|
Proprietrix -> RE: Witch Hunts (6/6/2006 10:45:05 AM)
|
(Fast reply)
Actually, I see it as quite simple.
The person who originally opens such a thread isn’t normally on an escapade to slam the name of someone else.
They are looking for validation of their own beliefs.
And unfortunately, going about it in a fashion that becomes detrimental to someone else.
It’s a lack of ability to express oneself in an honest fashion, in an appropriate time and place.
I personally hate and abhor XYZ practice. I find it immoral and it goes against everything I believe in. It stirs something negative inside me. I want to shout to the world "I HATE XYZ." and I want the world to validate my emotion.
Instead of taking that anger and focusing it in a productive fashion (perhaps I could lobby my local legislative body, perhaps I could pass on my value system to my offspring, perhaps I could start a support group for those I perceive as victims of XYZ)….
instead, I take that anger and selfishly look for validation Who else here hates XYZ? Let’s point out all the negative aspects of XYZ.. You know, as a matter of fact, I saw someone doing XYZ the other day. I speculate that XYZ causes all this horrible outcome. I’ll even frame my hatred as a positive thing. I’ll say I hate XYZ because it harms a certain individual, or group of individuals, or it oppresses us, takes away our civil liberties, or leaves people dead in the gutter. Now I’m showing you the face of the victim so that I can play on your emotions and you’ll agree with this horrible XYZ that the evil predator/perpetrator is causing. Now I’ve made more seats in my band wagon, because I presented the most negative view of XYZ imaginable.
And the troops who agree with me coming marching in to back me up.
I got exactly what I wanted, validation of my feeling.
It’s really very selfish and one-sided. It’s very similar to what either side in a court room would do. Exaggerate everything as much as possible. Inflate every detail to the most extreme that you can so that you can tug on the heart strings of the jury to get them to take that particular side of the argument.
Most of the time, it’s the plaintiff who starts it. They start making accusations against an anonymous defendant. And normally it’s the "plaintiff on behalf of the state". I rarely actually see someone come on here as "the victim" complaining.
Most of the time, there really is no victim to speak of. That’s precisely what makes it a witch hunt. People take it upon themselves to bring down a predator when in reality, there has been no harm done to anyone. They created a victim in their own mind. Because with no victim, there can be no predator, and no harm. With no victim, there can be no cause for the hatred in the first place. They have to create a victim in their mind and make it a believable victim for others to emotionally attach to. Once everyone has conceived the victim, the predator, and the harm, then they can all move forward to the whole point of the witch hunt…
validating one another’s hatred.
Those who aren’t buying into, can stand back and clearly see there is no victim, there is no predator, and there is no harm. They are the ones who can clearly see a witch hunt for what it truly is: the persecution of an innocent person who did no harm.
|
|
|
|
