Re:The Anti Social in Oppressive Societies

Interesting.

Where is conformation using diversification practised
in western democracies.? It was my understanding that the
western systems were penal systems. I note that you do not lessen the burden of culpability on those designated as anti-social in these extreme conditions, they are still apart from the general mass in your view. That in itself raises interesting questions. What conditions,norms and circumstances must be in place before we can justifiably deem someone as anti-social.? Could there ever be a moment,instant,action where the anti-social thought is justified in these individuals?

The entity called society interests me. Some thoughts.
Depending on the situation it has a personality, especially for things it takes for credit. But the personality vanishes into constituent parts or sub groups when it fails. There is an underlying reason for this I feel. The misconception is that the more individuals of a society say a decision is just, the more likely it is to be the correct decision (your ref: germany). The problem with this reasoning is that when it fails, those that wish to confront the entity for it's failure are left searching for answers amongst the constituents. John Q Citizen can never have a face-a-face discussion with the entity as a whole.

This ability to break up it's personality when it's
appropriate has it's advantages. For instance where appropriate an individual cannot apply individual attributes to the entity. If society, as a creation for the common good is indeed acting as a concious entity aware of it's failings and successes, then John Q Citizen should be able to categorize individual attributes to it. Usually when he tries to assign negative ones, the majority factor is thrown up as a barrier to reason. The majority agrees, therefore we cannot be wrong. However if he feels the entity has done a great deed or is in peril, he must stand up for it.

When we assign attributes to society, we naturally are left with unfamiliar and bizarre thoughts. If J.Q. Citizen is anti-social because he exhibits certain traits, then society that exhibits the same traits must be the same, or anti-individual. Here the majority police come in to scramble to defend society and does this by breaking up it's pesonality into constituents. (ref: mao,hitler your post).

For example if J.Q is taking group sessions for therapy
because of a past crime, he is told that society does not condone his behavior. He may well benefit from such gatherings feeling remorse that he offended his entity. He may return to his room and there may be a documentary about society refusing to return the assets of incarcerated Japanese or their families. The therapy from this point on reverts to brainwashing because the entity, society, turns out to have the same traits as himself.

He may well come to the conclusion that they wish him to conform to an ideal that the entity itself is trying to achieve, in which case the documentary and life's finding when he leaves the gate will prove he's already attained that level.

The inability for us to see society as an entity will
prevent the lessening of crime. Society can never guarantee
that all will be withheld from the offender, so the best approach is a self analysis and recognition that it too can fail. Anything done to him to make him conform by method of example will fail. This is why the attempts to persuade in most biblical texts is done at the individual levels.

The artificial village is an abnormal environment to start. I'd be willing to bet that there is very little anti-social behavior found in true villages.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.