CNN just did a special on the Jim Jones cult from the 1970's. I watched it, and had nightmares afterwards. I was a young girl when all of those people killed themselves, But I remember the graphic pictures that were shown on the news and my mother crying. Watching the CNN special brought back those horrific pictures of one of the most horrible pictures I have ever seen.
You have to question how one man can get so much control over another human being that a mother and father would poison thier own child. Its unnatural for humanity to do such a thing, Yet, they did it. Im sure Jim Jones seemed intelligent to some(apparently he did) But most could see that he was nothing but a tyrant and a control freak. Creepy. I know of this man that pretends to be a woman and post on message boards, He is sorta like Jim Jones, a real tyrant with no real appreciation for the value of human life. He would have no problem telling a mother who lost a child that she deserved the loss. Truly pathetic and creepy. On Nov 24, 8:22 pm, Morpheal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SIGNS THAT YOU ARE SUFFERING FROM DESPOTIC TOTALISM: > > Now remember these are signs, indicators, and everything can happen, > by chance in unmanipulated life, outside of a dictatorship, totalism > or despotic system. However, the violently destructive patterns > causing resigned despair among the many, who urge a “sane” sense of > futility of striving, as their answer to what they see as “reality” is > something different. Distinguishing normative bad luck from totalistic > despotism is not always easy, but if the signs are too persistent and > repetitively experienced, you have a strong indication of where you > are pinned down. > > 1). You recognize a strong pattern, with few or no exceptions to that > pattern, across a significant number of instances, which is outside of > normal life expectations. This is harder for people who have lived for > a significant part of their lives under a totalistic, despotic, > regime. They are too accustomed to the patterns being abnormal and do > not know what a normal experiential pattern really is like. The > pattern you recognize has strong personal significance, and is an > obstacle rather than nurturing or facilitating development of your own > potential, contrary to personal aptitudes and interests, and > peculiarly damaging to efforts at achievement. > > 2). You experience social manipulation where you function as if free > to associate with whomever you happen to choose and who in return > allows you to associate with them, but the chosen relationships never > work out to any reasonably expected results. You find that the > development of those freely chosen relationships is peculiarly > difficult, or outright thwarted. Even if you severely limit your > expectations below social norms, the results still fall below those > expectations with routine predictability. This is to be distinguished > from outright hostility against your joining. The social door appears > open. You can enter. No one stands in your way or challenges you in > any significant manner. Nevertheless, you find that the results of > social investment do not have a payback, whereas you find other > groups, whom you have no desire or interest as to joining or > participating in pay a higher dividend, for nearly no social > investment. Clearly you feel someone is messing with your social > capital and thwarting your freedom to invest where you choose. Clearly > you are not in a social “free market” even if you were taught that you > are and are expected to claim that you actually are “free” to invest > socially and reap increase in social capital according to your own > free choice. > > 3). You experience sudden, inexplicable, repeated instances of loss > where you have reasonable expectations of continuity of social > dividends, from having invested more heavily than you tend to invest > in relationships on average. The relationships you value, for the sake > of social capital, are terminated without reasonable expectation, or > warning, often in exceptional ways, under peculiarly suspicious but > unexplained circumstances. You lose your investment. You get no social > dividends. You are discouraged from further investments of that type > by repeated instances of that type of unpredictable and exceptional > failure of social investment, and the damage from the loss is damage > tied to your efforts at achievement, in terms of your own potential, > personal interests and aptitudes, and your own free choices from among > the social spectrum that is accessible to you in your socio-economic > circumstances. > > 4). That brings us to that point of repeated disappointment. You > invest in what you believe in, are interested in (often shared > interests in common with others), and you find that the positive > beginning and the social investment, even if it appears to be going > well, is doomed to create disappointment. When this exceeds the > statistics of what is normative, and you know you have done nothing > unusually wrong, you know you are a victim of toalistic despotism. > > 5). You experience an unusually rigid class structure barrier which > stops you from communicating, relating, and collaborating with those > who are doing better than you are, in relation to your personal > interests, aptitudes, and goals. You find you simply don’t have any of > those chances, and you find that others at your own level start > pointing out how they, with less interest, less aptitude, lower > aspirations as to goals, and sometimes some very negative > characteristics and habits, have the chance, and can boast about it to > you with surprising regularity even if you never told them about your > own experience. They don’t know you that well, but their behavior is > strangely relevant, rubbing it in, outside of the statistics of > chance. > > 6). You experience tokenism. You get repeated instances of a chance to > sample, but you never really get more than a taste to wet your > appetites. Then it is gone, with remarkable regularity and nothing at > all to replace the desired opportunities, experiences, situations. You > were given the illusion that you were getting the chance, but as soon > as you believe in it, it is completely gone. Poof. Vaporized. Totally > an illusion. You find that that is at variance with the experiences of > some others who again take pleasure at your disappointment, if you > chance to express it. Well, that is all ordinary competition, isn’t > it ? Not quite, but their reaction might be. You find you are > becoming increasingly disillusioned, no longer able to believe in what > might be tokenism, being realizable as anything more than the fleeting > illusion that tokenism is. Then despotism has begun to win and you are > losing ground to its persistent violence. > > 7). You experience repeated instances of entrapment. You are > reasonably sold on something, and given a variety of apparently > disconnected, not communicatively or causally related, positive > experiences to sell you on the potential of the situation. When you > invest, buy into it, socially or financially, or both, you suddenly > find it is all a bill of goods. You have spent effort, time, and > money, to get nothing of what you were being lured to bargain for. > This can happen in personal relationships, occupational pursuits, > personal business endeavors, or attempts to develop talents and > aptitudes to their fuller realization. Now, once or twice, > disconnected by causality, is part of normative live. When it happens > too often, you know you are in totalistic despotism. > > 8). You feel you can choose freely, among available ideas, such as > are apparent in some others lives around you. However, when you choose > in any way outside the most mainstream and narrowly ideological > position prevalent in your society, you find that you only get the > most negative side of the experience of what you chose. Suddenly there > is no positive side for you to know. You only get the nasty side, not > the pleasant. It acts as a type of persistent conditioning of your > choices and responses to ideological conformity with the prevalent > system. You try to fight it by choosing differently, but you find that > the result is the equivalent of a high voltage electro-shock, even if > it is not physical, but rather socio-psychological in nature. Bad > experiences add up and too many bad experiences tend to put a person > off of whatever it is. Most people give up relatively easily, but some > persist, depending on the strength of the attraction and interest. > Some never give up. Might be some eventually die, still trying to > fight for their freedom of choice. Always some others have the free > choice in question. It isn’t unique and something no one else has got > and certainly it is never something that no one else has any positive > experiences of or within. It is always something that seems to be > available to choice, but ends up being unavailable to any positive > realization of the choice. Despotism particularly loves this little > trick as it is so very hard to fight against. The argument that there > is always prejudice against minority views, and minority interests, is > insufficient and in fact illogical when you examine society more > carefully. Despotism, however, loves that argument as much as the form > of torture that it allows despotism to utilize, often so > successfully. > > 9). You only get the opposite of whatever your personal choices are, > no matter what those attractions entail and quite without any real > moral or ethical justification. It is simply that free choice as to > what attracts is severely opposed beyond statistical norms for the > population. What attracts and what you strive to know is as if > completely unavailable to you. However, the opposite, and therefore > what you do not particularly like and perhaps cannot even tolerate > much if any of, is peculiarly prevalent and responsive. Whatever > attracts you is peculiarly non responsive. For instance if you are a > person who only feels strong enough sexual attraction to people who > are thin, and of the opposite sex, you find that those are completely > disinterested in you and unresponsive. Instead only fat people of the > same sex are responsive, and show real interest, contrary to your own > choices. Of course despotism likes the argument that some people fall > for that says that you were simply making the wrong choices for you, > and that you should be more open to what is interested in you. Well, > that doesn’t really hold up under real logical scrutiny in any real > way at all. Of course I used the sexuality and body type example > because it is easier to understand. It is not something limited to > sexual attraction, or body types. It could be that if you are > interested in being a particular occupation, and know you have some > talent for it, you find that the people you need to know and enter > into activities with in order to pursue your dream are peculiarly > disinterested in you and unresponsive to you. However, people in some > opposed occupation, which ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "World-thread" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/world-thread?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
