11
votes
Mass psychosis - how an entire population becomes mentally ill
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- MASS PSYCHOSIS - How an Entire Population Becomes MENTALLY ILL
- Authors
- After Skool
- Duration
- 21:49
- Published
- Aug 3 2021
This video is several years old now, which makes for an interesting time capsule. Unsurprisingly, the comments are filled with people exclaiming that masks/isolation (re: COVID-19) is the first step to control us.
I found the video informative but watched with a pretty hefty dose of skepticism. I immediately knew the imagery used (people wearing masks) was going to bring some interesting interpretations in the comments.
A lot of claims and quotes by philosophers, and some thought-provoking framing for how a society could be collectively manipulated into ceding control to a ruling class. It doesn't really explain who totalitarians are, besides obvious examples, or give a concrete example for our current society, besides drawing corporate logos.
And the largest question I have, which it fails to address: how do you convince people they have been lied to and manipulated, when they claim you have been manipulated?
If some of society is already adopting the mass delusion, and part of that delusion is, "anyone against me is evil/deceived/delusional," how in the world will any progress be made to change their minds?
Well, typically it doesn't turn out so well. War and genocide being the most common.
Really puts that "enemy within" stuff into context.
I'm not good with words at the moment but i would also like to share this post i found in the fediverse recently: https://feddit.org/post/11605579
I haven't watched the video yet, but this post (not yours) doesn't sit well with me. It contains within it a reasonable point or two but tbh it feels like it sets up a "I'm isolated because I'm too smart" and a sort of "they don't want you to know the truth" vibe to me. It implies everyone else is shallow and the whole "masters of the matrix" thing is either a book reference or a movie reference phrasing I can't find anywhere on Reddit. I think there's some points there, but woven through it is a really toxic thread IMO.
If the next thing this poster said was how the earth was actually flat or aliens built the pyramids or that race science is real it would be unsurprising, is I guess what I'm saying. There are universities and entire communities of academics willing to discuss all sorts of truths... So what do they feel is being censored specifically? (To be clear there is censorship in the world but I'm not sure the poster and I have the same definition)
The video seems only tangentially related to that comment. There is a small part that is related, talking about ways to combat totalitarian control. One way is by having positive models, individuals that are not part of the "mass delusion." Totalitarians use isolation to limit the effects of positive models that could cause too many people to question the status quo.
Immediately following that was a point on parallel societies forming as a rejection of the rulers, and framed them as more effective and possibly the best way to combat totalitarianism.
I did plan to watch it. I just won't have time until I can listen to something in the background at work. Thanks for the info.
Thank you for penning this response! I had a very similar reaction. The related sentiment is very common elsewhere on the internet: “we, the smart ones, are better than they, the dumb ones. They have petty and meaningless existences, but we see the real truth and are punished for it!”
I hesitate to assign a particular group to that style of rhetoric, but it might be instructive to see which ones have historically flocked to Nietzsche’s writings, given that the author is putting them on a pedestal (as well as the concept of free speech communities!). Please draw your own conclusions, or not :3
To anyone with which this resonates: I also would have agreed with this earlier in my life. In the meantime, though, I’ve come to the conclusion that the manner in which others lead their lives is their problem, and if I feel that their existence is detrimental to my own, that is a skill issue.
It’s appealing to create a nebulous enemy to rail against: “they” can’t fight back, and it gives your mind a target on which to focus very productive emotions (spite, bitterness, etc.). But cooperation and collaboration is how our civilization has built itself up from literal mud and sticks. IMO: the best way to “win” — if thinking in those terms is your preference — is to build or join productive communities that seek positive growth, and to live happily and productively in spite of those that would oppose your existence. They do exist, despite the insistence of the author.
A little bit of protest sprinkled in here or there is also useful, at times.
Offtopic: @mycketforvirrad I moved this back to ~humanities, since after watching the video in full now, it's not really about mental health or mental illness at all, and is really not appropriate for ~health.mental, IMO. It's a video primarily about totalitarianism. Or rather, a video about the video creators' theories on how totalitarianism arises from mass delusion, psychological manipulation of the masses, etc. which they then allude to being related to modern mainstream media and social media, amongst other things.
No worries.
Not a bad message at all, and I must say that's some kickass whiteboard art. I'm not so sure about the messenger, though - in the same channel I quickly found a video making some iffy implications about an autism epidemic...
Living a life that serves as an example to others, the value of parallel structures when resisting totalitarianism, and the perniciousness of social networks all seem like fairly uncontroversial positions. I agree with them. As others have said though, these messages are subverted and used by essentially everyone. Without getting into too much detail because this is in the wrong category: Perhaps to someone I personally see as a "pyschotic individual," certain politicians I see as totalitarians are the shining beacons of light serving as a positive example to all, bravely resisting the overwhelming tide. Perhaps they see certain structures of social cooperation as oppressive, and the people who willingly participate in them as the deluded, psychotic ones.
This is the weaponized confusion that the video talks about. On a personal level, I'd argue that my own positions aren't predicated on fear or primed by any kind of propaganda, while I observe others being openly and shamelessly drowned in both of those on a daily basis. But this personal relationship with information isn't something we can easily share or explain to others, especially if they are already delusional.
As always, I must defend that social problems require social solutions. I've previously expressed the view that education is key, and totalitarians sure seem to work (incredibly) hard to undermine it. But education must be more than the belief in a youtube video that one is exposed to. I'm talking about structured systems of education that function in a capable manner - good schools, good teachers, a comprehensive curriculum that teaches young people about history, the world, and how to think for themselves. I trust that a society of educated people will do the best it possibly can, even if they don't agree with me specifically. But once people are lost to ignorance, it's really hard to get them back.
The channel has a lot of iffy implications in its videos in a way that makes me think they're deliberately dancing on the edge of things.
Same vibes as the comment shared, like, there are points but what are you actually saying
Their list of "contributors" is pretty concerning too, TBH. And by "contributors" I assume it means they've copied ideas and content from them, since a few on the list are long dead, and most are far too famous to have willingly contributed anything to this channel. See: https://www.afterskool.net/about
Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, Russell Brand, Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris = Need I really explain why they're problematic?
Graham Hancock, Bruce Lipton, Randall Carlson = Straight-up pseudoscience peddlers
Paul Stamets, Fungi Academy = mycology based medicine advocates of dubious scientific credibility
Terrence McKenna, Alan Watts, Ram Dass = psychedelic spiritualists... which I personally don't have an issue with (I still regularly smoke weed, do shrooms, and I've read/listened to plenty of McKenna and Watts over the years in my own spiritual journey), but they are all often a bit "out there" with their ideas
Tony Robbins, Eckhart Tolle, Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, David Goggins = Self-help/Lifestyle gurus and motivational speakers of questionable value
cc: @metoosalem, in case you weren't aware of the above. This doesn't seem like a particularly trustworthy channel when it comes to seeking objective truth, and I would take everything said in their videos with a hefty dose of skepticism.
p.s. Their actual stated collaborator for the submitted video, Academy of Ideas, doesn't look especially credible or trustworthy either. They don't list any real info about who they actually are or what their sources are, and their video history and messaging about everything is uh... interesting, to put it mildly. It's raising all sorts of red flags for me personally, and I would be wary of taking anything they said in their content at face value or treating it as an objective source of information.
I find it hard to follow videos from this channel. The speakers cadence has this rhythmic, almost hypnotic quality to it. But the text itself is kind of complex and I need to focus to parse what hes saying. In part due to lots of quotes and stuff that dont really follow contemporary vernacular.
I find myself kind of zoning out whenever I listen to it, and in the process I end up not really absorbing most of it.