psychiatrictimes.com/view/what…

What Does “Rat Park” Teach Us About Addiction?
Jun 10, 2019
Lloyd I. Sederer, MD

..."What we can do, a needed and effective approach, derives from what has Alexander taught us. Humans, not just rats, need to be part of a community, encouraged to relate and experience the support of others. This is about as basic a psychological truth as exists, yet does it find application in clinicians’ offices?

How many of us, during clinical encounters with patients, focus on their families, their social communities, their sources of human contact and support?

Do we ask questions like: Who do you care about in your life? Who cares about you? When was the last time you spent time with people who are good for you-instead of those who hurt you and foster your drug taking?

These questions may lead to others, such as: Who can you call or spend time with in the next couple of days? What gives you pause in calling or making the kind of human contact needed to enable recovery? What do you imagine these people would think and feel if you did make contact? How might that encounter go-where it was not about asking for help, or money, but instead simply, and most importantly, about re-igniting their friendship, their attachment to you, and their wish for your life to go well? Their interest is one way to achieve the dignity, purpose, meaning, and life of contribution so critical to the hard work of recovery.

And so on, as the conversation may continue.

The science of medicine, with the exceptional value it attributes to symptoms, diagnoses, and evidence-based therapies, has had the unintended effect of eclipsing what we know and can do about the benefits of human interaction and attachment."...

from an exchange on LinkedIn

linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:l…

A: why fight? Fighting just glorifies violence and discord. Why not find out what these grievances really are, why these people think they want authoritative rule against their proclaimed love of freedom, why they embrace violence against people who otherwise would mean them no harm? Why not rebel against dichotomy and find common ground in our common vulnerable humanity and work (not fight) for better relationships, communication, cooperation for common goals? I see so many stories of hate and violent temperament being turned by loving notice. People want to be seen, want attention and approbation and as with the children we all still are, if we don't get good attention we'll opt for the bad. Fascism is just another ism, another deadening of humanity which is better approached with good work than more fighting and destruction.

B: - this indeed is a noble venture.
I approach this question with nuance.
There is a time and place when your stated approach is apt with its greatest potential for success it could possibly have for that that moment, and weighed against the conditions of other moments.

But i consider our timeline of the #polycrisis accelerating its development right now; and its calamitous impact

I don't think we have time to waste continuing efforts to turn fascists if the first go fails

I also think most moments aren't ripe for turning them.
They are to be defeated because reason does not work.

Only a personal experience contrary to their conditioned mind-narrative can stir them from their brain rot. And those moments are uncommonly avail.

A: yes, direct experience of people who are kind, who are different from them and happy to help, to converse civilly and with good humor and good will -- to learn these skills we must be exposed

B: you think if you were around in 1943, say, and could interact with Hitler for 5mins, or even an hour, that being kind to Hitler and making him feel valued ,as well as you were able, would've convinced him to end his genocidal campaign and his military invasions, and his fascist style rule over Germany?

Or how much time do you think you would've needed with him to turn him off from his harmfufl ambitions?

Could you turn David Duke into a loving advocate for inclusion and ally for diversity, and for democratization of political power?

How long would you have needed with Mussolini to dissuade him from fascism? Or his descendant who today leads literally the same fascist movement reborn?

What about Bolsonaro, Orban, Netanyahu, Xi, and other prominent authoritarians today?

And these are just leaders; there are many more authoritarian followers.

In the time it takes to turn them, what's happening to Earth's life systems??

What about inspiring the apolitical & disenchanted to re-engage with their civic duty & political involvement?
If they joined Leftists, and centrists moved Left, wed actually outnumber the rightwingers easily and could just lead to peace with our collective power.

so if we instead win over the disengaged and disheartened to actively participate in self-governance (which I'd argue we can do by adopting legit progressive policies, and stop adhering to corporatist "centrist moderate" incremental performative do-little-to-foundationally-improve-things bullshht)

...but if we materially improve people's lives in policies, it'll not only inspire the disengaged & disenchanted, but it'll win over those authoritarian followers who enable & empower fascists & fascism.

Imo, we haven't time to be worrying about winning over the authoritarians and fascists.
They are the minority.

But the plurality have given up on participating because THEY feel forgotten & ignored.

That is a MUCH lighter lift to win them over than the fascists.

All we have to do is elect the #Aggressiveaprpgressive candidates, pressure them & shame them when they do wrong, praise & thank them when they do right.
Fight for democratic principles.
Use majority power.
Fight for majority power.

And those policies will win over the ones you wanna be kind to.

I want our policies to be kind to them.

I haven't time to worry about individual actions.

I won't convince them.
They need to experience Leftist policies.

A: it's not about turning individual leaders because they would have no power without that huge crying mass of people demanding their grievances be avenged
and not 5 min, an hour, but every day, every week, every year, putting that idea out into the great swirling world of human belief

B: so we haven't time then to try to convince all those people.
- esp considering each one will take a project amt of time. Maybe years.

It's possible that the reason you and i see very different timelines before us is due to our views on the ecological #polycrisis

you asked
"why instead? Isn't this kind policy worthwhile for all?"

• because our time/energy is better spent, imo, focusing on the more easily reachable people. It's lower hanging fruit.

To win over the disheartened & disenfranchised requires we pass policies that materially improve people's lives.
(no more bullshht neoliberal economic policies that centrists swoon over, but stupidly, frustratingly & stubbornly don't understand neoliberalism leads to fascism)

This inspires them that politics & engagement can make a real difference. & participation is worthwhile.

To win over the fascists & fascist sympathizers ALSO requires we pass policies that materially improve people's lives.
But until we can pass such policies, these folks are vehemently opposed and consider such policies literally as evil, on a biblical scale.
As you stipulated, they can take years to shake from their belief systems.

So defeating them is the objective, while wooing the disengaged

A: yes, but why win over those who are already ready, maybe just needing some leadership, direction,, specific projects, to be gathered into working groups, and so forth. You seem to think my kindness proposal is what, weird, difficult, something taking enormous time and energy? No, it's just living from that place of nonjudgement and openness to real communication, every day, with everyone. We have so little time because we are all in panic mode, lashing out, looking for war. What this world being murdered needs is a different viewpoint which eschews violence and offers its social energy to uplift, to bring together, bit by bit until the tipping point carries us over.