Michael Martin
Since: 2007-10-16 12:42:16.079
Posts: 15
Posted at 2008-01-24 14:00:21.782. Permalink.
Hi, Peter;
My apologies in advance for what will be a lengthy post.
What you have just described is a common phenomenon. Whenever a healthy social movement gets started, it is only a matter of time before people with pathological agendas (and sometimes, explicit pathologies of their own) try to jump on the bandwagon and hijack the movement. As you say, "All they do alienate so many people with their rabid message, and turn away many others of more moderate persuasion, wary of promoting issues about parenting and families, lest they become tarred by the extremists' brush."
In other words, as the "extremists" infect a social movement, they drive away normal, healthy elements, and attract more and more deviant elements, until the movement itself becomes sick. A detailed explanation of how this happens is given in the book Political Ponerology by retired Polish clinical psychologist Andrew Lobaczewski (whose work I have mentioned elsewhere).
So, how can we defend healthy social movements from this kind of influence? I don't have "pat" answers, but learning to recognize unhealthy influences from the start is essential. The most common form these influences take in New Zealand society is that of doctrinaire ideologies, both of the "far left" (e.g., Marx, Engels) and the "far right" (e.g., Thomas Hobbes or Leo Strauss). What all such ideologies have in common is an impoverished, reductionist, often primitive, view of human nature. Although such ideologies attract a diverse range of followers, their originators and chief exponents are almost always psychologically sick people.
These ideologues often give away their true nature in their statements and writings. One tell-tale sign is what Dr. Lobaczewski calls the "schizoid declaration," which is a statement or expression in the following general form:
"Human nature is so bad that order in human society can only be maintained by a strong power created by highly qualified individuals in the name of some higher idea."
The debate over the repeal of Section 59 provided an outstanding example of what I am talking about. Many of the "far right" opponents of the law change made "schizoid declarations" to the effect that "children are so naughty and wicked that only the threat of severe corporal punishment can keep them from growing up to be delinquents and criminals." Many proponents of the change, on the other hand, made "schizoid declarations" of their own, to the effect that "Parents (especially fathers) are so brutal, uncaring and ignorant, that only the heavy hand of the Police and CYFS can keep them from bashing their kids to death." In both cases, we heard views of human nature so impoverished that they can only be described as caricatures.
One of the most pestilent effects of these ideologies (and their proponents) is that they tend to induce a "Salem witch hunt" hysteria in society as a whole. A recent case in point is the ludicrous and absurd over-reaction of the public and the police to Jimmy Mason's disciplining of his youngest son. Had it not been for the overall level of public hysteria, the police would surely have acted more sensibly.
So, how to counter this on the campaign trail? You could point out, in your "stump speeches," that the "easy answers" offered by doctrinaire ideologies are the political equivalent of "get rich quick" schemes, which promise easy wealth but only end up impoverishing those who fall for them. Just as the scam artist is indifferent to the lives he ruins in pursuit of wealth, so the ideologue is indifferent to the social devastation his ideas cause. You should point out that ideologies which ignore or minimize important (and often messy) aspects of human life often have a mesmerizing appeal, but that voters should resist that appeal, and examine all such philosophies in the light of conscience and common sense.
Again, my apologies for the length of this post, but countering pathological influences in social movements is an important topic. I recommend that you purchase and read Political Ponerology (from Red Pill Press in Canada), for a more complete explanation of this subject.
