Blog Archives

Part 49

4/25/2016

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 49: It Takes Two to Tango

Why do we believe in what we believe? Perhaps because as believers—whether we believe in alien abduction, self-flagellation, the shroud of Turin, virgins in paradise, or Nigerian get-rich-quick schemes—we basically consume, then mercilessly get consumed by, a belief. If that's not bad enough, then we may have to defend our beliefs with our lives, for heaven's sake.

The problem is that as consumers we do not always act rationally. In fact, more than often, we act irrationally. Throughout our adult lives, each of us must have experienced some kinds of buyer's remorse, that familiar sense of regret after making a purchase (or voting for a politician). I certainly have more than my fair share of such regrets.

As stated in Part 3 (Interpersonal, Political and Financial Stockholm Syndrome), every year, thousands of Black Friday shoppers camp out over the Thanksgiving holiday, valiantly enduring the cold, rainy, and windy November darkness to secure a place in front of the line, merely to get the most desirable "doorbuster deals" which are actually sub-standard products, specifically manufactured with lower-quality specifications just for Black Friday.

This irrationality has been a fascinating subject among prominent scholars. In a paper published in the NBER (National Bureau Of Economic Research) Working Paper Series titled The New Science of Pleasure (2013), economics professor Daniel McFadden of University of California Berkeley admits the many ways economics fails to explain how consumers make decisions—and what economics can learn from psychology, anthropology, biology, and neurology. Now, how often does an economics professor admit that the science of economics fails to explain consumer behaviors? Well, he is not alone.

Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at Duke University, is another scholar who focused his attention to consumer behavior four years before McFadden. In The End of Rational Economics, published in the Harvard Business Review of July-August 2009, Ariely, begins by stating the widely-accepted standard assumption that "human beings are capable of making rational decisions and that markets and institutions, in the aggregate, are healthily self-regulating." However, the 2008 global economic crisis, argues Ariely, "has shattered these two articles of faith and forced us to confront our false assumptions about the way markets, companies, and people work." His conclusion is that the emerging discipline of behavioral economics can help businesses better defend against foolishness and waste.

Foolishness and waste! How do we defend ourselves against them is surely a worthy topic. If there is a lesson learned in behavioral economics, it can certainly be applied in the study of religion and ideology. No science is an island. The latest research and analysis in economics, psychology, biology, anthropology and neurology show that when it comes to making decisions, people are anything but rational. Foolishness and waste are everywhere.

We may think that Homo sapiens is the most intelligent species roaming the earth, but our irrationality is inherent within us. If we believe in something ridiculous—whether in economics, religion or any subject matter—we simply cannot only blame it to the false belief or the manipulative messenger or the dead prophet. We also have to blame … our own delusion. After all, it takes two to tango. "When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity," wrote Robert M. Pirsig in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values (1974). "When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called a Religion."

[To be continued.]

Johannes Tan, Indonesian Translator & Conference Interpreter

Part 48

4/18/2016

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 48: Silence is Not Golden

The worst crime was dared by a few, willed by more, tolerated by all.
-CORNELIUS TACITUS (55-117)

After citing the brutal killing of Bangladeshi law student and blogger Nazimuddin Samad in Dhaka (Part 47: The High Price of Obedience and Hypocrisy), it is only appropriate to recognize a small sliver of good news about a courageous Saudi anchorwoman.

As reported last week in The Jerusalem Post and other news outlets, in a blistering 3-minute address which allegedly interrupted routine programming, anchorwoman Nadine Al-Budair of Rotana Khalijiya Television lashed out against Muslim apologists who claim that terrorists have no connection to Islam, thus washing their hands conveniently with impunity. On Sunday, April 10, 2016, she implored fellow Muslims to acknowledge that "we are the ones who gave birth" to the terrorists who committed recent attacks in Europe" as well as "to stop shedding their conscience and start feeling a collective shame." "Whenever terrorism massacres peaceful civilians, the smart alecks and the hypocrites vie with one another in saying that these people do not represent Islam or the Muslims," she begins, then adding: "Perhaps one of them could tell us who does represent Islam and the Muslims." (The English translation was provided by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute.)

Then the unavoidable crescendo: "It is we who blow ourselves up. It is we who blow others up," Nadine Al-Budair charged. "We must admit that they are everywhere, that their nationality is Arab, and that they adhere to the religion of Islam," she asserted.

Al-Budair's bravery certainly needs to be appreciated, considering that in patriarchal Saudi Arabia, a woman's place is traditionally pushed into the background, certainly not in the spotlight to openly criticize the perverted ideology of Wahhabism and Salafi Jihadism. Except for the occasionally lip service, the deafening silence of "moderate" Muslim leaders against the inexplicable hatred nurtured by the Wahhabists and Salafi Jihadists applies not only in Saudi Arabia, but in other Muslim countries as well. The demonstration in Dhaka to urge the Bangladeshi authorities to take the killing seriously one day after Nazimuddin Samad was hacked to death is one thing. Concrete criminal prosecution by the so-called secular Bangladeshi government to charge the killers (also those of previous secular bloggers) is another one.

And there lies the crux of the problem: so far no Muslim governments have been courageous enough to openly condemn the perverted ideology of Wahhabism and Salafi Jihadism, because it's considered "un-Islamic". To the outside world, many Muslim governments tend to project a moderate or secular image to secure political legitimacy and financial aids. Within their borders, to paraphrase Al-Budair, they shed their conscience, and let the extremists persecute the moderates.

"The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people," Martin Luther King once said, "but the silence over that by the good people." This maxim was echoed by human rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali: "There are times when silence becomes an accomplice to injustice." The late Singaporean leader Lee Kuan Yew (1923-2015) went further into specifics by declaring that moderate Muslims should "own" the (radicalization) problem. According to Lee, the responsibility to solve this (radicalization) problem lies with the moderate Muslims. "Only the Muslims themselves, those with moderate, more modern approach to life—can fight the fundamentalists for control of the Muslim soul. Muslims must counter the terrorist ideology that is based on a perverted interpretation of Islam." He added that Muslims who refuse to take on this responsibility are "ducking issue and allowing the extremists to hijack not just Islam, but the whole of the Muslim community."

Thus kudos to anchorwoman Nadine Al-Budair for her incomparable bravery to speak out and refusal to be silenced. She exemplifies that which was emphasized by German anti-Nazi theologian, Lutheran pastor, and social activist Martin Niemöller (1892-1984):

"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent; I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent; I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."

[To be continued.]
Johannes Tan, Indonesian Translator & Conference Interpreter

Part 47

4/11/2016

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 47: The High Price of Obedience and Hypocrisy

There are times when silence becomes an accomplice to injustice.
-AYAAN HIRSI ALI

I cannot continue this exploration in good conscience without acknowledging the ultimate sacrifice of Nazimuddin Samad, 28, a Bangladeshi law student and blogger. As reported in The Guardian (April 7, 2016), last week Samad was hacked to death by at least four assailants shouting Allahu Akbar (God is greatest) as they attacked him on a busy road near Jagannath University, where he studied. Samad is not the first blogger killed viciously by radical Islamists; sadly, he will not be the last. He had been on a hit list of 84 atheist bloggers that a group of radical Islamists drew up and sent to the Bangladesh interior ministry. His murder was only the latest in a series of killings of secular activists and bloggers in the country.

The day after, demonstrators in Dhaka urged the Bangladeshi authorities to take the killing seriously. They accuse the government of having fostered a culture of impunity in the past. In 2015, suspected militants hacked at least four atheist bloggers and a secular publisher to death in one of a series of targeted killings in the Muslim-majority country. The Guardian article reports that though the Police arrested members of a banned group suspected as the perpetrators, none has yet been prosecuted.

As stated in Part 44 (On Religious-Political Holy Alliances), collusion between political and religious leaders have been the norm instead of the exception. The Bangladeshi government simply imitates the Saudi monarch in Saudi Arabia, who has entered a "Holy Alliance" with the Wahhabist movement since the late 18th century. In a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" deal of Koranic proportions, the Wahhabists sought protection from the Saudi royal family. Tit for tat: The Saudi royal family would endorse the Wahhabist austere form of pure Islam and to return the favor, the Saudi royal family would get political legitimacy and regular tithes from Wahhabist followers.

The most critical instrument in Holy Alliances is the bogeyman (often spelled as boogeyman). Throughout history, authoritarian regimes all over the world have been nurturing, then incestuously colluding with bogeymen to advance their political legitimacy for the sake of political stability and unity. The Oxford Dictionary defines bogeyman as "an imaginary evil spirit, referred to typically to frighten children." Parenting may or may not include the utilization of a bogeyman to enforce children's perpetual fear and obedience. Thus, in a political science context, governments may or may not utilize bogeymen to unite citizens and enforce their blind obedience. And that is exactly the problem. As pointed out by American historian and social activist Howard Zinn (1922-2010): "Historically, the most terrible things—war, genocide, and slavery—have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience."

For Adolf Hitler, the Jews were the bogeymen. For Catholics, the Protestants (and vice versa). For communists, the capitalists (and vice versa). For Shiites, the Sunnis (and vice versa). For royalists, the Republicans (and vice versa). For liberals, the Conservatives (and vice versa). During the Cold War, fascist military juntas in South and Central America employed the bogeyman strategy to persecute any opposition. Anyone who dared to speak out against a regime were labeled as "communists" (whether real or not) then summarily made to "disappear". Likewise, several Muslim countries still employ the bogeyman strategy to persecute non-Muslims and infidels. Mind you, authoritarian regimes do not necessarily apply the bogeyman strategy because they feel threatened by vocal critics (whether secular bloggers or other groups); instead, the ultimate objective is to unite and consolidate their political base.

As aptly described by David Tormsen in 10 Sordid Stories Of The Saudi Royal Family (June 23, 2015): "Absolute monarchies generate more crazy stories than democratic republics. While the common people of the Saudi state are subject to strict rules and tender mercies of the religious police, the royal family are subject to no such restrictions and live lives of luxury and adventure. Instead, the biggest threats to the Saudi princes and princesses are often themselves."

In one of the examples, Tormsen illustrates the preposterous level of mind-blowing hypocrisy: "Halloween is banned in the Saudi kingdom, as are most foreign holidays, for their "un-Islamic" nature. Every October, shopping malls are patrolled by religious police on the lookout for outlets selling costumes. But this prohibition doesn’t extend to the royal family. According to US diplomatic cables released through Wikileaks, there is a wild party scene in Jeddah under the protection of Saudi princes. In 2009, Prince Faisal al Thunayan held an underground Halloween party at his residence, inviting over 150 young Saudi men and women. Prince Faisal is a Cadet prince, meaning that he is not in line for the throne but still enjoys all the protection and perks of being a member of the royal family. The religious police were kept at bay by khawi, young Nigerian bodyguards of a similar age who grow up with their princes and serve for life and are considered utterly loyal.

Despite Saudi prohibitions on alcohol, Filipino bartenders served a cocktail punch made from sadiqi, a local moonshine. Top-shelf liquor bottles filled with sadiqi were on display. The event, co-sponsored by US energy drink company Kizz-me, featured dancing, costumes, and a DJ. The American consulate officials attending the event heard by word of mouth that many of the female guests were actually prostitutes hired for the event and also that cocaine and hashish use is common at these kind of parties."

Alcohol, prostitutes, cocaine and hashish. The Saudi royal family can get away with all of that, never mind the "pure" Islam's strict theology of Wahhabism. What Wahhabism? Yet Nazimuddin Samad was hacked to death only because in his FaceBook profile he courageously declared that he has no religion. This explains why the Bangladeshi government have fostered a culture of impunity towards past perpetrators. Most likely there must be a tit for tat, Saudi-style, incestuous pact between the Bangladeshi government and the religious vigilantes. Ironically, the assassination proves the truth of Nazimuddin Samad's statement that "Religion and race are [an] invention of the savage and uncivil people." Unfortunately, he was cowardly murdered by the very same savage and uncivil people in the name of, what else, religion.

[To be continued.]
Johannes Tan, Indonesian Translator & Conference Interpreter

Part 46

4/4/2016

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 46: The Art of Overcompensation

All forms of dedication, devotion, loyalty and self surrender are in essence a desperate clinging to something which might give worth and meaning to our futile, spoiled lives.
-ERIC HOFFER

In the previous Part, I concluded by stating the law of unintended consequences in the religious industrial complex. Religion does not necessarily improve individual responsibility and accountability. In fact, history has shown us again and again that organized religions, to an alarming extent, somehow, accidentally, institutionalize irresponsibility and impunity. As observed by African-American social reformer, abolitionist, and author Frederick Douglass (1818-1895) in Part 43: "The most brutal slaveholders were always the most devout." Not surprisingly, the most corrupt politicians have always been the most devout. Idem ditto: The most religious societies tend to be more exposed to violent crime rates, high infant mortality rates, poverty rates and rampant corruption than the most secular ones. Somehow organized religions seem to provide a convenient bullet-proof shield against individual responsibility and accountability.

Part 7 (A Little Old Lady and an Atheist Man) cites two separate studies which confirmed that atheists are under-represented in the U.S. prison system population, while so-called believers are over-represented. The Corruption Perception Index (CPI)—annually published by Transparency International (Berlin) since 1995—ranks the least religious countries with high numbers of atheists-per-capita (Denmark, New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Singapore) consistently on the top, while the most religious countries with high numbers of believers-per-capita (Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen) consistently on the bottom.

Truly, are all these aforementioned anomalies merely mind-blowing coincidences, or do we fail to connect the dots?

To say that organized religions beget corruption and fanaticism, is to state the obvious. Yet our 21st-century society has been very good in perfecting denialism, which is defined as "irrational action that withholds the validation of an historical experience or event, by persons refusing to accept an empirically verifiable reality."

Indeed a less direct version of denialism is cognitive dissonance, coined by American social psychologist Leon Festinger (1919-1989). Festinger defined cognitive dissonance as "the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the time, performs an action that is contradictory to one or more beliefs, ideas or values, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values." Simply put, cognitive dissonance is the gap between one's sugarcoated beliefs and the bitter Truth.

Martinique-born psychiatrist and philosopher Frantz Omar Fanon (1925-1961) who was influential in post-colonial studies and critical theory, highlighted this cognitive dissonance in his "Black Skin, White Masks" (Peau Noire, Masques Blancs, 1952). "Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong," Fanon wrote. "When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't fit in with the core belief."

Indeed no one put this universal aversion against the bitter Truth better than French mathematician, physicist, and philosopher Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) in his Pensees:

Man would fain be great and sees that he is little;
would fain be happy and sees that he is miserable;
would fain be perfect and sees that he is full of imperfections;
would fain be the object of the love and esteem of men,
and sees that his faults merit only their aversion and contempt.
The embarrassment wherein he finds himself
produces in him the most unjust and criminal passions imaginable,
for he conceives a mortal hatred against that truth
which blames him and convinces him of his faults.

Naturally denialism generates defense mechanisms which are psychological strategies utilized by our unconscious mind to deny, manipulate, or even distort reality as a defense against anxiety to maintain our self interests. Denialism, cognitive dissonance and their respective defense mechanisms are thus manifested in paradoxical behaviors. In this regard, American philosopher Eric Hoffer (1898-1983) provided an illuminating explanation in The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (1951). "Faith in a holy cause," Hoffer wrote, "is to a considerable extent a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves." Then further on: "The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready is he to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause."

Welcome to the Art of Overcompensation.

Thus the brutal slaveholders, the corrupt politicians, the theocratic societies, the over-represented believers in prison population, the most corrupt countries as per CPI, the pedophilic priests, the barbaric jihadists—all dissected surgically by Hoffer in just two sentences.

[To be continued.]

Johannes Tan, Indonesian Translator & Conference Interpreter

Part 49

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 49: It Takes Two to Tango

Part 48

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 48: Silence is Not Golden

Part 47

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 47: The High Price of Obedience and Hypocrisy

Part 46

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 46: The Art of Overcompensation

Continuously exploring literal, semantic, idiomatic, contextual, metaphorical, symptomatic, conceptual and metaphysical meanings of everything worth thinking about.

Archives

Categories

Part 49

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima SyndromePart 49: It Takes Two to Tango

Part 48

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima SyndromePart 48: Silence is Not Golden

Part 47

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima SyndromePart 47: The High Price of Obedience and Hypocrisy

Part 46

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima SyndromePart 46: The Art of Overcompensation

Continuously exploring literal, semantic, idiomatic, contextual, metaphorical, symptomatic, conceptual and metaphysical meanings of everything worth thinking about.

Archives

Categories

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 49: It Takes Two to Tango

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 48: Silence is Not Golden

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 47: The High Price of Obedience and Hypocrisy

Between Stockholm Syndrome and Lima Syndrome
Part 46: The Art of Overcompensation