|
|
Post by Tomas on Feb 5, 2021 11:54:32 GMT
Posting this in Religion section due to the mentioning of the once very famous term "Stockholm Syndrome" in an interview with beloved convert theologian Scott Hahn on LifeSiteNews (recently banned by Facebook and for a while opened at the platform rumble instead). The origin of the term is a major crime in the 1970s where bank robbers took hostages in central Stockholm. They held them caught under weapon threat for several days, before being delivered by police force in the end. What it connotes is how people astonishingly can be found to "take pity on" their captors, their harassers, their fiends, while they find themselves being held under conditions of severe fright in a prolonged situation of pressure. What strikes me, personally but perhaps also resonating among others, is how many people appears to do the same phenomena right now. During these disturbed times, marked by insane mainstream-extremist measures and mass manipulations, presented as normal or the new normal along with some almost inbuilt contradicting lack of sympathies, the simple response by many is tragically to just go with the times and take the easiest apporaches like "do only what you feel" and "follow the leaders" however brainless or heartless that be. Development towards openness for ways forward to a world recovering for the time being has been delayed, at some levels it nearly even looks like the contemporary world is being held hostage as a whole by a small minority, where serious choice and real solidarity and virtue may in practise come close to an impossible challenge for "common man". Is that too far fetched, to paint masses "loving" their manipulators, or do you recognise some similarity with the earlier hostages? Maybe people are just uninterested in ethical questions, wants to go easy, and doesn´t find any faults in the present leaders´ policies other than therir own familiar ones? rumble.com/vdi3vh-scott-hahn-catholics-cant-win-by-compromising-with-liberalism.html?utm_source=LifeSite+Video+News&utm_campaign=5f8c66092b-saturday_3_29_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_747195aa73-5f8c66092b-410157158 |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Feb 5, 2021 19:45:11 GMT
Posting this in Religion section due to the mentioning of the once very famous term "Stockholm Syndrome" in an interview with beloved convert theologian Scott Hahn on LifeSiteNews (recently banned by Facebook and for a while opened at the platform rumble instead). The origin of the term is a major crime in the 1970s where bank robbers took hostages in central Stockholm. They held them caught under weapon threat for several days, before being delivered by police force in the end. What it connotes is how people astonishingly can be found to "take pity on" their captors, their harassers, their fiends, while they find themselves being held under conditions of severe fright in a prolonged situation of pressure. What strikes me, personally but perhaps also resonating among others, is how many people appears to do the same phenomena right now. During these disturbed times, marked by insane mainstream-extremist measures and mass manipulations, presented as normal or the new normal along with some almost inbuilt contradicting lack of sympathies, the simple response by many is tragically to just go with the times and take the easiest apporaches like "do only what you feel" and "follow the leaders" however brainless or heartless that be. Development towards openness for ways forward to a world recovering for the time being has been delayed, at some levels it nearly even looks like the contemporary world is being held hostage as a whole by a small minority, where serious choice and real solidarity and virtue may in practise come close to an impossible challenge for "common man". Is that too far fetched, to paint masses "loving" their manipulators, or do you recognise some similarity with the earlier hostages? Maybe people are just uninterested in ethical questions, wants to go easy, and doesn´t find any faults in the present leaders´ policies other than therir own familiar ones? rumble.com/vdi3vh-scott-hahn-catholics-cant-win-by-compromising-with-liberalism.html?utm_source=LifeSite+Video+News&utm_campaign=5f8c66092b-saturday_3_29_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_747195aa73-5f8c66092b-410157158Could it be that the people being held captive have little or no moral compass, no fixed objective ideas of truth or justice? That the captives don't really believe anything and are therefore very impressionable to someone decisive, even if that decisiveness was criminal? A bit like the whole 'liberal guilt' that drives much of western behaviour. |
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Feb 5, 2021 22:09:03 GMT
Could it be that the people being held captive have little or no moral compass, no fixed objective ideas of truth or justice? That the captives don't really believe anything and are therefore very impressionable to someone decisive, even if that decisiveness was criminal? A bit like the whole 'liberal guilt' that drives much of western behaviour.
[/quote]
That's it. Such sum up however ridiculous goes a long way by explaining the limited scope of views. We have as bricks for societies been so conditioned to practically loose every tool for independence. No pure straight freedom is available when every single minuscle move is tainted by deceptive welfare devices. Education, apart from some few traditional exceptions, is so low that the graduates hardly understand what "those fringe extremists" (more relevant, in this context, any conservative opposed to the lies and halftruths) are legitimately concerned about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Jan 10, 2022 22:58:04 GMT
Here is an interview with Bishop Athanasius Schneider, primarily on what he names the abortion-tainted vaccines. Using the word cannibalism in devouring them may sound bad to many here as elsewhere, yet given a second thought it might not. The word implies that parts of the children gets into injected peoples bodies, so why not saying so? The interview also touches upon the need for the Anti-Globalist Alliance that Archbishop Vigano called for only few weeks ago. These two churchmen are often branded as controversial by lax voices, but almost all I have heard or read from them has been straightforward and uncontroversial as close as anyone "normal" in regard to basics. Whatever you think, the example here can also be an example of "educational" talk. Calmly giving easy language that everyone can understand, simple laymen without examinas included (sic). remnant-tv.com/video/522/vaccines-bishop-athanasius-schneider-presents-the-catholic-position-?channelName=RemnantTV&fbclid=IwAR0kDMPCIcoLY2c5aeQbNf_HtoW8IK1YMCOW799Ix14cnWdvQDTe1oQ0qCk The vaxx-component is practically overriding most matters in this fabricated world crisis we have to suffer due to sin. Yet I have least some impression or feeling the public opinion situation has moved along a little bit during the last weeks, in a slightly better direction in terms of conscientous concern. Less stalemate as some among ordinary folks are getting alerted? Or maybe one should be cautious still because no political opposition is really there on the ground. No challenging apart from more or less lame rhetoric. |
|
