The “Just Enough” Policy: Behavioral Control of Collective Protest through Minimum Reward, Part 3 of a 3-part series

 

The Paradox of Advances and Losses

by Anthony Marsella, PhD

Virtually everyone, except perhaps the very young and uninformed, is in disbelief at our national situation. Most adults never imagined a world filled with so many challenges to security, health, and wellbeing. Old timers (i.e., over 70 years) ask, “How did it all happen? It’s not just the changes, but the speed of things!” They gaze into their memories, and utter those timeless words: “It seems like only yesterday.”

There are, of course, many positive changes occurring, especially in our social fabric and formation. Long denied civil and human rights are increasing across different population sectors. Advances in medical sciences and practices fill us with awe as countless lives are saved, and longevity increased. The list is endless, and should evoke optimism. But amid the advances are losses that bring a sense of insecurity and fear.

That is the paradox! The mix of advances and challenges leave us filled with ambiguity. We become immobilized as we search for answers or yield to complexity. Conscience calls, but trade-offs are calculated. Citizen activism is rising, fueled by access to information and knowledge previously unknown. Whistle blowers risk pain and punishment, as conscience rises in the face of injustice.

Who or what is the foe? We are told that the process and product of globalization has resulted in increases in health, wealth, and happiness. But is globalization really hegemonic, controlled by a few nations, corporate monopolies, and powerful individuals? Who is it benefitting?

The concentration of power, wealth, and position is, in my opinion, our greatest threat. It seeks a homogenization of social orders, cultures, and fundamental values. In the heady post WWII days, a strong sense of national pride and identity was natural. But! We were warned by Eisenhower of the impending dangers of a “Military-Industrial Complex” and the capacity of this Complex to dominate our nation’s future. Eisenhower, unfortunately, did not tell us the Complex would grow, and become a “military-industrial-congressional-educational-moral-technological-cultural-managed complex,” now resistant to change because of complexity, resiliency, and concentration of wealth, power, and position.

There is a calibrated mental calculus now in use by those with wealth, power, and position. They are firmly entrenched in every institution, and their interests are narrow and self-serving. We argue over the benefits of capitalism and other neo-liberal policies even as neo-cons re-assert their interests. And through all of this, the “Just Enough” principle is played out confusing, immobilizing, frightening a public unaccustomed to the unfolding changes. Is this a planned conspiracy? I do not know! I do know the wealthy, powerful, and positioned know each other, gather, and benefit from their relationships. I know they function in secrecy, while our privacy is removed. They set the vision. Their appointed “acolytes” implement the vision. Conspiracy? “A rose by any other name, is still a rose.”

What we have today is not much different from the gilded-age period when monopolies in banking, steel, oil, and transportation brought together “barons” in Jekyll Island, Georgia. Together, they grasped their mutual interests. Today we have a return in the form of “Big” agriculture, banking, education, energy, finance, medicine, military, pharmacology, transportation, and on and on. The times return!

The words of an old Arab saying come to mind: “The times are father to the child.” We are experiencing a time of “Just Enough!” The question remains to be answered whether “Just Enough” will be understood, questioned, and replaced by “Not Enough?” Resentment is “smoldering”! Citizens recognize the tactics being used. That may be the topic of my next commentary: Behavioral control through oppression. Ahhh, the endless historical story!

_____________________________________

Anthony Marsella, Ph.D., a member of the TRANSCEND Network, is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii, and past director of the World Health Organization Psychiatric Research Center in Honolulu. He is known nationally and internationally as a pioneer figure in the study of culture and psychopathology who challenged the ethnocentrism and racial biases of many assumptions, theories, and practices in psychology and psychiatry. In more recent years, he has been writing and lecturing on peace and social justice. He has published 15 edited books, and more than 250 articles, chapters, book reviews, and popular pieces. He can be reached at marsella@hawaii.edu.

This is the third in a three-part series originally published on https://www.transcend.org/tms/2014/06/the-just-enough-policy-behavioral-control-of-collective-protest-through-minimum-reward/

 

Marching with Occupy Boston

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison:  This week we feature two posts from our regular guest contributor, John Hess of UMass/Boston, reporting on Occupy Boston.]

Occupy Boston
Photo by Twp (Used under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

I have just returned from the demonstration to support Occupy Boston (10-10-11) and can happily report that it was a successful march of probably two or more thousand people.

Aside from flashes of déjà vu, a number of things struck me about the march.  It was sizable, though there is certainly room for growth, growth that will almost certainly come.

There was a festive but serious atmosphere about the march.  Simply being there with so many others who shared the same outlook was exhilarating.  Though there was a fair amount of grey hair and grey beards in the crowd, and a fair amount of union representation, the large majority were students, or of that age.

These kids were not naïve thrill seekers or copycats.  The ones I spoke with were sharp, aware, and committed, and above all enthusiastic.  As we used to say, good vibes were everywhere.

For me, the march was a stunning and unmistakable refutation of some of the myths that have surrounded the Occupy Wall Street wave starting to sweep the country.  One myth is that the students are naïvely copying protests of the ‘60s.  The second is that what the protesters want is amorphous, airy, or uncertain.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Although there is no agreed upon platform of practical demands yet, this is in part because many of the protesters seem fully aware that both political parties are in the arms of Wall Street (as Mark Twain famously said in the Gilded Age, “We have the best government money can buy”), and that an appeal to Congress for reform is probably not the way to go at this moment.  Nevertheless, there is a clear sense of agreement in political outlook, and this is best reflected in the chants and slogans of the march today.

John Hess, Senior Lecturer in English and American Studies, University of Massachusetts, Boston