Attacking the Dead: How to separate children from their roots in an Age of Propaganda.

New York magazine has a bullshit piece about champagne socialism — the fake trend that culturally, historically, and politically ignorant wannabes are babbling about now that they are too old and used up to be rich and famous and want someone to support their worthless butts because mommy and daddy never had the courage to tell them that they are average and have to work hard to earn things.

Self-sufficiency please.

And it is not as big of trend and the press pretends it is.

But people with money love to manipulate the little people.

Truly, it is like shooting fish in a barrel. Middle class young adults are gullible and conniving — the perfect patsies.

And the Left keep playing them for fools.

The Left never understood math, and with no math, no foundation in logic. They gravitate toward narratives, meaning they gravitate toward propaganda.

So with no understand of numbers, means no understanding of neither finance or measurement. They have missed a critical step in Piaget’s hierarchy of cognitive development.

So you do have the structural solidity to understand quantity. How much can you afford? How much can a government afford? How much debt can you afford? How much debt can your country afford?

This is the exact point where the Left and Right have their chasm. The Right lack a certain piece of emotional intelligence, but the Left as a collective don’t have the logic. There are two black holes — one on the Left and one on the Right — that prevent unity and consensus, but let’s focus on the Left’s black hole this time. I will leave the Right one for another entry.

So when you have a collective with no logic, but a predilection for propaganda not understand that there is no bottomless well of monies to spend on everyone without anyone putting any effort, they want to be proven Forever Right. The problem is that they are hopelessly wrong.

There is no fairy godmother, Prince Charming, or magic beans. You have to work hard actively, and be a realist.

And you have to know the past. That is your reference.

Someone wants the United States to be weakened. That much is plain. They want it weak enough in order to find a pool of minions to exploit and distract so they don’t get challenged. This isn’t personal; this is strictly a lazy form of pragmatism. You cannot actually compete directly because until now you keep getting your ass whumped: so divide and conquer.

War is deception, after all. Psyche out your rivals.

As someone who has had inferior rivals try to psyche me out since I was a kid, I know the drill. Plant seeds of discontent in united groups in order to divide them and have them so busy with their petty and vindictive bullshit garbage fights to see someone is reaping the benefits of the propaganda campaign.

It is a sucker circus.

But instead of the news media asking, How did this fake trend come from, they are hyping it up, meaning they are, as usual, cribbing from PR firm press releases. Let’s stop WikiLeaks from sounding any alarms by discrediting them, and let’s try to manipulate the gullible youth.

But for the gambit to work, we need to create another divide that goes beyond Left and Right: young and old. Propaganda works devastatingly well at isolating and alienating youth from the support of their families, particularly their parents.

And we are seeing it now with this sudden interest in demonizing the icons of previous generations, such as John Wayne and Michael Jackson.

Were these men flawed? Yes, and so are you, princess. I have yet to hear someone not say something stupid and offensive. If we were to punish people on the basis of their insensitivity, then let’s just throw a nuclear bomb on this planet and get it over with once already.

Except that would be a dumbass thing to do.

Tolerance is critical to social evolution, and that means putting up with other people’s bullshit just as they put up with yours. Each generation improves, but that doesn’t mean you have no respect for your ancestors because they had less refinement than you do now, because you will seem as vulgar and barbaric to the next generation as the last generation seems to you.

You wouldn’t be as high up the ladder as you are unless the previous generation didn’t pave a path for you in the first place.

But disrespect is the hallmark of the current ideological mindset. People behave like entitled divas, snapping their fingers and expecting everyone else to do the heavy lifting as they bark orders, and burn through the hired help for not jumping high enough on cue.

Fuck you.

For all the whining about the previous icons, what have the complainers done in comparison?

Not much, if anything. Kvetching on Twitter isn’t doing anything at all.

“Socialism” is a passing fancy because when you have a disrespectful generation, you also have an ungrateful one: it will never be enough. They have gotten into the habit of always finding fault and expecting other people to do their work and live their lives for them.

It is time to change the programming once and for all.

What we have is a me-centred mindset in an Age of Propaganda.

And it is not just on youth. The adults who should have been the guides didn’t understand the nuances of connection, nor did they explain that humans are flawed by nature. It is not an excuse to not do your best, but you still have to stop pretend you are without flaw or have no social burdens to carry. We all do.

But an Age of Propaganda keeps people living in the Now with no sense of connect to the Past, nor consideration how their panic will impact the Future.

When you attack the dead, you are so planting seeds of destruction for those yet to arrive, and none of us have the right to do that…

Piaget, Pandas, and why there is absolutely no "war" on men or boys. As usual, the National Post is afraid of women with self-respect.

I

ext.jpeg

II

of.jpg

III

When I was in my early twenties, I had a rabbit named Trixie, given that name because I got her on Halloween (trick or treat), not because of Beatrix Potter.

Screen Shot 2019-02-02 at 3.41.29 PM.png

Trixie Pixie weighted 900 grams.

She was a tiny little thing, but had a heart of a lioness. I also had a red canary Ben who was free and the two were inseparable. When Ben passed away because the vet gave the wrong antibiotic twice instead of once, Trixie was very sad. I rescued another rabbit Susie, and the two also became inseparable.

Trixie had numerous operations because her jaw was too small for her teeth. She went to the University of Guelph constantly, but she lived about six years. She was loving, bossy, nosy, and very brave.

Particularly when it came to standing up to humans that rubbed her the wrong way.

There was one man who was a family friend who was not the most sensitive person in the world. He thought it was funny to make loud nonsensical noises when he saw Trixie, and tried to twist her nose repeatedly. She’d run away, I would tell him that wasn’t acceptable, he’d dismiss me as some sort of snowflake, and do it again.

But Trixie always got her revenge.

Because she knew which pair of shoes he wore and then promptly pissed in them. Only his. Never anyone else’s.

Then he’d put them on, complain they were wet, but never quite hit upon the fact that he was mucking around in rabbit urine.

And then he’d come for the next visit, where the cycle went on without deviation. I never went to hide his shoes from Trixie.

That’s what you get for intimidating a 900 gram herbivore.

Trixie was a smart little bunny. I had to euthanize her when she developed a brain tumour. I think her passing hurt me the most in the fuzzy kid division.

She had an unbelievable sense of fairness. I had been dealt a serious blow in my professional life, and one that would have been a breakthrough. I can count on one hand the number of times I have cried in my life, and that was one. I was blowing off steam on my sofa in the living room with my mother on the love seat that was in front of a ledge with potted plants on it. Trixie ran to the ledge, and promptly knocked flower pots right on my mother’s head by pushing them with her own little noggin.

What can I say? She thought mom was responsible for me getting upset and was going to level the playing field. She was a righteous little mini-lop.

She was protective of me, and I always returned the favour. I did not take kindly to people trying to abuse her, but it seemed every time I told a male — and it was always an adult male — to knock it off, they would fly off the handle, and keep doing it. I had a male relative do the same thing, and neither one of those people are in my life anymore.

They were both ill-behaved and unteachable. When someone tells you not to make loud and stupid noises and try to twist their pet’s nose, stop doing it. You are being a swine. There is no benefit in frightening a small animal. There is no benefit in bad manners that net you no rewards, but impede your social standing as you alienate people who just want you to stop annoying them and their pets.

It is not a “war” if someone tells you to stop being uncivilized. It is the inevitable byproduct of feral behaviour. I never went to these men’s houses to molest and disturb their animals.

But it wasn’t just my pets. These were the same people who belittled every one of my achievements, called me names, tried to gaslight me as they patronized me, telling me what to think regardless if I had expertise and they never heard of the subject before in their lives, and thought they had every right to tell me how to dress, dye my hair, put on my make-up, and that I should stop having a career, and do something of value, like get married and have children.

I never stood for it. I told them off, even as a kid, and then they got upset with me, calling me rude.

Excuse me, I just said, “Hello.” You made lengthy comments about a pimple on my chin. That is a deliberate attempt at establishing a pecking order by making me feel inferior to you and be too consumed with my alleged deficiencies to see what you are doing.

I am not a moron. The fact that I push back doesn’t mean there is a “war” against snowflake you.

Instead of getting your knickers in a knot, you can sign up for some etiquette lessons.

LOGO-GOLD-e1527165672104.png

They really are miracle workers. Bless the Brits for their centuries-long dedication to sensitivity to other people’s feelings.

They didn’t write a silly column in the National Post whining about some non-existent war on boys and men, and then try to impose a narrative about it being “ideology versus science” because it isn’t.

So what’s really going on here?

Simple: communications technology finally caught up to reality, and what was always happening suddenly could no longer be suppressed by a patriarchal news media.

IV

In Canada, men are a minority, and have been for at least thirty years. 50.4% of the population are women, and yet men are vastly over-represented in positions of power in both business and government. We have always had rigs that favoured men, and biology has zero to do with it. White men, who are even a smaller piece of that demographic pie, are even more over-represented based on the population make-up.

So here is a single minority group among a mosaic of minority groups, who are upset because the Internet finally allows us to hear what everyone around us is thinking. Stop mansplaining is not throwing a grenade; it’s feedback that the individual does not need to be treated like she is in kindergarten when she has a graduate degree and has expertise in the field under discussion.

Before, the press would either ignore the complaints, or worse, spin them to make it sound as if some lunatic fringe was spewing insanity. That is a crying shame. If people understood that in a planet of 7.4 billion people, you will have a sea of disagreement, outrage, support, and differing opinions decades ago, they wouldn’t take the peculiar stance that they are.

Fox News exploits this demographic: they target frustrated white men and then tell them nothing in their lives is their fault, which is ridiculous. Sometimes you are the architect of your own misery, and the sooner you see it, the sooner you can do something about it and get yourself out of your slump.

A big problem for men is the fairytales they have been told where there can only be The One, and if someone opposes you, that they are the Villain to be vanquished and women are just there to be saved because they are inferior to you and are made to drool all over you.

That is a fantasy.

And a horrible lie. If we reversed the gender roles, it would be no less horrific. No one should be following this destructive rigged script.

A more sensible map is that we all have hopes, dreams, and goals. We all have different life requirements. We are all flawed and make mistakes. We have rights, but also responsibilities. Life isn’t always looking for an entourage to drool all over you, nor find an inferior ditz to relieve your crude urges. People who have different ideas have the same rights as you do.

Cooperation and negotiation to coordinate our competing interests is far more profitable and liberating than some competition where it is all-or-none. A shrewd person makes alliances, and ensures that there is a balance for everyone in terms of work, risk, responsibilities, and payoffs. Jealousy, greed, laziness, and ego are very destructive forces, but they are not some static force that chains us forever to ruin our lives. We have to face our worst traits, acknowledge them, realize they manipulate our perceptions of reality, and then do something about them.

Men shouldn’t feel threatened if a woman is a visionary who is ambitious. She has every right as does he to aim high, but the second a woman does break through as a man is called on the carpet for trying to sabotage her, other men get scared and then make up a propaganda tale of there being a war on men.

No, there isn’t. There is a man person who is prime minister, just as the other two political parties have man people in charge of their party. The only party to have a woman person is the Greens and they have one seat.  The world’s most powerful players are men. That hasn’t changed. And those men have their fans and many are seen as visionaries.

There is no war just because someone calls you an asshole. You are an asshole.

That Fox News can tell bedtime stories to men who are silly enough to believe them is not a surprise. The sad thing is that those men don’t realize that the FNC gets rich by keeping them running on a hamster wheel of hate, and keeps them in a very unhappy holding pattern because that’s how they create audiences. MSNBC plays the same propaganda for losers on the left. Both sides would be wise to look inward, get off the fucking wheel, and break old habits and modify their behaviours to make them prosper.

But the National Post is playing a similar game, recruiting Jordan Peterson into their web, which I find utterly fascinating. Peterson is a psychologist by trade, and this pop psych narrative has many of his detractors unnecessarily stymied. Their counterarguments are too cerebral. They are over-thinking things and not addressing the audience that has had a spell cast on them as they have been primed by the FNC into thinking they are victims.

What’s interesting is that Peterson’s pop psych arguments do not go anywhere near the logic of Jean Piaget’s Stage Four of Cognitive Development (Piaget is Person #31 on the List of People Everyone Should Know). The Formal Operational Stage is one that many adults never attain, but you cannot be an experimental psychologist and not be in that very stage because that’s the very stage where experimental psychology depends on for its very purpose and methods.

So Peterson isn’t someone who could possibly be devoid of a Stage Four mind, yet his pop psych is clearly at Level Two and Three.

That’s quite a feat.

Journalism was never in Stage Four, and I have said that is the reason it collapsed, but Peterson made a career of intellectual regression. It is a cagey move: for one, your detractors will never reach the people who are being beguiled because they will use Stage Four Arguments, and those under the spell have been stymied by their Stage Three prison, and can’t see it.

They very well may be capable of making the leap to the Fourth Stage — but they were led to believe that they didn’t need that leap because the narratives they were told are of lower stages, and they cling on to those stories, thinking it is the answer for Winning At Life.

It is a recipe for self-destruction.

So if there is no “war” on men, why are they stuck in a slump that distorts their perceptions of reality?

The answer lies in pandas.

V

Many ambitious white collar types — and even the entire profession of journalism — have the same problem, regardless of gender, race, nationality, religion, or age. They make it so far, and then they can no longer move upward in a company or career. They have the right education and experience. They are smart and even social.

Are they victims of outside forces?

No, but they are a victim of their own panda.

A panda is a term for a seemingly benign personality trait or mindset that is more destructive to you than you realize.

Such as indulging in aggressive behaviours and ignoring repeated requests to knock it off. You may feel as if you have power to thwart and emotionally upset people, but if they push back, they aren’t going to give you another inch. They can retaliate.

Do you want short-term thrills — or do you want long-term viability?

In business, being passive-aggressive can get you up so far, but then when you hit a certain level, the rules change and what what worked for you begins to work against you.

Adherence to The One Rule That Explains Everything is a losing gamble.

And if your rule is that you can bully other people and they’ll just sit and take it, you are in for the surprise of your life. There are people like me who don’t care about your gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, wealth, education, nationality, connections, fame, or political affiliation.

You pull some bullshit stunt on me, and I will unleash my righteousness on you. Fuck you.

Treat me with kindness and respect, and I will go out of my way to help you if you should ever be in need or want of it.

No war.

And we in an era right now where we have arrogance and temper tantrums where everyone is accusing everyone else of waging some “war” on them.

No, what you are experiencing is the technology that lets you hear the world’s thoughts at once.

People have agendas. They bully. They try to get things they did not earn. They try to impress people with some image. They hedge their bets on a side they think will reward them.

The fuel of arrogance is messing with a lot of minds, but that’s easily remedied with a good dose of humility.

The only problem is when you chose the medicine, it goes down very easy — but when life rams it down your throat, the cure is often more traumatic than the disease.

And it’s coming a lot sooner than people think.

It’s not a war, but reality people need to worry about.

After all, if we just give in to “biology”, remember, people sure did love to kill, rape, and pillage, and enslave other people.

And they went to watch the slaughter of gladiators, imprison foreigners to serve as their slaves, and spark wars for pure financial profit.

Eventually, people started to become civilized and learned something called empathy.

And they sublimated those biological drives into something creative and productive.

So the biology excuse is pure nincompoopity, and it’s time to go up a rung in evolution — not down…

Temper tantrums aren't saving Canada. Let's try something that actually gets results.

The Reality Deniers of the Toronto Star are at it again, using irrational and oblivious chest-thumping in lieu of actual reportage:

China needs to pay a heavy price for its treatment of Canadians

Are you serious? Are you truly that stupid? Canada stepped into dog shit without thinking about something called consequences.

Canada has no cards to play. Our economy is tanking. Housing is crashing. The few quality jobs are being lost. We fucked up USMCA because the Arrogance-Obliviousness Disease the federal regime has. We pissed off the Saudis as we are tweaking their noses as they can still make damage.

But China is another matter. They can, for instance, recall all of their university students studying in Canada. That can screw up our post-academic viability in a heartbeat. Canada can recall all of their students studying in China, and…that regime will not feel a thing.

Or, China can decide to stop all exports to Canada. Canada would collapse. We don’t have factories that can pick up the slack. We don’t have the workers who are trained. From medical equipment to food, most of our staples come from China.

And you asshole think that China gives one flying fuck about your threat? We put all our eggs in one basket, and then dropped the basket.

China is now throwing every single word we threw at them back in our faces, and this has been a long time coming.

Grow up, children. You have been nannied and sheltered. Stop making a mockery of this country with your moron hick schtick.

This reminds me of a horrible tragedy that happened in Toronto in 2003.

It was a ten-year-old girl named Holly Jones. She was grabbed by an adult male and dragged away to her death.

She was a lithe and dainty girl, and I remember the case very well. I have always had issues with adults who prey on children. There is cowardice, but that kind of cowardice is vile.

But I remember one columnist who basically opined that had young Holly taken self-defence lessons, somehow, that would have saved her.

Right.

A grown adult male and a child fighting. He has a plan, and she doesn’t.

Self-defence is not some sort of magical cure-all.

We could train a 10-year-old to box and then put the kid in the ring to fight the adult male.

You wanna place your bets on who would win that bout?

It takes a special kind of stupid not to understand that kind of grossly unequal fight, but it broadly hints that Canadian journalists have not gotten very far on Jean Piaget’s Four Stages of cognitive development.

That they have not reached Stage Four is not a surprise, but they are struggling through Stage Two — the Pre-operational Stage where they have yet to master this key concept:

Children at this stage tend to be egocentric and struggle to see things from the perspective of others.

They also have serious issues of Stage Three’s Concrete Operational Stage where children:

[B]egin to understand the concept of conservation; that the amount of liquid in a short, wide cup is equal to that in a tall, skinny glass, for example.

There is no logic. None. It is just anger control issues and temper tantrums. How does Canada go up against China? With irrational vendettas, wasting thoughts, money, and resources with childish tweaking? By making alliances where they have to enslave themselves with odious and costly favours? China can do to Canada whatever it pleases. They can literally hit us with such economic force that we will not be able to recover for decades.

And they know it, but we don’t.

But the Star column is as privileged white bread as you can get — sounding like some rich snot who becomes enraged because the foreign nanny spoke out of line. How dare she? I’ll show her! Do you know who I am?

Oh, get over yourself, you morons, and take some racial sensitivity courses.

Or didn’t you get the memo that this is the Woke Generation?

If China were to call Canada’s bluff, we’d be screwed, and royally.

The Globe and Mail also is making silly remarks: yes, Canada was in a weak position, but we have already lost that war. We lost it when the US knocked us off that pedestal. We got cocky and like our housing market, we vastly overestimated our value and power.

So is the National Post who are oblivious: China doesn’t need to “frighten” Canada — they can just fuck up the economy. They can flood the market and undercut us. They have intelligence they can use. If it comes to a brawl of might, Canada is cooked.

And once again, Canada had to go crawling to the United States for help because we are not an actual power.

Anger is not Canada’s friend. We can roar, and then get stomped on by someone who’s power is bigger than our own.

We don’t need propaganda sending us down the wrong path. We need an accurate picture of reality. We need strategy based on our own unique circumstances. This storm was brewing for months. We ignored it, thinking some They was going to make all better. It has gotten worse.

So instead of petty and vindictive rage puking based on nerdy revenge porn, we need a plan that actually works, given Canada’s deteriorating circumstances. Use wit, not a shit fit.

Because the longer this drags, the more incompetent and weak we show ourselves to be — and no temper tantrum can hide that bottom line…

Deconstructing the Gun Control narrative: you have a problem with violent people. You take away their guns, they will stab you instead. Well played, children.

Journalism was never about reality. It was always about presenting narrative and passive and easy causes people can cheer for without feeling offended as some benevolent group known as They clean up the messes. People find all sorts of excuses not to ask hard questions. In the US, we now have a generation of teenagers parading as activists, demanding their rights be taken away so they can have a Nanny State to take over from their Helicopter Parents.

This is the first American generation who are fighting to have fewer freedoms, and there is a big implication that should have the entire nation very worried.

When a society progresses and evolves, it is stronger, smarter, healthier, more moral, rational, and mature than the generation before it; ergo, it can handle more freedoms. 

One generation may need training wheels to get a feel of a problem, but by the time they solve it, the new generation moves everything forward. That is the hallmark of progress.

So, we should have greater freedoms with every new generation, not less.

And here is a generation who self-admit to being so untrustworthy and not in control of themselves, that they have to be supervised. They refuse to take responsibility, but are using a deceptive narrative to do it.

It reminds me of a Benjamin Franklin quote:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

His context was not about fleeing from violence, but it still applies: if you sacrifice freedom for a fleeting moment of safety, you actually lose credibility. You admit that you are too incompetent to survive in freedom. You need to be caged to exist.

That is the problem with the Gun Control narrative: you cannot restrict freedoms of the non-existent Them; you must restrict Us.

And we have evidence to show a restricted Us is not a safe Us.

Take London, for instance, whose murder rate is now higher than New York City's. This was accomplished without guns, but knives. People are getting stabbed to death.

In fact, the UK has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

And those who are not getting stabbed are having acid thrown in their face. The UK also has one of the highest rates of acid attacks in the world.

So we can impose even stricter gun control laws, and guess what? You are not actually dealing with the reality.

You have a violence problem, not a gun problem.

And yet, you have a young generation who are shilling a lie, making demands that do not align with reality. There is no defence of this narrative peddling, and I do not care if they were shot at and lost friends as a result.

My own grandmother lost her entire family in concentration camps in the Second World War. She saw violence in war, but she never used it as an excuse to fight for losing her freedoms, or making a career as she mugged and vogued for the camera, either. There are countless terrorists who lost family members to violence; their past sorrows do not justify their horrific solution to their pain. Nor is one extreme superior to another extreme.

What we have is a lack of rationality, and an over abundance of civic laziness. 

Ooo, getting shot at is scary! Let's chain ourselves and let the government solve our problems!

No, they won't. If gun control was an effective method of curbing murder, then London should not have a murder rate higher than New York City, but it eclipses it.

And in a world that has a Dark Web and means to manufacture guns underground as it is not that hard to make weapons -- what gun control can do is merely keep legal guns out of the hands of people who obey the law and aren't likely to misuse their weapons.

So if the problem is not guns, and it is violence, why do journalists insist it is about guns?

Because journalism doesn't deal with reality or facts. It deals with narrative. It is a way of creating an easy and passive solution that offends those who are ideologically opposed to their own political beliefs. It is a form of imposing a will on those whose beliefs differ from the status quo.

Because journalists have no training in psychology, they cannot assess people properly. Guns, on the other hand, are things, and things do not have feelings or can be offended.

The profession is an intellectually immature one, and depressingly so. If you are familiar with Jean Piaget's four levels of cognitive development, you realize that collectively, journalism isn't even out of the first stage, known as the Sensorimotor Stage: they see guns. They think removing the gun makes the problem vanish. 

It is a profession with absolutely no sense of object permanence. None.

Just like a toddler forgets about an object if it is removed from view, and does not have the intellectual ability to form a memory, the curiosity, or the initiative to start hunting in search of something that was there for one second, but now is gone.

The guns may be gone, but the violence is still there.

What is most disturbing is you have a young generation and a dead industry who are both less intellectually developed than killers who do not forget about a weapon just because you take it away from them. They find another weapon and then kill you, anyway. You might forget about violence because there is no gun to see, but murderers won't, giving them an even greater advantage over the activist prey.

Why is this even happening in 2018? Why is Western society regressing at the most basic level?

Because we do not have a journalism that is functional, and we have a generation that is logically illiterate: they throw temper tantrums, and then preen in front of cameras demanding nannying, but completely stuck in the early Sensorimotor Stage. If we had a functional media that reached the Formal Operational Stage, there not only would be no clamouring for a Gun Control that cannot possibly work, there would be no violence control problem because it would have been properly dealt with decades ago.

There is no excuse to have a primitive society that is regressing thanks to journalistic ignorance.

We need an alternative to journalism, and it needs a matriarch to nurture it to make sure it reaches each stage of development from infancy to adulthood. Journalism was always an orphan, and it needed a mentor that worried about it when it strayed too far for too long.

And that's why we still have a violent world filled with frightened people who can no longer think rationally, or come up with a solution that actually works.

No, Guardian, violence in games can cause a violent disposition: Why journalists' psychological illiteracy blares loudly.

It is hard to imagine that Donald Trump has been the level-headed one in the aftermath of the Florida Massacre. Proposing to arm teachers is not the best idea anyone ever had. But unlike the traditional press who blame all of society's woes on just gun control and nothing else, he has brought up more complex reasons -- and more than one. Mental illness is one. Violence in games and movies is another.

The Guardian took issue and haughtily decreed that violence in games does not cause violence in real life.

Oh, I would very much disagree with that sentiment.

I studied psychology and sociology, and I do remember my lessons well. You learn that human beings adopt to their surroundings and adjust. People are followers by nature. When in Rome is a way many people function.

Modelling is the term used when discussing how children learn to assimilate to their surroundings. They watch others, and then they mimic what they see.

Jean Piaget noticed it. So too did Albert Bandura whose ground-breaking experiment showed that when presented with violence, children copied what they saw.

bandura-bobo_doll

Children watched a video of a grown woman beating up a Bobo doll.

They were presented with the same doll.

What did they do?

You can see from the pictures what boys and girls did: beat it up -- and with relish.

And they beat up the doll the same way as the adult in the movie. The film was the visual memo, and they got the message.

You immerse a generation in violence, you create a path for them to take. There is no question of this truth. Even watching horror movies and other violent films has physiological effects on the brain.

In their tit-for-tat feud with Trump, they are taking things off the table that, in fact, need to be discussed -- and it is a discussion that is long overdue.

We have films, movies, books, shows, and video games that have entrenched antagonistic thinking patterns. We have games where the protagonist (the hero) takes weapons and blows people's heads off with it, and "wins."

And you are telling me exposure to this kind of thinking doesn't spill over to disturbed minds who are tired of losing, and are looking to "win"?

Of course it does.

It is not the only factor, but when you have a society that condones, tolerates, and even glorifies violence, you can expect consequences that has a body count.

Just like in the movies and games. How many video games require the player to kill everyone in the game -- all of the enemies who all often look alike.

Virtual genocidal hate crimes for fun and points.

It wouldn't hurt to curb that kind of story structure in popular culture. It would be a breath of fresh air if our ideas of conflict resolution didn't involve a rocket launcher.

boyd11

The US would accomplish more if it didn't politicize this problem and both sides didn't come into it with an attitude problem.

Journalists are supposed to be gathering facts -- not making decrees based on zero research. Had they the proper training in psychology, for example, they wouldn't be relying on a gaming critic on making an uninformed opinion for them.

They be asking the question: how does fictional violence shape the way young people think?

Perhaps it would be a minimal. Or perhaps it is significant to certain group.

If we had facts, we could formulate a solution.

Instead, we have nags and nannies in lieu of information-gatherers, and we no more informed than we were before, even if the number of dead children keeps rising for no good reason at all.