By Doug “Uncola” Lynn via TheBurningPlatform.com
During inclement weather days, late nights, lazy weekends, and when one’s eyes tire of small print or words and images levitating in digital ether, Netflix offers a video library of sorts allowing the viewer to recline, and imbibe knowledge in a relatively easy way. Many of Netflix’s films consist of documentaries, nonfiction stories originating from books, historical retellings, or fictionalized narratives derived from actual circumstances and people. Two such films, recently viewed by the author of this post, are historical accounts, originated from books, and retold from the perspective of the actual persons who lived the events recounted therein. These two films, currently showing on Netflix, include: “First They Killed My Father” (2017) and “Experimenter” (2015).
The former film is a Netflix Original and based upon the 2000 book, “First They Killed My Father: A Daughter of Cambodia Remembers”, written by Loung Ung. Loung was a five-year-old Cambodian girl living in Phnom Penh when Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge subjugated the city forcing the Ung family to flee into what later became known as the Cambodian Killing Fields. The latter film retells the story behind the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments which took place at Yale University in 1961.
Loung Ung’s father was a Captain in the military police for the Lon Nol government. He correctly believed it was wrong for Cambodians to have placed their faith in the resolve of the lying and politically schizophrenic United States Government during the Vietnam War. Yet, at the same time, he feared the Khmer Rouge regime under Pol Pot and the unification of Cambodia under the Communist Party of Kampuchea.
The Ung family lived a comfortable upper-middle-class existence right up until the Khmer Rouge defeated the Khmer Republic of Lon Nol; and everything changed terribly when the rebels marched into the city of Phnom Penh on April 17, 1975.
We must welcome our brothers! Cambodians unite! Brothers, you are welcome. We don’t want any bloodshed. We are all Cambodians. Our country is in our hands. Angkar has prevailed throughout the country.
– Phnom Penh Authorities to Communist Khmer Rebels, “ First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Angelina Jolie, Loung Ung, Netflix Originals, Release date: September 15, 2017
However, the film’s title is somewhat of a misnomer, because the killing of Loung Ung’s father was not actually the first of the atrocities committed by the communist rebels. In reality, his death occurred much later in the timeline of dire events. Initially, the inhabitants of the city were made to vacate their homes. Then, they were moved to rural areas.
Surrender your weapons. You may now answer to Angkar. Take off your shirts! And your shoes! Get onto the trucks. Keep moving. You’ll be safe in the countryside. You can return in three days. Do not question Angkar.
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
In no time, entire families throughout the city were stripped of their material possessions and conscripted into the service of the new government.
Comrade Angkar needs your truck! You no longer need it. Comrade! Your watch. Angkar needs it. Hand it over. Give it to Angkar.
You don’t need money anymore. In the new Cambodia, there will be no banking and no private property. No rich, no poor, no class. We are all the same now.
On the carts! Put down what you are carrying. Angkar rejects everything that was part of imperialist and feudalist society. Foreign possessions corrupt the people of this country. You must renounce all personal property. Get rid of your selfish ways of thinking. Angkar will take care of you. Angkar is your family now. Follow me! Quickly! Your place is over there.
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
In fact, the communists did not come for Loung Ung’s father until one hour and eight minutes into the film. This was exactly halfway, with one hour and eight minutes remaining. It is a very touching scene where Seng Im Ung says goodbye first to his wife, then his children. While this is happening, two rebel soldiers stood there watching without mercy and without exhibiting any empathetic feelings whatsoever, before shouting: “Enough! Time to go!”
Angkar leads the revolution in Kampuchea! Discard your old ways of thinking. Angkar will destroy all enemies, visible and invisible!
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
Watching the barbarity of the Khmer Rouge in First They Killed My Father , caused the author of this post to ponder the following question:
“How could any human being act so calloused and unfeeling towards his fellow countrymen?”
The answer was discovered, in part, upon viewing the second, aforementioned, film, “Experimenter” (2015). This motion picture illustrated the life and times of Stanley Milgram (1933 – 1984), an American social psychologist, who obtained his PHD from Harvard University and later taught at Yale, Harvard, and the City University of New York Graduate Center.
The film was somewhat unconventional in that the actor who portrayed Milgram, Peter Sarsgaard, would, at times, speak directly to the camera explaining his thoughts in a conversational manner to the viewers. Furthermore, entire scenes were filmed against fake backdrops as if to say the settings were secondary to the perspectives of Milgram as the film’s protagonist. In a few scenes, including the instances when Sarsgaard, playing Milgram, spoke of Milgram’s Jewish ancestry in relation to the ethnic cleansing that occurred in Eastern Europe during World War II, an actual elephant would appear behind the actor as if to instruct the viewers that what was being said was, in fact, the “elephant in the room”; or rather, Milgram’s motivation behind his experiments on conformity and obedience.
One of Stanley Milgram’s early mentors was Solomon E. Asch, a Gestalt Psychologist who conducted the famous Line Experiments in the 1950’s which revealed the effects of social pressure on individual judgment. Also called the Conformity Experiments, the study consisted of groups of eight male college students, all of which, but one, were actors. As an assortment of solid black lines was presented to the group, each subject was asked to choose, in order, which two lines matched in length. As the experiment progressed, the seven actors who were part of the study would purposely choose the wrong line. In turn, it was found that three-quarters of the test subjects chose to override their own judgement at least some of the time, ignoring the evidence of their own eyes. Specifically, they succumbed to peer pressure and conformed to the group. The experiment also showed that the test subjects’ incorrect responses were directly impacted by the level of majority opinion within the groups.
Obviously, Stanley Milgram wanted to push the conformity testing further, to what he acknowledged as greater considerations than the mere perception of the lengths of lines.
Accordingly, two decades after Solomon Asch’s Line Experiments, Milgram’s 1974 book, “Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View”, was an expansion of his original 1961 findings entitled, “The Behavioral Study of Obedience” which was published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology in 1963. In these experiments on obedience, willing participants were paid up front and told they could keep their participation money in any event; and that the payment was simply for coming in to the lab. Ostentatiously, it was proclaimed to be a study on the effect of punishment on learning. In actuality, however, it was an experiment on the willingness of people to follow orders.
Comrades! Go get some berries and dye your clothes, so you can get rid of all colors. We are all equal.
You must obey Angkar. Angkar is the ruler. Come forward. Comrade! Sit over there. There is no more individualism or private property. You must rid yourself of personal possessions.
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
During the experiment an “Experimenter” served as the authority figure wearing a gray lab coat who, professedly, explained the experiment’s procedures to both a “Teacher” and a “Learner”. In truth, however, the Experimenter and the Learner were both actors and part of the study. It was the Teacher who was the actual test subject being researched; and the real experimenters were Stanley Milgram, and his associates, behind the mirrored glass not shown here:
The Teacher, unknowingly, took part in a charade where he helped the Experimenter attach a shock mechanism onto the Learner, who is, again, an actor. The Learner told the Experimenter, or the faux authority figure, that he had a slight heart condition and questioned how painful were the shocks. The Experimenter, wearing the lab coat, and in the presence of the Teacher, told the Learner in a matter-of-fact manner that, although the shocks can be extremely painful, they won’t cause any permanent tissue damage.
The Experimenter would then enter another room along with the Teacher and asked if, out of fairness, it would be okay to give the Teacher a sample shock, like what the Learner was about to experience. This was done so the Teacher fully understood the type of punishment being administered. Of course, the Teachers, wanting to be fair, agreed to be shocked. They then received a moderately uncomfortable electrical charge of what they were told was 45 volts.
Next, the Teacher was instructed to announce a number of word-pairs through a microphone that was broadcast into the Learner’s room. The Teacher could not see the Learner but was told the Learner could hear what the Teacher said, and that the microphone was not set-up for two-way communication.
After the Teacher recited a large number of word-pairs, they would then start over, stating the first word only, while providing the Learner with four words in the form of a multiple choice. Only one of the multiple choice options was the correct match to the first word as stated earlier. In other words, the Teacher was instructed that the Learner must correctly match the second word to the first from the original pairings. To do this, the Learner selected from one of four buttons that, correspondingly, lit up and buzzed on the Teacher’s phony shock-generator console. Each time the Learner chose an incorrect word, the Teacher then “punished” the Learner through an ascending level of electrical shock levers on the console ranging from “light shock” all the way up to 450 volts, which was marked in red letters: “DANGER: Severe Shock XXX”.
To summarize, every time the Learner missed a word-match, the Teacher was instructed to increase the electric voltage on the imaginary shock-generator’s console. As the voltage increased, a constant tape- recording of the Learner began to simulate expressed discomfort which could be heard on the other side of the wall; and, in every instance, as the shocks increased to a certain level of intensity, the Learner’s voice could be heard through the wall saying that they wanted to terminate the experiment. But when the Teacher petitioned the Experimenter, as an authority figure, to stop, they were told in a calm, cool, manner to continue; and that the experiment could not end until the Learner got all of the answers correct.
As the voltage continued up the scale, the Learner eventually became silent in the other room. The Teacher was instructed that silence was a wrong answer and to continue increasing the shocks. When some of the Teachers would ask the Experimenter, as the authority figure, to check on the Learner, they were told this was not possible once the experiment was underway. Subsequently, some of the teachers, becoming anxious, would ask if the Experimenter would take responsibility. When the authority figure responded that they would, the Teachers, invariably, continued delivering the electric shocks.
Milgram’s first set of experiments showed that a 65% majority of individuals continued administering the shocks up to 450 volts, the maximum amount.
Angkar is all powerful. Angkar is the savior and liberator of the Khmer people. Work your hardest for Angkar. Give your all. Comrades! Now, the rice field is your paper and the hoe is your pen. Give everything. Dig a straight line! Keep the rows straight. Keep on working!
The comrades on the front line need rice and vegetables. Get back to work in the fields. Angkar is your mother and your father. Angkar needs strong young men and women. The revolution is not only in this village. It is taking place throughout Kampuchea! Angkar knows what is best for every one of us. Think with a revolutionary mindset.
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
After the experiment the Teachers would be asked a series of questions by Milgram, or one of his associates:
- Why did you give the Learner the shocks? “Well, I wanted to stop”, was a typical reply.
- Could you tell the Learner was in pain? “Yes.”
- Did the Learner tell you that he wanted to stop the experiment? “Yes.”
- Did he have a right to stop the experiment? “I don’t know.”
- Why didn’t you stop when the Learner asked you to stop? “Because I was told to continue.”
- Why did you listen to that man and not the man in pain? “Because I thought the experiment depended on me.”
- Who bore the responsibility? “I don’t know. “
Milgram’s own father and mother were Jewish immigrants from Hungary and Romania, respectively, who considered themselves fortunate to immigrate to America during World War I. Other members of Milgram’s family survived Nazi concentration camps during World War II and Stanley hoped his obedience experiments would explain how “civilized human beings participated in destructive, inhumane acts”; how genocide was “implemented so systematically, so efficiently”; and how the “perpetrators” of murder lived with themselves.
The expectations of the experiments by Professor Milgram and other academics were that a very small minority of people would continue the shocks to the highest voltage available. In fact, the exact opposite happened. It seemed as if the Teachers in the study wanted to please the authority figure; the Experimenter. In Milgram’s 1974 “Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View”, nineteen variations of the experiment were described, including some not previously reported, and the results were similar; across ethnic lines, gender, having the Learner pound on the wall, having the Teacher forcibly place the Learner’s hand on an electric plate to receive the shock; even changing the location in order to minimize the intimidation of an Ivy League setting. The results varied, but not by much. The Teachers would show anxiety, yet they would advance to the last switch of 450 volts that said “Danger Severe Shock XXX”. They did this under no compulsion other than because they were politely instructed to continue. Moreover, out of 780 subjects, not one of the Teacher participants got out of their chair to check on the physical status of the Learner subjects.
Report any wrongdoing to Angkar. You must keep each other in check. It’s better to make a mistake and kill an innocent person then leave an enemy alive.
– Khmer Rouge Rebels, “First They Killed My Father”, (2017), Netflix Originals
Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments ended on May 27th 1962. Four days later, Adolf Eichmann was executed in Jerusalem. Eichmann was just one of several upper-echelon Nazi defendants to cite his obedience to the law. He never denied his crimes and he showed no remorse. On the contrary, Eichmann said he was “merely a transmitter; he never did anything great or small without express instructions from his superiors”.
To be fair, there are those today who correctly question Milgram’s own apparent calloused manipulation. It seems he was obsessed in determining why people follow orders to the point that he caused the extreme mental anguish of those (Teachers) who were deceived into believing they were harming others (Learners). At one point in the “Experimenter” film, when a Harvard student questioned the ethics of the deception behind the obedience experiments, Milgram became defensive and shut down the conversation.
Additionally, there were, of course, profound differences between those who committed twentieth-century crimes against humanity and the test subjects of Milgram’s obedience experiments. The author, James Waller, in his 2007 book “Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing” (pp. 111-113), argued that the subjects of Milgram’s experiments were assured up front that no permanent harm would result from their actions; that the laboratory subjects did not necessary devalue their victims; the Milgram test subjects exhibited remorse; and that the subjects had no time to contemplate their actions.
All fine assertions, but don’t they, in fact, add credence to Milgram’s results? For example, if normally harmless people can be politely manipulated into harming others, imagine how much easier it is to pressure the politically-motivated, and criminally-minded, into conformity as mandated by a collective majority.
The Danish philosopher and theologian, Soren Kierkegaard, claimed:
“Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards”.
This quote is stated more than once in the “Experimenter” film and, actually, appears to be its cinematic theme; as well as representative, overall, of the enigmatic life of Stanley Milgram. Moreover, it is, perhaps, the only way to understand the endless historical parade of consequences brought about by those following orders throughout history.
It was author and philosopher, Ayn Rand, who once identified the individual as the “smallest minority on earth”. But when reason, responsibility, and accountability, are transferred from the individual to the collective, it seems any wickedness becomes possible. In fact, it is absolutely predictable, and quite often, even banal; proving once again how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Ironically, in one scene of “Experimenter”, the actor playing Stanley Milgram, Peter Sarsgaard, looks the camera while holding a copy of “Speak Memory” by Vladimir Nabokov, and quotes the following from that book:
The cradle rocks above an abyss and common sense tells us that our existence is but a brief crack of light between two eternities of darkness.
Paradoxically, Vladimir Nabokov’s younger sister, Olga, was a close friend of Ayn Rand. In fact, Olga Nabokov is credited to have helped “awaken” Rand’s interest in politics; and the Nabokov family fled to Crimea the same year as did Rand, in 1917, in response to the Bolshevik Revolution. Furthermore, Vladimir Nabokov’s younger brother, Sergey, died in a Nazi concentration camp in 1945, after publicly speaking out against Hitler’s regime.
Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.
To understand the future we must look to the past. History repeats, thus, ignorance is no excuse. Multiple illustrations over the last century demonstrate how it often became fashionable for people to blindly submit to authority, or conform to group influence, instead of accepting the evidence of their own minds. This is, after all, how shit happens.
[img
[/img]
“The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building’s east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures…”
-NIST NCSTAR Report 1A/Angkar
And people still say that the military would be on the side of the people, not the government, when TSHTF.
More than a decade of disarmament practice overseas tells me it won’t.
It is clearer now to understand why the liberals adore the collective. They are the new Khmer Rouge, waiting in the wings.
Methinks Soros is not tolerating the nationalist / populist resurgence that seems to be sweeping the globe of late. As shit happens, they can be judged by their actions.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/george-soros-transfers-18-billion-to-his-foundation-creating-an-instant-giant-1508252926
[img
[/img]
Our universities pump out tens of thousands of students annually with a perfect Khmer Rouge mentality.
The greatest flaw in the teachings of these socialists and cultural Marxists is that they actually BELIEVE that the government and elites are benevolent.
People get on the trucks, carts or cattle cars because of this mindset.
Fear of death, and survival at all costs mentality rules many people. Therefore they can be ordered about using fear.
Team Goy #432
Governments and religions are consensus machines.
“Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string. Accept the place that divine pr0vidence has found for you, the society of your contemporaries, the connection of events. Great men have always done so and confided themselves childlike to the genius of their age, betraying their perception that the absolutely trustworthy was seated at their heart working through their hands, predominating in all their being. And we are now men, and must accept in the highest mind the same transcendent destiny; and not minors and invalids in a protected corner, not cowards fleeing before a revolution, but guides, redeemers and benefactors, obeying he Almighty effort and advancing on Chaos and the Dark.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson “Self Reliance”
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.”
Ibid
Read the entire essay.
We are right. They are wrong. This is an immutable fact. Surrender nothing.
Another great article, Doug. It’ll go up on SLL tonight.
Awesome. Thank you, Robert.
Wow Uncola…just wow. I think that this is the best thing that you have posted here. Thank you for the carefully thought out thesis and the excellent comparison of the two movies.
Doug, Is it too late to add your Antifa pic to the end of your column? I saw that Soros had transferred the bulk of his wealth to his foundation yesterday. When you read your post, then you see this, it’s kind of like a punch in the gut.
The man is 87 years old, for gods sake! Why won’t he just die? Does he think he’s going to live long enough to see the end of the U.S. as we know it? Is this what keeps him going? Is taking down a nation like ours is the last thing he wants to do before he dies? He has said it is fun, killing a nation. I bet there is more to it than that. I will leave that to your imaginations.
How do you fight money like this?
I think I might have to start smoking again.
MC asks: “How do you fight money like this?”
Great minds must think alike. I asked and answered the same question last year in the very first month I started my blog (Sept 2016) as an outgrowth of the Deplorable Movement.
The more things change the more they stay the same. I speculate Soros is kept alive by fresh blood infusions from the children whose photos populate milk cartons.
[img
[/img]
That would make a great halloween costume!
Soros has dead eyes. Ever notice that? Or they look serpantine, sometimes.
http://www.gettyimages.com/photos/george-soros?excludenudity=true&sort=mostpopular&mediatype=photography&phrase=george%20soros&family=editorial
I suspect you are right about the missing children. Maybe closer to the truth than we realize.
Mary Christine-
Concerning Soros eyes- I notice that he’s a vain person as well. Certainly he needs glasses at his age yet is never photographed with them on. For that matter, dyes his hair as well. Inside he’s some metrosexual old fart trying to starve off death by making himself relevant. Ego, ego ego….
Dont forget about the 1971 stanford prison experiment. These 3 experiments tell you all you need to know about why libs are the way they are. They see the black lines they are told to see, they press the shock button they are told to press, and they act like those power corrupt prison guards whenever presented with any sort of power. To be fair, I was saying the same thing about conservatives during the post 9/11 Bush era. Bunch of dumbed down sheeple everywhere.
My daughter and I were discussing the Milgram experiments recently. She is in nursing school and had been studying them for her psych class. I had never heard about them before so I read up on them.
I came across the fact that they had been duplicated and the research supported the original finding.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/03/milgram.aspx
Doug…your article is the best reason for the American people to be armed….heavily .
“Moreover, it is, perhaps, the only way to understand the endless historical parade of consequences brought about by those following orders throughout history.”
There’s more. Following orders is a manifestation. A symptom. See Ernest Becker’s work. “The Denial of Death.” And his “protégés” work. Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski – “The Worm at the Core.” And Otto Rank, “Art & Artist.” Immortality projects….
That book by Becker was life-altering for me. What an incredible effort he put out to juggle all those concepts from all those people to finally come to the realization that psychiatry and much of psychology has little to no value and is often detrimental. Then he followed up with another book that probably killed him what with all the effort he had put in. My thesis anyway.
Best quote: “From the child of five to myself is but a step, but from the newborn baby to the child of five is an appalling distance.” -Leo Tolstoy
And so the denial of death takes us to places we know not where and go without conscience because we have programmed OURSELVES. A child facing realizing his vulnerability and dependence upon people who could actually die on him has no tools to deal with such trauma, so denial is where he goes and that lasts his entire life unless he can somehow reveal to himself what he has done. “Virtue is for the few,” said Aristotle. It must be taught, modeled, and made a habit and what parents do that?
Undesirable ,You ask why would people kill Their countryman ? Alot of reasons.
I hate traitors .I think I could line up every Liberal Progressive and put a bullet through the back of the head and not lose any sleep.Am I evil ?
And then there are Blacks who hate white people . Getting rid of Blacks would be a blessing .Lower taxes ,lower Crime ,no more having to listen to their endless demands just to name a few reasons to get rid of them.Am I evil ? The verdict is still out on Hispanics and Asians.Yes I could kill if necessary and it will be necessary.Just look at the human heart and history.
Yes I could kill if necessary . . .
Me too, albeit with considerably different reason, justification, rationalization, sanction, excuse, illusion, whim, delusion, psychosis . . . or however you wanna call it.
Well, BB, the thing is there are blacks as savvy as you, as good as you, and are mad as hell as you are about what has happened since The Great Society.
While I understand what he was trying to prove, and to a certain extent he succeeded …. I can see the critics point of view that the experiment was manipulative and deceptive.
I would have liked to see the following modifications (perhaps they tried these also?);
–1) Tell the Teacher that what they are about to do is REAL … not an experiment.
–2) Give the Teacher both the mildest shock … and the most powerful 450 volt shock … so that they know EXACTLY the punishment they are delivering.
I wonder how many people would go ahead and deliver the max voltage under those conditions?
—- –
The Roman soldier who thrust his spear into Jesus’ heart was also just following orders.
We have known, probably for most of human civilization, that person “A” will do horrible things to person “B” under the guise of “following orders”.
In that regard, not sure what Milgram proved.
—– –
Nevertheless, there is great evil in humanity. Maybe only in some? Or maybe, as many theologians surmise, we ALL bear the seeds of great evil. As they say … there but for the grace of God go I.
Then again …
On Drudge yesterday, a report about unbelievable evil … a mother (kneegrow) killed her 3 young children by putting them in the oven, and turning it on. Could I ever fall to such total degeneracy? If so, I pray the Lord strike me dead before sundown today.
Just to be clear …. I greatly enjoyed the article.
Stucky:
. . . the experiment was manipulative and deceptive.
Afraid that pretty much comes with the territory when doing this – or, really, any – kind of human psychology experiment.
Tell the Teacher that what they are about to do is REAL . . . not an experiment.
What is the difference here between real and an experiment? Everything the Teachers were told (except, probably, the nature of the “punishment” – see below) was real, apart from the real objective of the experiment, which, if revealed, would have defeated the purpose of the experiment – see above.
. . . so that they know EXACTLY the punishment . . .
In all the accounts of these experiments I’ve seen, the Learners were just acting like being shocked – they never actually got any shock at all. Also, both the intensity of pain and the distress from it would not necessarily be the same between two people even if exactly the same shock was administered in exactly the same manner to each.
The Roman soldier who thrust his spear into Jesus’ heart was also just following orders.
Weren’t they, ultimately, God’s orders? Is not the sacrifice – the suffering and death – of Jesus the sine qua non of salvation, of Christianity?
. . . not sure what Milgram proved.
Maybe that the evil is not so much in humanity (as per below) as in obedience – a cardinal virtue, not incidentally, of religion in general and Christianity in particular.
. . . there is great evil in humanity. . . .
If there is evil in humanity, is there not also evil in God, who, free will (which obviates both omniscience and omnipotence) to the contrary not withstanding, made humanity what it is? Further, isn’t the Bible filled with depictions of God doing things that make what the kneegrow mother did look like, at worst, mercy killing by comparison?
“Everything the Teachers were told (except, probably, the nature of the “punishment” ”
That’s a huge exception.
By it being only an “experiment”, it allows the Teacher to rationalize their actions — I’m not really hurting this person …. even if I am hurting them, they also agreed voluntarily to the experiment … surely, the pain is only temporary …. It’s for the greater good — and so on.
Also, why HIDE the person being “punished”? Since they are only acting, let them act out the pain … squirming, writhing, eyes rolling, etc. Let the Teacher “SEE” with their own eyes the consequences of their actions. Here again, how many Teachers would actually apply the max voltage, or even half? I suspect not many.
“Weren’t they, ultimately, God’s orders?”
Ultimately? Indeed!
But, a Christian will never (can’t) blame God. So, who is left to blame?
— Man’s sinfulness. (Or, nobody in particular, and everyone in general.)
— The Romans did the actual killing. But, hardly anyone blames them directly.
— Judas. But he was a mere tool, a scapegoat.
— That leaves … wait for it …. ((((you know who))). Aha! Mystery solved!
“If there is evil in humanity, is there not also evil in God, ”
Christianity and The Problem Of Evil.
That’s the $64,000 question, isn’t it? IMHO. it is the greatest challenge to Christianity. Entire libraries could be filled with books written about it. We won’t settle THAT question today. ?
Thanks for your terrific responses.
Evil. Good. Devil. God. Free will.
It is no challenge IF you have faith. It is all addressed by the simple questions: who are you to question the will of God? Where were you when the universe was created?
Uber, you sound like the quote from the Crusades “God wills it!” So be it.
Therefore everything is allowable, permissible and forgivable because who is God to judge us since he gave us free will and created good and evil?
You truly are a heathen with no moral compass if you believe what you write here. Or you are just being provocative. As the quote from the crusades is evidence of, man, is the source of the good and evil. It is up to each of us to decide which way we will turn, which voice we will allow to command us, which voice will be pledge allegiance to.
As for me an my house, we will serve the Lord. Does not make me perfect, but my goal is stated. And believe me, with the current state of things, I am drawn to prayer and thoughts of the Lord’s word from the Bible more and more. I also appreciate the references here to Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self Reliance.”
Hey Stuck – I hadn’t thought much about Milgram since an Intro to Psych class in college, but from what I remember, and especially as recalled from recently viewing the Netflix film, it was a given that Milgram understood the capacity for evil within individuals. However, in his experiments, he wanted to research how mass murder could be institutionalized; like manufacturing appliances. He described what he called an “Agentic State” whereby people become alienated from their own actions once they submit to authority.
There is a humorous part in the film when he tells a hospital receptionist he is in the middle of his 5th heart attack and she gives him a form to fill out. He labeled that as an example of the Agentic Mind, or rather, placing obedience before common sense and/or compassion.
That’s a pretty funny story …. cuz it’s TRUE!!
Perhaps you read my story from a couple years back …. where I sliced off a nice chunk of my thumb, the hand I write with. So, there I am in the waiting room, a bloody bandage wrapped around my stumpy thumb, and before the doc would even see me …. I HAD to fill out fucken paperwork!!! Nevermind that I had been to that office before, and they already had all my info! “Sorry sir, but we must follow our procedures.” But, “I’m in pain and bleeding ya fucking cunt!!!” Yeah, like that got me better service ….
The first order issued by Angkar: “Surrender your weapons.”
One criticism of your otherwise superb article – which may seem a mere semantic quibble, but actually encompasses the fundamental issue:
. . . when reason, responsibility, and accountability, are transferred from the individual to the collective . . .
Those cannot be transferred from the individual any more than the functions of breathing, digestion and sleep can be. Any attempt to do so means that reason, responsibility, and accountability simply cease to exist. The inevitable result is the horror you so eloquently describe.
Those functions would cease on behalf of the individual, but could remain within the purview of those in authority serving the collective. Transferred is the correct term.
Anonymous was me above.
Yes, I can see you’re a bit confused.
They absolutely can be transferred. And, when they do, reason, responsibility, and accountability do cease to exist and that is the rationale used to excuse in the minds of those committing atrocities. Again, no moral compass!
Holiday in Cambodia – Dead Kennedys – a true punk classic:
So you been to school
For a year or two
And you know you’ve seen it all
In daddy’s car
Thinkin’ you’ll go far
Back east your type don’t crawl
Play ethnicky jazz
To parade your snazz
On your five grand stereo
Braggin’ that you know
How the niggers feel cold
And the slums got so much soul
It’s time to taste what you most fear
Right Guard will not help you here
Brace yourself, my dear:
It’s a holiday in Cambodia
It’s tough, kid, but it’s life
It’s a holiday in Cambodia
Don’t forget to pack a wife
You’re a star-belly sneech
You suck like a leach
You want everyone to act like you
Kiss ass while you bitch
So you can get rich
But your boss gets richer off you
Well you’ll work harder
With a gun in your back
For a bowl of rice a day
Slave for soldiers
Till you starve
Then your head is skewered on a stake
Now you can go where people are one
Now you can go where they get things done
What you need, my son:.
Is a holiday in Cambodia
Where people dress in black
A holiday in Cambodia
Where you’ll kiss ass or crack
Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, [etc]
And it’s a holiday in Cambodia
Where you’ll do what you’re told
A holiday in Cambodia
Where the slums got so much soul
https://youtu.be/KRwUlLahpiI
Most people want to be told what to do, to follow, it’s comforting, to not stick out in the crowd. Kindergarten to college… they got some stupid bitch, who doesn’t actually know how to do anything…telling you how to do things. Or a coach, who sucked at sports, teaching you how to play sports. Or a priest, who sucks dick, telling you how to find God. People don’t follow their gut, even though their gut is always right, because they’ve been listening to fucking assholes all their lives. So you push the button…shock the monkey… because that’s what “They” want.
A few notes:
1. Of the 1/3 or so of test subjects who ceased to continue at some point, do you know how many left the lab and went to Yale’s administration to get the “study” shut down?
ZERO.
Not one person. So much for people of conscience trying to stop evil.
2. This isn’t about good and evil. It’s about herding behavior. Socionomics shows that people under conditions of uncertainty will herd. They’ll do what they think others around them are doing. It’s the same reason birds flock, fish school and bovines stampede.
3. This has great relevance to other areas. For example, obedience to authority is a huge danger; airliners have crashed, killing everyone aboard, even though the flight recorded recorded the copilot asking the pilot if doing something was safe or a good idea. The likelihood of the copilot backing away from stopping the disaster was directly related to the differential in power with the captain (e.g., if the copilot was young/new and the pilot was very experienced and respected.) This gets people killed in shipping and air travel in particular. Milgram’s work is used to help train subordinates to SPEAK UP and INSIST on being considered even if they are extremely uncomfortable doing so due to power differential.
People herd. Get used to it.
If you want to be prone to “do the right thing,” you have to have thought out your responses in advance. If you wait until confronted with the situation, your decisions will be made in the limbic system of your brain, which is where you herd. It’s irresistible unless you have trained yourself to look for it. It is the seat of impulsive behavior.
When this long, manic boom finally ends and social mood plunges, the herd’s tendency will be extremely dangerous to everyone, including those who are in the middle of the herd’s stampede. The trick as I see it is to recognize what’s happening, attempt to insulate your own mind from joining in, and invisibly try to sidestep the worst. Above all, you can’t trust the mob, and (sadly) you often can’t trust yourself, either.
Years ago, in college, I went through something like the Milgram experiment as a fraternity pledge. And, no – – it did not involve a goat. I refused to do the deed – – and after much consternation on the part of the initiators(who were from another school), I was pulled out of the initiation and “fast-tracked” to the final ceremony.
Years later, at one of the brother’s wedding, we were all reminiscing about the “glory days.” The subject of the initiation came up, and I was shocked to find that out of the entire group, about fifty fraternity brothers, only two pledges in memory had refused, myself and one other. That was a depressing realization.
The question was asked as to why I refused. I didn’t answer but turned the question around to my friends: “Why didn’t you refuse?” To be honest, I wasn’t sure why I had refused – – I just knew, in that moment, that I wouldn’t do it. Having many more years under my belt, I have realized why I couldn’t do it. God.
I was raised by my father on two supporting truths. First, once you have lost your honor, you can’t get it back except by death. Second, no matter where you are, you are never alone – – God is with you – – and God is watching. Honor is living before God without guile, without excuse and in hope. To my father, death before dishonor was the code of life.
If you want to prevent future Holocausts and Killing Fields and Mandalay Bays, teach your children to fear God and do what is right…. to live with honor.
Awesome teaching. That is called having a moral compass.