Selling Alternates to Personal Responsilibity

[Rumpl4skn]

This more of a mental health issue, and related to social engineering.

I traveled with the artist that I work for to Phoenix 2 weeks ago to perform and support a homeless child program there. Multi-million dollar organization that does good work, getting kids off the streets, at a rate of about 2,000 per year. I suspected a lot of the money went into fluff issues that meant nothing, other than providing local dignitaries a chance to be identified with a "good cause" and have a nice gold plaque on their wall (or in the extreme, allow some to springboard from their 'social conscience' into politics, as a few apparently have done). But still, the effect is generally positive and I have no gripe with the premise, despite suspicions about the sincerity of some participant's motives.

Two of the speakers were a Mother - Daughter team who had been through Hell. The daughter had been sexually molested by her father at 3 years old, and at age 12 she had run to the streets and started doing heroin and having random sex with anyone who had heroin.

We spoke with them on the break, and they related the story. Intelligent people, sad story. They gave us free copies of their book, said they had just filmed a segment on Montel, which I just caught a few minutes ago. And that's when the subtle social-engineering op hit me.

The book was a decent read, but one thing becomes quite clear early on - the Mother does not wish to accept responsibility for anything, particularly allowing the sexual molestation to go on, and she blames a lot of her inaction on the state not allowing her to "force" the girl into an institution.

The book - and the show segment - pose a particularly attractive meme for anyone in this situation who's favorite answer to everything is self-victimization. It provides the "it's not your fault, you are not required to handle this" idea along with "let's give the state more power to do the parenting, and force people into institutionalization when the situation provides the opportunity."

Also, the choice of the venue was seemingly critical - Montel is the emotional lapdog of choice whenever personal responsibility is being shirked in order to further an 'approved' socio-political agenda - the polar opposite of Dr. Phil, who's instinct would have been to rip the Mother a new one over her cop-out. Dr. Phil appearances are more suited to confronting those who's designated "bad behavior" is in opposition to the desired propaganda - he's not noted for his empathy, which is why the ever-sympathetic Montel is chosen to prop up those who push the agenda. I'm certain the publishers and promo people were well prepped on where to take this "product." (The book was well-hyped, as expected.)

Yes, it appears that, US daytime talk shows are categorized into different segments to maximize the social engineering.

[Nat]

sounds like a right proper analysis to me, Rump