White Supremacists - We aren’t all mentally ill

[Toni]

White Supremacists - We aren't all Mentally Disturbed and Paranoid to the point where we Murder those we hold to be Inferior.

I think that's more accurate and informative than the original title.

That is the point of the article, though. Where is the line between between being mentally ill and white nationalism. It isn't simply pulling the trigger. Mental illness means something. It isn't a cloak to cover over willful ignorance, self-pity, and entitlement. While we musn't confuse my OP with what white nationalists are actually saying, I have no idea what they are saying, it is meant to explore this absurd concept that simply pulling the trigger indicates mental illness. That is too convenient.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

It's a cult. And the cult leader has brainwashed his devoted followers into acting out. How they act out depends on what the cult leader has been priming them with.

Trump is identical to Charles Manson. Manson always said he was innocent; that he couldn't control what these people did; that he was just talking about things in a general sense; that he's not responsible; etc., etc., etc.

He took his people apart like a semi-automatic assault rifle; cleaned every piece; carefully removed the "semi" automatic block, turning it into a fully automatic machine gun; put all of the pieces back together again; loaded it; and told it who needs to be killed and why and how much love and affection he would shower on those who achieved such wondrous goals.

And then when his followers did what he programmed and wanted them to do, he said, "It ain't me man! I didn't do this!"

Same fucking thing.

And it's not the first time Trump did this! He started by encouraging his followers to murder Hillary Clinton ffs! Straight up told them to kill her. Oh, but, no, that was a "joke."

That's how it starts. First he says it. Then retracts it. Then he says a similar thing. Then retracts it. Step by step by step toward saying, "Kill for me."

Loyalty oaths; surrounding himself with sycophants that must publicly humiliate themselves by sucking his cock during press meetings; firing anyone who doesn't such his cock; etc.

That he's also a national joke doesn't change the fact that he considers himself to be a mob boss.

 

[ronburgundy]

White Supremacists - We aren't all Mentally Disturbed and Paranoid to the point where we Murder those we hold to be Inferior.

I think that's more accurate and informative than the original title.

That is the point of the article, though. Where is the line between between being mentally ill and white nationalism. It isn't simply pulling the trigger. Mental illness means something. It isn't a cloak to cover over willful ignorance, self-pity, and entitlement. While we musn't confuse my OP with what white nationalists are actually saying, I have no idea what they are saying, it is meant to explore this absurd concept that simply pulling the trigger indicates mental illness. That is too convenient.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

Choosing to hold a hateful ideology b/c it serves a useful psychological/social function for you to do so is NOT a disease or and addiction. It is an ethical choice to the extent that the concept of "choice" can ever be applied to human thought or action (the whole free will problem). With actual addiction, hurting other people is only a byproduct of the addiction, where you don't want to hurt them but are compelled by a biological need to satisfy the addiction. IF you hurt them intentionally b/c you want and try to hurt them directly, rather than as an unintended byproduct of some other action, then it isn't an addiction, your just a fucking immoral asshole.
Now, some people are socialized from birth to be immoral assholes and make choices to hurt others. But most white supremacists (and misogynists and homophobes) have plenty of exposure to other information and experiences that would undermine those beliefs, but they choose to actively disregard that information because they are selfish and the benefit they get from the beliefs matters more to them than whether the beliefs that cause them to harm others is accurate.

In fact, I would argue that a large % of racists, misogynist, etc. are similar to most theists in that they don't sincerely and fully believe their claimed ideology, but commit to pretending it's real b/c it serves a function. It b/c it serves a function for them, it isn't a dysfunction but a product of normal human behavior, as is hate and violence more generally. That doesn't mean we shouldn't counter and punish it, b/c that is also a normal human behavior against behaviors we don't like. And treating such behavior as a moral failing with legal and social punishments is itself functional and neccessary to keep people who act purely as self serving motives in line.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I suppose we are looking at two different things.

Insanity and Disease. Insanity, to my best understanding, indicates an inability to judge right from wrong, that the lens in which they see the world, their is an inability to make viable judgments. Andrea Yates suffered from mental illness and drowned her kids. She most likely knew it was wrong on some level, but her ability to process it was broken.

Treating supremacist thought like a disease such as addiction is wrong. While I can see people who suffer from mental illness swaying into a supremacist movement, much like they can to religion or NY sport teams, I think the Venn Diagram is less overlapping than suggested. Stubbornness isn't a mental illness. Nor is partisanship. I think there is a difference between trying to determine how to deradicalize extremists, verses viewing them as people suffering from mental illness.

 

[Playball40]

So to use your example.

The simple act of 'smoking' doesn't make you addicted to nicotine.
The act of 'drinking' doesn't make you an alcoholic.
To assume that someone that commits vehicular homicide due to drinking while driving does NOT MEAN the person who drank and drove is ill. In fact, it's quite possible they were NOT - look how many people drink that are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

White Supremacists - We aren't all Mentally Disturbed and Paranoid to the point where we Murder those we hold to be Inferior.

I think that's more accurate and informative than the original title.

That is the point of the article, though. Where is the line between between being mentally ill and white nationalism. It isn't simply pulling the trigger. Mental illness means something. It isn't a cloak to cover over willful ignorance, self-pity, and entitlement. While we musn't confuse my OP with what white nationalists are actually saying, I have no idea what they are saying, it is meant to explore this absurd concept that simply pulling the trigger indicates mental illness. That is too convenient.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

 

[Toni]

So to use your example.

The simple act of 'smoking' doesn't make you addicted to nicotine.
The act of 'drinking' doesn't make you an alcoholic.
To assume that someone that commits vehicular homicide due to drinking while driving does NOT MEAN the person who drank and drove is ill. In fact, it's quite possible they were NOT - look how many people drink that are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I suppose we are looking at two different things.

Insanity and Disease. Insanity, to my best understanding, indicates an inability to judge right from wrong, that the lens in which they see the world, their is an inability to make viable judgments. Andrea Yates suffered from mental illness and drowned her kids. She most likely knew it was wrong on some level, but her ability to process it was broken.

Treating supremacist thought like a disease such as addiction is wrong. While I can see people who suffer from mental illness swaying into a supremacist movement, much like they can to religion or NY sport teams, I think the Venn Diagram is less overlapping than suggested. Stubbornness isn't a mental illness. Nor is partisanship. I think there is a difference between trying to determine how to deradicalize extremists, verses viewing them as people suffering from mental illness.

There are well documented cases of lionesses killing the young of their pride. This is natural selection at work. Racist behavior is natural behavior and human history is filled with examples of humans killing humans. The racists in the U.S. would love to have their way but are prevented by too many other people who think otherwise. It's that simple.

Insanity can be thought of as a diseased brain, certainly a broken brain, at least in terms of modern society. And these conditions are not binary, these conditions occur in degrees. I think it goes without question that all humans are unhealthy to some degree both mentally and otherwise, and any mental disorder is ultimately something physical about the brain.

I'm certainly a racist, but I try to control it because I don't like that aspect of the evolved organism that is me. But sometimes it shows. Hopefully when it does there are enough intelligent people around that I don't get judged as a racist, that they recognize we're all evolved creatures with conditions and propensities that got us here. But if I go to the point where I pick up my AR-15 and start killing people or post white nationalist hate scree they take some action against me.

Someone like Candice Keller from Ohio sounds like a piece of work. at least if this article is accurate.

 

[Playball40]

So to use your example.

The simple act of 'smoking' doesn't make you addicted to nicotine.
The act of 'drinking' doesn't make you an alcoholic.
To assume that someone that commits vehicular homicide due to drinking while driving does NOT MEAN the person who drank and drove is ill. In fact, it's quite possible they were NOT - look how many people drink that are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So to use your example.

The simple act of 'smoking' doesn't make you addicted to nicotine.
The act of 'drinking' doesn't make you an alcoholic.
To assume that someone that commits vehicular homicide due to drinking while driving does NOT MEAN the person who drank and drove is ill. In fact, it's quite possible they were NOT - look how many people drink that are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

Not a cloak but an explanation. And a lens through which to see and understand—-and hopefully cure and reform.

Certainly I am not saying that this was foisted upon them, unaware.

Look, we all recognized that cancers are diseases. The fact that someone smoked a couple of packs a day for thirty years does not make their lung cancer any less a disease or any less tragic.

The fact that non smokers living with a smoker face ill effects such as asthma, respiratory infections, possibly COPD, possibly their own cancer, low birth weight and premature birth and so on is a predictable byproduct that the smoker, being addicted, is unable to see. Lung cancer is still a disease and so is the addiction that drives the tobacco use.

This is a very obvious case of a disease(tobacco addiction) causing another disease: lung cancer and COPD, and having nasty effects on standers by who did not willingly participate in the smoking.

Look at alcoholism and other addictions. We see those addictions as diseases that cause behavior that is severely harmful to the addict and also severely harmful to friends and family AND strangers when the addict commits crimes to support his or her habit.

An addict that commits vehicular homicide while under the influence is still an addict and still committed a crime. We can punish them for their crimes but unless we treat the underlying disease, it will happen again.

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

Clearly, when it comes to trying to break through, that will require understanding their mindset is protected by a seriously effective partisan firewall and different methods of discourse are needed to have any hope of breaking through it. But I just find it stretching the word disease to include willful ignorance and anger.

 

[Toni]

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

If it’s a disease it is potentially treatable. Maybe curable.

 

[starwater]

Here is a weird thought. Many of these guys also identify themselves as Incels (involuntary celibate) because women have rejected them. So there is intense anger at women and what they refer to as feminists as their problem with not getting sex. So if this is a symptom of the disease, is it a cure to get them sex?

I'm no psychiatrist - but there seems to me to be a link here.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Here is a weird thought. Many of these guys also identify themselves as Incels (involuntary celibate) because women have rejected them. So there is intense anger at women and what they refer to as feminists as their problem with not getting sex. So if this is a symptom of the disease, is it a cure to get them sex?

I'm no psychiatrist - but there seems to me to be a link here.

The problem is that many of these more radical incels want sex with "Stacys", that is, very good looking, young, sexy women. Not going to happen without drugging a Stacy. Of course, if one is a repulsive, mentally ill incel with a bad attitude towards women, these incels can't even get an ugly, overweight woman with home made prison tatoos.

 

[starwater]

Here is a weird thought. Many of these guys also identify themselves as Incels (involuntary celibate) because women have rejected them. So there is intense anger at women and what they refer to as feminists as their problem with not getting sex. So if this is a symptom of the disease, is it a cure to get them sex?

I'm no psychiatrist - but there seems to me to be a link here.

The problem is that many of these more radical incels want sex with "Stacys", that is, very good looking, young, sexy women. Not going to happen without drugging a Stacy. Of course, if one is a repulsive, mentally ill incel with a bad attitude towards women, these incels can't even get an ugly, overweight woman with home made prison tatoos.

gotcha -

 

[Toni]

Here is a weird thought. Many of these guys also identify themselves as Incels (involuntary celibate) because women have rejected them. So there is intense anger at women and what they refer to as feminists as their problem with not getting sex. So if this is a symptom of the disease, is it a cure to get them sex?

I'm no psychiatrist - but there seems to me to be a link here.

No, the 'cure' would be to getting them the mental health care that they need to overcome the insecurities and personality flaws that have led them to develop hatred of and need to control women.

 

[Toni]

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

It's not 'rationalizing' anything. Absolutely the opposite. I'm looking for an explanation for what it is that makes some people susceptible to right wing (or left wing) extremism and radicalization.

I don't think it's a healthy personality. There is a reason that such hateful ideals appeal to some people and not to others. I think it is diseased thinking.

 

[Jarhyn]

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

It's not 'rationalizing' anything. Absolutely the opposite. I'm looking for an explanation for what it is that makes some people susceptible to right wing (or left wing) extremism and radicalization.

I don't think it's a healthy personality. There is a reason that such hateful ideals appeal to some people and not to others. I think it is diseased thinking.

It's not that it's diseased thinking. That manner of thinking wouldn't exist at the levels we see today if there weren't some selection pressures through history to have maintained it.

Rather, it has only recently become a maladaptive trait: Organizations through history have always needed zealots to strengthen them against competing organizations. In response, organizational heirarchies would reward said zealots and guard them from internal consequences.

That said, given the rapid advance of models that approach the function of reality in earnest, and the fact that progress demands mental agility, that subset of "true believers" has recently become maladaptive: a true believer can no longer live and die in the timespan in which their organization needs to change "with the times".

It's not so much a disease as it is simply a maladaptive trait.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm not convinced that most of these people are mentally ill. Their behavior is more like an extreme form of tribalism, often perpetuated by other like minded members of the tribe. In this case, members of the white tribe.

Seconded. They aren't mentally ill, they define non-whites as subhuman.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

It's not 'rationalizing' anything. Absolutely the opposite. I'm looking for an explanation for what it is that makes some people susceptible to right wing (or left wing) extremism and radicalization.

I don't think it's a healthy personality. There is a reason that such hateful ideals appeal to some people and not to others. I think it is diseased thinking.

If you take a bit of time to occasionally peruse the Nazi forums, you will find they actively proselytize. They look for those young fools who have absorbed a mild case of racism who are vulnerable to propaganda and being sucked in to radical right winged ideologies. These extremists pt a lot of thought into how to achieve this.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's not that it's diseased thinking. That manner of thinking wouldn't exist at the levels we see today if there weren't some selection pressures through history to have maintained it.

Rather, it has only recently become a maladaptive trait: Organizations through history have always needed zealots to strengthen them against competing organizations. In response, organizational heirarchies would reward said zealots and guard them from internal consequences.

That said, given the rapid advance of models that approach the function of reality in earnest, and the fact that progress demands mental agility, that subset of "true believers" has recently become maladaptive: a true believer can no longer live and die in the timespan in which their organization needs to change "with the times".

It's not so much a disease as it is simply a maladaptive trait.

Nicely put. I think you've done a good job of explaining the behavior and why it is so prevalent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Right. There are a LOT more casual drinkers than there are alcoholics. And there are a lot more casual bigots and racists than there are white supremacists.

Some people can smoke only now and then.

Some people. Can occasionally use recreational drugs.

And some people cross over the line between enjoying a substance to feeling that they require the substance to their bodies and brains rebelling at not having the substance.

We don’t understand very well why one person might drink occasionally or heavily for long periods of time without ever becoming an alcoholic and why the next person might do the same and become addicted. Sometimes a trauma or series of traumas can push one over the edge between user and addict. Genetics seems to play a role. Sometimes.

One can commit vehicular homicide driving drunk the first and only time one drinks. Or without ever drinking or using any other mood altering substance.

Being addicted to alcohol greatly increases the chances that someone will commit vehicular suicide. We still hold them accountable for the vehicular homicide, even if we recognize that a disease was a root cause.

We’re better off recognizing the alcoholic intake as a symptom of a disease and treating the disease.

I wonder if we are better off, as a society and in the long run, of recognizing racism and things like white supremacy as a disease.

Maybe not. I’m pretty sleep deprived right now.

I simply do not think pathologizing racism will IMPROVE things and in fact, will harm those that suffer from real disease. We should stigmatize racism and white supremacy NOT addiction and depression.

It's not 'rationalizing' anything. Absolutely the opposite. I'm looking for an explanation for what it is that makes some people susceptible to right wing (or left wing) extremism and radicalization.

Why do kids start smoking? Yeah, in part, it is that stupid.

I don't think it's a healthy personality. There is a reason that such hateful ideals appeal to some people and not to others. I think it is diseased thinking.

It's human thinking, and I think it is important to not overlap real mental illness with racism.