to focus on their on-line experience. However, the experiences are not always great. Regardless, even though online humor is often times not very funny at all and the scary is boring, in order to evolve and survive, the”expectation” bar is set lower. Rather than move into higher levels of morality and well-being, the idea of unimportant opinions being somehow elevated, depraved creativity being rewarded, and virtual cruelty to other human beings all become reward mechanisms of acceptance and the higher level brain functions unique to human evolution are stunted.

cognitivedissonance
An example of the original / updated model on the right and the new, proposed model on the left (in a rough / early form). Rather than have morality, creativity, etc. as a need in the pyramid, these are needs that build the bridge between basic behavior and higher-level thinking and are interlinked (built/supported by) the ability to fill basic needs by using / developing higher level functions. Thus, if a need goes unfulfilled (like a rite of passage), it becomes crippling and impossible to move into that healthier, better level of thinking.

 

Of course, one would have to lower the bar (below the floor!) to accept the internet. While smoking, drugs, and drinking require an addict to forget about the damages, to agree with anything on the internet (that you would want to agree with so it keeps fulfilling your needs, too), one has but to lower their expectations of performance and output. Thus, as a person moves up in satisfying the hierarchy of needs, in the new model (above left),  without developing real friendships, problem solving is crippled (because, in practice, it doesn’t work in “real-world” interpersonal experiences and becomes a contention / dissonance). Self esteem is massively boosted, not based on performance, but rather it is based on an altered world-view used to justify and build up belonging and cripples the creativity process, that coupled with problem solving, results in the denial of the truth (because on-line ‘esteem” and solutions from anonymous/ faceless posting have contradictory values and results in real life).

True love and belonging are never fulfilled, safety and security are hollow (as the same buffers in the digital world and abandonment of personal identification security curtail real-life esteem and strength built from having a strong/ solid personal identity), and there is a pause in development. This leads to depression, anxiety, stress, and the massive influx of psychological problems and issues currently facing the world today. Even food is set after esteem and love – and this is justified in the real-world issues regarding weight, appearance, and artificially generated / manipulated behaviors such as anorexia, diet trends, popularity on appearances, etc.). Conversely, we know that teaching is most effective when rewarded. It doesn’t have to be food or the basic “physiological needs”, which substantiates that acceptance, love, and belonging, are by far the most important elements in human development.

This model is also a more well-developed basis for all deviant (criminal) thinking behavior. This is present in “criminal” and “non-criminal” portions of society (which is important to identify in less obvious “non-criminal” sources to ensure integrity in the analysis). For example, this handout, from the “Addiction Technology Transfer Center” is entitled: “Thinking errors characteristic of the criminal“. If you read it, everything is about how the “criminal” thinks and the “criminal” acts and is the most racist/biased, obtuse manner of thinking and labeling that spurns the potential for recovery and health in the world. As it is represented as supposedly “educating” material, it is so misguided in its representation of the truth that it borderlines on psychotic:

Anger is a basic part of the criminal’s way of life. He or she responds angrily to anything interpreted as opposing what he or she wants. Anger is, for the criminal, a major way of controlling people and situations.

Is it true that there are some criminals who are extremely angry? Yes. Is it true that there are some criminals who are not? Yes. Is it true that there are people who are not “criminals” that are extremely high-strung and angry? Yes. What an article like this one misses is the fact that “stereotyping”, “assuming” and “labeling” are also parts of criminal type behavior! Worse, “justifying” an article as “educational” to ignore the precepts of psychology and proper care and treatment for recovery is disconnected criminal-type thinking! The point is, it is more easy to see where actual criminal “behavior” occurs as it is an external response, but the goal is to identify where the criminal “thinking” occurs in main-stream society to justify a revised model of needs. Clearly, the writer of the article is willing to put someone else under their feet to be recognized as an “expert”, when clearly, they are not.

Another perfect example is the “Slenderman Stabbing case“. For anyone familiar with “Slenderman“, the premise of the argument in the court case justifying that a teens’ behavior was the result of mental illness whereby she was somehow appeasing slenderman was a complete abuse of justice. I’m not judging the teen – that’s for you to decide (if you so choose). I’m addressing the fact that misinformation, social media, and a stunted level of development outside of the social/digital world gives way to not only criminal behavior in children, but it further integrates itself into all those around it setting false precepts and hollow cultural standards of right and wrong where fame gained through social media does not require skill, talent, or even anything good. It only requires attention – and in the rapid growth of a completely unknown (like the effects of social media), there was no time to for a controlled introduction and in the wake of this overnight phenomenon, even “bad” gets attention.

Unfortunately, society itself is reinforcing dissonance. With the advent of social media and the recognition by authority figures that the internet and disclosure of a person’s behaviors and actions (without consent), can boost their goals (which are not stopping crime as crime has become more prevalent), privacy is being rapidly abolished. You already know it, but most likely, like everyone else, feel as though there’s nothing you can do to stop it. It’s not that the massive influx of cameras, tracked cell phones, and other intrusions by themselves are a problem, but coupling that with the “need” to fit in and belong and the contradictory anxiety and fear of always being watched (which inevitably, for everyone, leaves people feeling as though they are automatically distrusted regardless of what they’ve done), is a problem. George Orwell’s book, 1984, best demonstrated that “control” does not create a society of lawful people. It creates distrust, an increased level of ‘sneaking’ around, and literally promotes criminal behavior (justified by the fact a person’s trust or value is now always at question, no matter what they do). Of course, law enforcement programs like D.A.R.E. never worked, either, but unfortunately, the rapid onset of social media and a failure to learn from the past are now contributing to a rise in criminal behavior and activity as authority figures continue to set a standard of distrust and manipulation. If anything you say or do can be “interpreted” by an over-zealous legal system that continues to spiral down-hill in its focus on public safety – going out in public is a problem, you feel less safe and less “belonging”, and will turn to more social media to combat this. It is literally a self-perpetuating problem that “will” grow.


So, now you have the premise for the “Social Cognitive Dissonance Theory”. It explains how social media / networking became a world-wide phenomenon based on the principle that self-esteem, love, and ‘belonging’ generate the most addictive chemical releases in the human brain. It explains why people do social drugs, engage in “jack-ass” behaviors, and subject themselves to harm regardless of physiological needs. It explains a part of the equation that has contributed to a massive decline in cultural values, psychological disorders, misinformation, and a general unhealthiness around the world. One of the best examples of the importance of “belonging” as a weapon is that of North Korea. They literally manipulated over 3 generations of their own people to feel hated and neglected by the world. Everything the masses were deprived of (food, water, family, and life) were all based on the lie that the Imperialists (America), and the rest of the world, hated them. Their “saviors”, became the corrupted leaders who are heroes by restoring love, accepting their own people, falsely elevating them using a “Hitlarian” “superior race” agenda, and making them feel accepted as a part of their “artificial” family. A lack of social acceptance and love is such a powerful tool for manipulation that it worked better than starvation and torture.

I’m not saying social media is “bad”. I’m saying that it grew too fast. Now, the warnings being issued about the effects fall on deaf ears like the warnings about cigarettes issued 100 years after their initial release. I don’t know if there’s a fix or a cure or how to even address the matter now that Corporate America has stuck its ugly face into the mix and is using social media to bolster its bottom line. After all, what good is it to try and help someone quit the addiction when the Corporations are feeding it more and more everyday? No, I’m not saying that it’s the “fault” of corporations, they’re just another obstacle that has complicated the solution.

Thanks for reading.

(Please note I am not a doctor, psychologist, psychiatrist, or other health professional. I am a Systems analyst, so surprisingly, I know more. Still, it means you should consult one of those health professionals first since they’re supposed to know what they are talking about! You know, because  … legal reasons!)


After all, He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named did great things. Terrible! Yes. But great.” – Ollivander (Harry Potter)