Large Scale Conditioning

[henryp]

So the idea of being controlled/manipulated came up in the "Being Good" thread.  Where I somewhat equated social morality with Nationalism and Religion as avenues to get the masses to not behave in their own best interests.

Nationalism is the easiest one, so I'll maybe lay out what I see there, and perhaps we can discuss if there are some parallels between that and "being good" in general.

My kid starts Kindergarten in the fall, and one of the first things they are going to do is teach her to pledge allegiance to a flag.  A concept that the majority of the kids can't comprehend.  I take her to a hockey game, and we all stand up and stare at a flag while they sing a big bombastic song.  During almost every game, some soldier has come back, and everyone in the arenea stands and applauds.  They have Military appreciation day, where the star hockey players she likes all say "Thanks for your service!" on the jumbotron.  She sees them in Parades.  She'll see people thanking them on the street.  Likely, most kids hear their parents speaking highly of them.  She'll see commercials with catchy slogans.  She'll see them glorified in movies.  She'll see the president thanking them.  

And when these kids turn 18, some Military recruiter is going to come and offer them shit money to go risk their life in some country far away for some ambiguous motivations.  And many of these kids will say yes.  And the reason for more than a few will be that they've basically been living in a propaganda piece there whole life.

It's diabolical, right?

---

Are there similarities in terms of teaching people what is good when young? Certainly, the military would probably fall under that umbrella.  We teach them (many of us without realizing it) it is good to be a soldier. But there isn't a clear 'bad guy' in the more generic being good like there is in Nationalism.  But there is definitely a concept of controlling how the people think and act, and I'm not convinced it's purely an evolutionary social deal.  It seems like a lot of rich people have their fingers in it.  Whether it was just a matter of keeping poor people from storming the castle, or the formation of a bunch of holidays to drive sales by telling people good sons and daughters buy Mom a card and some flowers.

This is still a an incomplete thought it my head.  But watching advertising, politics, social movements, religions, etc..., there is definitely a lot of forces trying to steer our behavior, and it seems like we go along pretty easily by not putting much thought into it?

Takes on this?

[Pyrrho]

If you mean by "social morality," whatever society regards as right, I think you are not far off the mark.  Anyone can see that different societies have different ideas about what is morally right and what is morally wrong.  Though (and this is the important part) they are not entirely dissimilar.  It is in the commonality that you will find hints of what is going on.

The short answer is, there is a part of human nature called "empathy," which is the source of morality.  If you want the long answer, I recommend reading David Hume's Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, which can be found here:

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-e...-of-morals

[Minimalist]

It's diabolical, right?

Right.

[Thumpalumpacus]

We are all programmed to one degree or another.

[bennyboy]

Any time you teach kids something they don't have the capacity to fully understand, it is conditioning. You use their animal instincts to manipulate their behavior: reward/punishment, fear, desire for acceptance, the natural tendency to imitate parents, etc.

But there's nothing necessarily diabolical about this process. What's diabolical is the things some adults choose to condition their kids to do: hate foreigners, subject their own happiness to that of a fairy tale character, show unconditional respect to adults who clearly don't deserve it, etc.

[Dystopia]

You should read a book on nationalism - If you think teaching a national anthem is indoctrinating nationalism, you have a very wrong liberal idea of what it actually is. If you're talking about America, it seems, in many ways, the opposite of nationalism and past nationalist doctrines because of how high it holds the values of liberalism that are directly incompatible with nationalist principles.

[Cato]

And when these kids turn 18, some Military recruiter is going to come and offer them shit money to go risk their life in some country far away for some ambiguous motivations.  And many of these kids will say yes.  And the reason for more than a few will be that they've basically been living in a propaganda piece there whole life.

This isn't to say that some don't join for the reason you suggest, but my military experience forces me to draw another conclusion. The vast majority of people I met served for a myriad of reasons that all pointed back to a lack of opportunity. Many couldn't afford college and had no other employment prospects. For others, it was simply a means to earn money for school. For some, it was a stable job that allowed them to eat; whether to provide for a young family or as a means of escaping a hellish and hopeless existence.

It's not the salesmanship or the propaganda that make recruiters successful, it's the lack of competition.

[abaris]

We are all programmed to one degree or another.

But believe me, the OP scenarios are quite alien and in all honesty almost frightening to many outside observers. Do you remember that old song by Mike and the mechanics featuring the line "swear allegiance to the flag whatever flag they offer"? It's on these lines. The flags and their purpose are interchangeable, but the meaning stays the same: Catch them at every possible opportunity, so they don't question authority and go willingly whenever a flag is waved in their faces.

It's also in the Kennedy line of "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". On the outside this seems pretty harmless, but it's along the same lines as the old Prussian ideals of the state coming before the individual.

[Faith No More]

This is still a an incomplete thought it my head.  But watching advertising, politics, social movements, religions, etc..., there is definitely a lot of forces trying to steer our behavior, and it seems like we go along pretty easily by not putting much thought into it?

Takes on this?

We're a "go with the flow" kind of species. Not only are there outside forces, both man-made and natural, trying to steer our behavior, one of those forces is the driving impulse to be accepted as part of the herd. Most people do what they think other people will accept and base their choices on how others will perceive them. Being an individual means saying that you stand for certain things regardless of how others feel, but we're hardwired to desire the approval of others.

As a species, the ideas that drive our actions are extremely malleable, and no individual is completely immune to this. We are so susceptible to the environment around us that it is an easy task to convince a person of anything if the right thinking skills are not in place. At least in America, those thinking skills as a wholeare abysmal across our culture, and when you combine that with such a consumer-centric society, you end up with a large amount of lemmings ready to walk of a cliff at a moment's notice.

[abaris]

You should read a book on nationalism - If you think teaching a national anthem is indoctrinating nationalism, you have a very wrong liberal idea of what it actually is. If you're talking about America, it seems, in many ways, the opposite of nationalism and past nationalist doctrines because of how high it holds the values of liberalism that are directly incompatible with nationalist principles.

Sorry, but I disagree completely. As I said, the US features many of the hallmarks of genuine nationalism. Just do a reality check on how liberalism looks like in light of the Patriot Act or how it's now called the Freedom Act looks. Btw, I love these Orwellian names.