Christopher Simpson: Americas Recruitment of Nazis

Leave a comment

Blowback is the first thorough, scholarly study of the US government’s extensive recruitment of Nazis and fascist collaborators right after the war. Although others have approached the topic since, Simpson’s book remains the essential starting point. The author demonstrates how this secret policy of collaboration only served to intensify the Cold War and has had lasting detrimental effects on the American government and society that endure to this day.

Social Identity Theory (SIT)

Leave a comment

Social Identity Theory (SIT), developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, explores the cognitive processes behind how individuals define their identities within social groups. It’s a fundamental theory in social psychology that helps explain intergroup behaviors, prejudices, and discrimination.

Core Tenets:

1. Categorization: SIT suggests that people categorize themselves and others into social groups, creating an “us vs. them” mentality. This categorization forms a part of one’s self-concept and social identity.

2. Social Comparison: Individuals strive to maintain a positive self-concept by comparing their in-group favorably with out-groups. This comparison bolsters self-esteem and enhances social identity.

3. In-Group Favoritism: People show preference and favoritism towards their in-group, as it contributes to a positive social identity, bolstering their self-esteem.

Processes in SIT:

1. Social Identity: It refers to the part of an individual’s self-concept that derives from their membership in social groups. For instance, someone may strongly identify themselves as a part of a religious, ethnic, or national group.

2. Cognitive Aspect: SIT emphasizes the cognitive processes involved in perceiving and categorizing oneself and others into various social groups, which influences behaviors and attitudes.

3. Intergroup Behavior: The theory explains intergroup behaviors, such as in-group favoritism and discrimination against out-groups. These behaviors are driven by the need to maintain a positive social identity.


Further References

1. Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison . Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations, 61(76), 293.

2. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74.

3. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory . Basil Blackwell.

SIT is crucial in understanding group dynamics, intergroup conflicts, and the basis of prejudices. It provides insights into how social identities are formed, how they influence behaviors and attitudes, and the implications for intergroup relations.

The Minimal Group Paradigm

Leave a comment

The Minimal Group Paradigm, introduced by social psychologist Henri Tajfel in the 1970s, explores the minimal conditions required for individuals to exhibit in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination, even in the absence of substantial reasons for group differentiation. This paradigm aims to understand the psychological mechanisms underlying intergroup biases.

Foundation of the Minimal Group Paradigm:

1. Minimal Categorization: Participants are divided into groups based on trivial distinctions, like preferences for certain artworks, random assignments, or color choices.

2. Task Allocation: Individuals are then engaged in various activities where they distribute rewards or resources between members of their own group (in-group) and members of the other group (out-group).

Key Findings and Observations:

1. In-Group Favoritism: Even in conditions where group assignment is completely arbitrary or inconsequential, participants consistently show a bias towards their in-group. They tend to allocate more resources or rewards to members of their own group.

2. Out-Group Discrimination: Simultaneously, individuals exhibit discrimination against the out-group by favoring their in-group in resource distribution, even if it results in fewer overall resources for the in-group.

Psychological Mechanisms:

1. Social Identity Theory: Tajfel’s theory posits that people categorize themselves into social groups to boost their self-esteem. This categorization leads to in-group favoritism as a way to enhance their social identity and self-worth.

2. Minimal Conditions for Bias: The findings from the Minimal Group Paradigm suggest that even minimal and arbitrary categorization can lead to in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination, highlighting the innate human tendency towards group biases.


Further References

1. Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination . Scientific American, 223(5), 96-102.

2. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74.

3. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1990). Social motivation, self-esteem, and social identity . In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances (pp. 28-47). Harvester Wheatsheaf.

The Minimal Group Paradigm provides essential insights into the psychological roots of intergroup biases, emphasizing how even the most minimal distinctions can trigger biases. Understanding these mechanisms is critical in addressing and mitigating intergroup conflicts and biases in various social settings.

Robbers Cave Experiment (classics in social psychology)

Leave a comment

The Robbers Cave Experiment, conducted by social psychologist Muzafer Sherif and his team in 1954, was a landmark study investigating intergroup conflicts and group dynamics. It was carried out at Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma over three weeks and involved 22 11-year-old boys. The experiment is a classic illustration of intergroup conflict, cooperation, and resolution.

The Setup:

1. Stage 1: Formation of Groups: The boys were divided into two separate groups: the Eagles and the Rattlers. They were kept isolated from each other, unaware of the other group’s existence.

2. Group Cohesion Development: Over a week, each group formed strong bonds and developed their unique identities through team-based activities.

3. Intergroup Introduction: The two groups were introduced to each other in a competitive setting. This immediately led to hostility and conflict between the groups.

The Conflict Phase:

1. Competition and Hostility: The experimenters created situations where the groups competed against each other for resources. This competition intensified the hostility and led to the development of negative stereotypes about the opposing group.

2. Escalation of Conflict: As the competition continued, the boys exhibited increased hostility, with verbal insults and physical confrontations. The groups developed strong in-group loyalty and began to discriminate against the other group.

Resolution Phase:

1. Superordinate Goals: Sherif introduced tasks that required the cooperation of both groups to achieve common goals. For instance, a problem that could only be solved if both groups worked together.

2. Reduced Conflict: As the groups cooperated to achieve these shared goals, the hostility diminished. They began to see each other in a more positive light.

3. Fusion and Integration: The boys developed friendships across groups, and the hostility significantly decreased. The experiment demonstrated that working together towards common objectives reduced intergroup conflict.


Further References

Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1988). The Robbers Cave experiment: Intergroup conflict and cooperation . Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Sherif, M. (1966). In common predicament: Social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation . Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

This experiment is crucial in understanding group behavior, conflict resolution, and the conditions that foster cooperation among conflicting groups. It sheds light on the importance of shared goals in reducing intergroup hostility and fostering harmony.

  • Muzafer Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum Verhalten in Gruppen. In: J.-J. Koch (Hrsg.): Sozialer Einfluss und Konformität. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim und Basel 1977, S. 167–192.
  • M. Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Social Psychology (Int. Rev. Ed.). Harper & Row, New York 1969.
  • M. Sherif, O. J. Harvey, B. J. White, W. R. Hood, C. W. Sherif: Intergroup conflict and cooperation: the Robbers Cave experiment. University of Oklahoma Book Exchange, Norman 1961.
  • M. Sherif, B. J. White, O. J. Harvey: Status in experimentally produced groups. In: American Journal of Sociology. Band 60, 1955, S. 370–379.
  • M. Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Groups in harmony and tension. Harper & Row, New York 1953.

See also: psychclassics.yorku.ca/Sherif/

National Security Study Memorandum: The Kissinger report (declassified)

Leave a comment

See also: popcouncil.org

The Population Council is a leading research organization dedicated to building an equitable and sustainable world that enhances the health and well-being of current and future generations. We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world.

See also: www.unfpa.org

UNFPA is the United Nations sexual and reproductive health agency. Our mission is to deliver a world where every pregnancy is wanted, every childbirth is safe and every young person’s potential is fulfilled.

More infos
A 2001 study conducted by the pro-life Population Research Institute claimed that the UNFPA shared an office with the Chinese family planning officials who were carrying out forced abortions. “We located the family planning offices, and in that family planning office, we located the UNFPA office, and we confirmed from family planning officials there that there is no distinction between what the UNFPA does and what the Chinese Family Planning Office does,” said Scott Weinberg, a spokesman for PRI.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_Research_Institute_(organization) finalchinareport
the kissinger report

U.S. Special Forces Want to Use Deepfakes for Psy-Ops

Leave a comment

U.S. Special Operations Command, responsible for some of the country’s most secretive military endeavors, is gearing up to conduct internet propaganda and deception campaigns online using deepfake videos, according to federal contracting documents. The plans, which also describe hacking internet-connected devices to eavesdrop in order to assess foreign populations’ susceptibility to propaganda, come at a time of intense global debate over technologically sophisticated “disinformation” campaigns, their effectiveness, and the ethics of their use.

us-socom-procurement-document-announcing-desire-to-utilize-deepfakes

The need for cognition

Leave a comment
Slide
The
need
for cognition
The term "Need for Cognition" (NFC) is a concept in psychology that refers to an individual's inherent motivation or desire to engage in cognitive activities such as thinking, problem-solving, and information processing. It represents the extent to which an individual enjoys and values thinking and intellectual activities. Need for Cognition can be explained in psychological terms as follows:

Individual Differences: Need for Cognition is considered an individual difference variable, meaning that it varies from person to person. Some individuals have a high need for cognition, while others have a low need for cognition.

Motivation for Cognitive Effort: People with a high Need for Cognition are intrinsically motivated to engage in cognitive tasks. They find intellectual challenges enjoyable and are willing to invest effort in thinking critically, analyzing information, and exploring complex problems.

Information Processing: Individuals with a high NFC tend to process information more deeply and thoroughly. They are more likely to scrutinize details, consider various perspectives, and weigh the pros and cons of different options.

Problem Solving: Need for Cognition is associated with a greater willingness to engage in problem-solving activities. Those with a high NFC are more likely to seek out information, generate potential solutions, and carefully evaluate their choices.

Learning and Knowledge Acquisition: People with a high NFC are often more inclined to seek out knowledge and are more open to learning. They are curious and interested in expanding their understanding of the world.

Influence on Decision Making: Need for Cognition can impact decision-making processes. Those with a high NFC may be more deliberative and less influenced by heuristics or cognitive shortcuts. They prefer to analyze the information thoroughly before making decisions.

Effects on Persuasion: In the context of persuasive communication, individuals with a high NFC are less likely to be influenced by superficial or emotional appeals. They are more persuaded by well-reasoned and logically sound arguments.

Cognitive Satisfaction: Engaging in cognitive tasks and activities provides satisfaction and fulfillment for individuals with a high NFC. They often derive a sense of accomplishment from intellectual pursuits.

In psychological research, Need for Cognition is often measured using self-report scales that assess an individual's preferences for thinking and problem-solving. The concept has been studied in various contexts, including cognitive psychology, social psychology, and consumer behavior.

Understanding an individual's Need for Cognition can provide insights into their cognitive style and preferences, which can be valuable in educational settings, marketing, and understanding how people process information and make decisions.
Exit full screenEnter Full screen

Dr. Peter Duesberg: The HIV-AIDS Hypothesis – 30 Years Later

Leave a comment


Ad hominem attack: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Duesberg
Book: library.lol/main/3264B33AEBD9D227C8EA064549A3DAB1

Scientific America article: Mind Control by Cell Phone

Leave a comment

Subtitle: Electromagnetic signals from cell phones can change your brainwaves and behavior. But don’t break out the aluminum foil head shield just yet.

www.scientificamerican.com/article/mind-control-by-cell/