Interesting, no comment on the "horizontal forces at work," on the "Push-Pull Dynamics on the Horizontal Continuum." That, because of our "different horizontal windows, not every person on this continuum will be able to separate out the different shades, gradations, or degrees."

"Think of a political spectrum with nine hypothetical positions:
1.Radical(left wing) 2.Principled 3.Pragmatic (moderate) 4.Tilted 5.Middle(neutral) 6.Tilted (moderate) 7.Pragmatic 8.Principled 9.Radical(right wing)"

No comment on the "two kinds of distortions [which can] occur." The "first, if a position on the 1-9 scale is close to '[our] own' on the same scale, [we] may deny the differences and assimilate it as equivalent to [our] own. Thus, we have the formation of political alliances that deny differences among the various wings of a party as they attempt to unite and speak with one voice." "Often, these entities make for strange bedfellows while the differences are ignored and they pull together in common cause." This is known as the assimilation effect.

The second distortion that can occur "under other conditions, a person will push the other position away from his or her own, thus shoving it further into the camp of the enemy. 'You' may think we are singing from the same page, but 'I' conclude that you are one of 'them' because we sing slightly different notes. This is known as the contrast effect."

The extreme position is "unable to recognize the positions within its own wing but, instead, will displace or contrast them into the camp of the enemy."

While with the first distortion we get "strange bedfellows" who ignore their own differences, with the second we get natural allies who do not recognize themselves as such. Our natural friend is seen as an enemy.

Beck and Cowan state, "From a research standpoint, how a person defines all the positions on the continuum will reveal that person’s own position on the same scale."

They go on to make their point that, "here, is that it has become difficult to develop "non-partisan" solutions to complex problems because every proposal has to run the gauntlet through this distorting assimilation-contrast effect."

The writers claim that "[t]his is certainly the case when it comes to understanding the motives of the terrorists, the influence of the anti-government militia movements, and the role of more "conservative" talk radio hosts in encouraging, giving aid to, or creating the atmosphere for the entire right-wing spectrum to flourish. (The same comment could have been made about the so-called 'left-wing' during the anti-war polarization in the midst of the Vietnam war protests of the 1960’s and 1970’s.) To 'lower the rhetoric' on explosive, inflammatory issues should mean 'moderate the assimilation-contrast effect.' Only then can we begin to see the whole and act for the greater good."

Remember the terrorist they were referring to was Timothy McVeigh , not the Islamonazis extremists we face today. And the rhetoric they were responding to was the response by conservatives to President Clinton's claim that the "hate talk" on the right encouraged McVeigh's actions. I would say that President Clinton's claim was inappropriate and the response by conservatives unnecessary. Rush is no more hard right than I am. Michael Savage is hard extreme right, Rush is principled right, and I am neither. But, of course, according Beck and Cowan, by defining positions on the continuum I have revealed my own position on the same scale. Or have I?

All quotes are From: A Spiral View of Terrorism by Dr. Don Beck and Christopher Cowan © 1996 National Values Center, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------
tashi deleks,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

I don't know how "interesting" it is, but the reason I don't comment on lengthy quotes of this nature is that I don't have enough interest, and certainly not enough time in the day to debate the arcana of some scholarly works that people sometimes post.

The way these forums work for most people is, you state your opinion and argue it for a while if necessary (providing some kind of backup when necessary) and move on to another topic.

__________________
Not a day goes by that I don't see something that reinforces my belief that people are idiots.

And I find that interesting.

That may be how most people work, I usually, but not always, seek a little more depth. To each their own.

tashi deleks and Happy 4th,

M

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?

And I find that unsurprising.When dealing in opinions, "depth" isn't always what it's cracked up to be, particularly when many sources are opinions themselves. Most times, we can all find a book or treatise SOMEWHERE to back up our opinions.

And, above all else, and I'm not specifically targeting you, I have an aversion to long posts and still longer responses as they seem to grow even LONGER with every post.
I've learned, over the years that although I'm often paid by the word when I sell a article, the more concise I am makes my stuff more acceptable to an editor.

And a happy 4th to you too.

__________________
Not a day goes by that I don't see something that reinforces my belief that people are idiots.

Only with "depth" are we able to base our own beliefs on something other than mere "opinion." Only by "depth" are we able to determine the foundation of others "opinion."

Yes, I have noticed that tendency, in others and myself, and can understand such an aversion.

Ah, the hated blue pen of the editor. Well, there is only so much space on the printed page, and why pay more when you can pay less? As the bard says, "Brevity is the soul of wit," unfortunately it is also the essence of the sound bit. E=MC2, is beautifully short. The Heart Sutra presents the ultimate teaching of the Bodhisattvas path on one page of text. But there are tons of pages dedicated to explaining both and in a way the most dense of us can understand.

While some can say more with less, most say nothing regardless of the lengthen. If all you want to do is invoke a feeling, rather than communicate a critical thought or outline a policy of substance, 30 seconds, or 45 is all that is necessary. Shallowness is the ultimate truth of popular postmodern culture and the Obama campaign.

tashi deleks,

M

And I hope yours was.

__________________
"They haven't got Brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't Think." -- Eeyore, The House At Pooh Corner

Sit like a mountain,
Breathe like the wind,
Mind like the Sky.

When all the Gods are crazy, who do you pray to?