- This topic has 19 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
The Nazis persecuted Jews in the 1930s and 40s, unfairly blaming them for Germany’s defeat in WWI. Do you think that there are groups within the US that are being unfairly blamed for the US’s problems today? What did you think about Milgram’s experiment? How do you think knowledge of this experiment can be used to positively influence behaviour? What are some ways to use this knowledge effectively in our families and communities?
-
As a Canadian, I won’t comment on groups being unfairly blamed within the US for the US’s problems. I have a general idea, but haven’t followed politics closely enough to comment on that part of the question.
What I understand from Lesson 1 is the lesson to not obey in advance calls for people to think more critically of their actions and behaviours and not to follow directions or believe what’s been told to them blindly. Unfortunately, history and Milgram’s experiment have shown that people do follow direction without thought. And we have also seen the lack of critical thinking in believing soundbites on social media without proper fact checking. So, not only do history and science inform us of this tendency in human behaviour, we have seen it ourselves online.
What is shocking is the extent of obedience and how far people go when it is not just expected, but perhaps just allowed or not actively stopped. Timothy Snyder mentions with Kristallnacht and the events that led up to it: “Crucially, people who were not Nazis looked on with interest and amusement”, “Crucially, others who were not Nazis joined in the theft”, “when German troops invaded the country and Gentile neighbors started riots at Jewish homes, Austrian Jews began to commit suicide.” And Milgram’s experiment demonstrates the same extreme behaviours carried out without thought or compassion when it seems that authorities demand or expect it.
It’s such a sad and terrifying finding and I can only hope that by sharing this knowledge enables people to recognize these types of situations when they potentially evince themselves in the future.
I do think that by having a book club discussion of “On Tyranny” helps to raise awareness of this lesson and thereby spreads this knowledge to other readers and hopefully their families and communities through them.
-
I’m also not as tapped into US politics as most of our American friends are, so I don’t have a comprehensive list of groups. However, I have noticed a number of examples of groups within the US that are being unfairly persecuted. The first group is illegal immigrants. A second example are transgender folks, (Texas has just introduced a bill to make being trans or non-binary a state jail felony https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=HB3817). A third example was just mentioned in Heather Cox Richardson’s recent post detailing Musk’s use of the term “NPCs” for political opponents and people who disagree with him (This term comes from the gaming world and refers to a nonplayer character, a character that follows a scripted path and cannot think or act on its own, and is there only to populate the world of the game for the actual players. https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/march-9-2025).
Ultimately, I believe these people and groups are identified as a way to dehumanize them by creating an “us vs them” mentality. It seems to be a common tactic to create an enemy consisting of “them”, where all blame and hate can be pointed. And I believe that Milgram’s experiment demonstrates how easily people are willing to dehumanize others, particularly when authority figures initiate the process of dehumanization.
There is another experiment, or performance as she calls it, that demonstrates how quickly people seem to switch off their empathy and dehumanize others. In 1974, artist Marina Abramović performed “Rhythm 0”, and just six days ago, YouTuber “Norme” live streamed his attempt to break a world record by standing still for 38 hours. In both these examples, we see how easily and how quickly people stop seeing other people as human and instead treat them as objects, often with destructive intentions. (Read more about these experiences here.)
As we’ve said many times in our book club discussions here, knowledge is power. First acquiring this knowledge allows us to do two things to positively influence our families and communities: share knowledge and model empathy.
Research studies suggest that people can cultivate empathy (https://www.apa.org/monitor/2021/11/feature-cultivating-empathy). Knowing about Milgram’s experiment and other examples of dehumanization helps not only to inoculate against the behaviour in ourselves, but also to raise awareness in others of the intent behind unfair persecution of minority groups. With a better understanding of this tactic, humans who are capable of empathizing with others (and I believe a great majority of humans are good and do have empathy for others) can stand up against unfair treatment of minority groups. It’s a similar situation with bullies who pick on those who seem weaker or smaller. If all those around the bully recognize the harmful behaviour and can empathize with the victim, bystanders will not stay silent and allow the bullying to continue.
On a related note, disinformation is often used to cultivate hate and unfairly assign blame to minority groups. Evidence based research has also demonstrated that teaching about disinformation inoculates against future acceptance of disinformation and that acting with empathy towards those who are questioning their past behaviours can help people to recognize and understand disinformation. (Read more about strategies to combat disinformation here.)
-
I agree with your identification of three groups being persecuted. I would add LBTGQ.
-
-
I do feel there are groups in the US that are being targeted. One group would be the immigrants in our country. Immigrants are being lumped into one category whether they are here legally, are waiting for the legal process to be completed, or are in fact here illegally. It was the Republican administration that began the rumor that immigrants in Ohio were eating their neighbor’s pet cats and dogs. Immigrants are blamed for our drug problems. They are blamed for our high crime rates. People have been told that countries are unlocking their asylum doors and sending their mentally ill people to the states. People of color continue to struggle for equality and the LGBTQ+ community is constantly under attack. Even in this day and age women are bleeding out in hospital parking lots because the state they live in has such outrageous laws about treating a woman who is pregnant. Doctors are afraid of losing their license or being jailed if they treat these women.
The Milgram experiment shows us that people will act in isolation as well as with a group to cause someone harm. “Stand back and stand by” were tRumps words to the Proud Boys during a presidential debate in 2020. These words set into motion the actions of militant groups around the nation for the January 6, 2021 insurrection against the Capitol. I believe that many others were swept up into the mob mentality when their president said he would be with them at the Capitol.
We must educate ourselves with fact and question leaders concerning actions they want us to take. We cannot follow blindly behind a leader or government. Powerful people are often greedy people who think of themselves and their agenda only. They will do and say anything to sway their audience into believing them. We need to listen to learn when leaders are campaigning. Campaign speeches are loaded with snappy phrases that catch one’s interest and we become caught up in the moment and don’t ask, “How will that happen? What will that look like? What happens afterwards?” We get caught up in the excitement of the moment with the music, the jingles, the crowd’s enthusiasm and we cease to think.
One of the most effective ways to get a message across, to have people hear your words, is to keep emotion out of your voice. The first thing we hear is tone of voice – emotion- not words. We then form our responses based on what we perceive the speaker to be saying because of his tone of voice. Once our minds go on the defensive only arguments will follow and learning will stop. We need to ask questions that will help us understand what motivates someone’s decision. It’s amazing what we can learn when we try to see something from someone else’s perspective.
-
Excellent point about tone Libby. I agree with you completely that being able to communicate is an important part of sharing knowledge. We can learn it for ourselves and realize that we have to share the knowledge, but then offering the message to another person is almost an art, especially for someone who doesn’t necessarily have any authority or influence. So the first part is building a relationship that enables one to have some influence, and then identifying the best way to deliver messages so that they’re well received – something that likely differs between individuals. So it’s not an easy task! There is quite a lot of work and skill (EQ?) involved in teaching effectively. This is where teachers can shine outside of the classroom, I think.
I think you nailed it with how defensive minds refuse to learn and how much power there is in being able to see things from another person’s perspective.
-
-
Lots of insightful comments here.
I would add the following groups being blamed for “problems” in the U.S. I believe these were historically targeted during authoritarian periods in the U.S. and in ascendent authoritarian regimes:
“Elites”-a sufficiently fluid definition to cover all kinds of perceived grievances
Academic institutions and faculty/staff
Scientific or other experts
Media-especially if it publishes opposing views or unflattering information
Artists and writers
Lawyers and judges
People of color and those with visible disabilities
People who are poor and/or rely on a social safety net.The Milgram study would never be permitted today. It contains so many egregious violations of research principles and subjects’ rights, it would never make it past a human subject review board. I am uncertain how many of the real “subjects” would have continued to inflict pain IF they had been clearly told they were free to stop any time with no questions or consequences. For me, the interpretation is that it is possible to construct an authority structure that few have the courage or resources to defy.
I believe there are people who support the current administration, either specifically because it taps into their prejudice or grievance or because they are/were willing to overlook its harms to others as collateral damage on the way to achieving some desired end. Some may even be incapable of empathy; they would have competed Milgram’s research with pleasure. I see the greater risk being that people accept what the administration creates as their authority or believe themselves without the resources or agency to challenge what the administration claims. The path forward is to support those individuals and groups who do step up and to convey to others that they have rights and ask them to consider where they have agency. To compare this to Milgram’s study, to give people permission to say “No more.”
I agree that cultivating empathy is important and necessary. I am working on it.
-
Jane, I absolutely agree with you regarding the path forward. Do you know of any individuals or groups doing this work type of work?
Libby, I also agree that effective communication is key. The stories you’ve shared of how you’ve connected with your students to help them learn what they needed to know are quite special and demonstrate the thought, effort and compassion needed to bridge gaps.
-
Jane, I am sure I know only a few. These are the ones I have supported in some way:
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)-this is an organization with a proven track record of defending individual rights, even of unpopular groups
Democracy Docket is the work of Marc Elias-his law firm is best known for its work defending voting rights.
I think one can support the writers and publishers of media that consistently challenges the authoritarian efforts of the administration, much of this is available free (even reading them makes a statement) but subscribing gives them more clout and financial resources. I like “The Contrarian” “Civil Discourse” and Heather Cox Richardson and Andy Borowitz. While he is usually noted for his short, satirical pieces, he is the writer of a well regarded book, “Profiles in Ignorance.” And one of my favorite media analysts is Margaret Sullivan-link here.
https://margaretsullivan.substack.com/p/as-others-buckle-the-ap-resists-trumps
Cheryl Meadows previously reported on her work with Indivisible. There are chapters all over the U.S. I am not a big joiner but find their work and public events helpful reminders that there is company in resisting.
I hope others identify their favorites.
-
Thank you!
-
-
In one of the interviews linked here in one of the posts on Maria Ressa, she pointed to citizens winning the Nobel peace prize for 2022 (it was awarded to Ales Bialiatski, a Belarusian human rights activist, Memorial, a Russian human rights organisation, and Center for Civil Liberties, a Ukrainian human rights organisation; the Nobel organization states that the Peace Prize laureates represent civil society in their home countries).
This is where I think I’ve come to realize that a more active role from citizens is required for democracies to remain intact. We can definitely look to, applaud and support individuals and organizations such as those listed by Jane and Cheryl, but it may be the case that more is needed from every citizen considering the enormous challenges we face with respect to tech and media. Clearly our dependence on, and an owner’s ability to manipulate, technology show how difficult the challenges truly are.
But as pervasive and addictive as tech is, it does not compare to in-person human connection. Or even trusted relationships that may not even be in-person. The strength and influence brought about by meaningful connection built on empathy, trust, effective communication and time are more powerful than algos and disinformation. This makes me feel that there is potential, and even a need, for the path forward to include all us taking on a more active role in sharing knowledge, guiding morals, teaching empathy and fighting back against tyranny.
Imagine the power of Tupperware parties or religious outreach programs, based on fun, social activities, but having a subtle purpose (to sell products/encourage church membership and donations – and in this case, just reinforcing strong morals and resistance against disinformation). We can even imagine book clubs in this same respect, and what is happening right here, right now, to be movements along these lines. These social relationships are much more powerful and persuasive than memes and soundbites, in my opinion. And maybe the lessons learned from our personal relationships that reinforce strong morals will stand up to immoral direction from tyrants when the time comes that we need to find the courage to do so.
-
One way I look at this is to categorize our society into different groups based on levels of activity with respect to activism for human rights, with the top level including organizations like the ACLU and the bottom level being fascists.
So the levels may be:
1. ACLU, Democracy Docket, Timothy Snyder, Maria Ressa and all those who have been fighting for human rights for years and decades. We can support these organizations with monetary donations/subscriptions and perhaps volunteerism.
2. Currently active and aware – these may include those who are going to protests and making calls and are active participants in the resistance. They may be more aware of history and the lessons to be learned, including the lessons from “On Tyranny”
3. Not active but watching events closely – these may be people who are upset and shocked at what is unfolding every day.
4. Not active and not paying close attention
5. Happy with current events
6. Fascists causing current eventsI also agree with Jane in that the path forward is to support Level 1 organizations and individuals. I think Level 2 and some level 3 individuals are doing just that.
But maybe there is also room to support education to activate level 3 and 4 individuals into level 2 individuals? I’m not sure that the tens of millions who didn’t vote or voted blue but haven’t taken any action whatsoever should be overlooked.
If democracy is now a verb that every citizen needs to put effort into preserving, maybe the greatest potential for positive change comes from the activating the majority of the population who seem to watch from the sidelines?
What do you all think?
-
I like the levels of activism you present Katherine. I think it is the level 3 and 4 groups that need a lot of attention. Those in the level 3 that are at least passively paying attention might be more easily educated about what they are witnessing, therefore making them a little more likely to change to a democratic saving way of thinking. Helping them see that it’s more than grocery and egg prices at stake. They would need to be approached carefully with no finger pointing, shaming or blaming. I think there’s a far better chance of engaging those in this group. I suspect many of this group are die hard Republicans – not necessarily fans of the current president.
Group 4 folks will be harder to engage since they aren’t even watching but with some skillful illustrations and diplomatic conversations we might be able to at least get them interested enough to start paying attention. I don’t think we can ignore group 4. We have to listen to find out why they are so apathetic and then work from there.
-
I agree with you Libby, and I think you’re spot on with respect to the approach to take to start and maintain conversations.
There seems to be a very strong sense of identity in being D or R, but I do know that some people switch, or have switched depending on party policies and where the party’s policies seem to be trending. It seems a shame that R’s are to be supporters of the current administration when that might not be the case. But perhaps the definition of R has changed and those who used to consider themselves R don’t actually align well with the Republican Party of today.
In any case, I think you are so right about targeting the right groups of people, listening and learning, and then using that knowledge with the right approach to communicate.
-
I also agree with you Libby; groups 3 and 4 present a good opportunity to target. Now the challenge seems to be: how do we target these groups efficiently and pass on the appropriate messages effectively? This is what we’re trying to do with the pop-up on FB. We may have a better idea of how successful this has been in April.
-
Here is where we say that every action counts and no action is too small. However, I don’t think this is a small action. Everything starts with acquiring knowledge and gaining a better understanding. That is the base upon which everything that grows from it can be better conceived.
-
-
-
-
I’m so impressed by what you all have written and shared. There’s a lot to consider in this question. The Nazis persecuted the Jews predominantly, but they also targeted other groups of people prior to and alongside the Jews and I can see similarities in the groups being currently targeted by the US government. Scapegoating and blaming external forces for internal problems is a common tactic in politics to deflect from really addressing the central issue, which I think is the wealthy corporations and individuals not paying enough taxes – which just widens the divide between rich and poor.
The Nazis came into power under promises to address the widespread poverty and the economic desperation in Germany at the time. They promised economic recovery and a “New Order” that would restore their values. They blamed the Jews for the country’s problems but they also went after many other groups including Roma people (Gypsies), Blacks, gays, people with disabilities, Poles, civilians engaged in civil disobedience, and political opposition. They also persecuted scholars, lawyers, Jehovah’s Witnesses. They also went after the homeless, prostitutes, and people living on the margins – they were labelled socially deviant and imprisoned. None of these groups were responsible for the position the country was in, and the same can be said for the groups being targeted by the current administration.
I think things are escalating fast in the US and I think perhaps you’ll start to see “crackdowns” on multiple groups of people. This likely means:
– more mass deportations of immigrants.
– more universities having funding pulled who allowed protests on their campuses (esp Palestinian activists)
– more DEI rollbacks
– increased anti-LGBTQ bills
– political activists will face arrests
– gutting of funding for scholarship and scienceMilgram’s experiment is an upsetting one, and one that shows how quickly people jump to obeying authority and put aside empathy. I would also recommend people look at the Stanford Prison Experiment because right now we’re not only seeing individuals increasingly submissively obeying, we’re seeing groups of people being granted permission to wield power and violence against other groups. There’s a reason all the J6’ers were released, as were the Tate brothers, and the Silk Road founder. It is signalling permission to the broader society that violence and criminal behaviour will be overlooked or even rewarded by this administration. Very scary.
I agree with all the points others have made about educating ourselves and not following blindly. Knowing these experiments can be used to point out that we are all capable of being swept up in roles and manipulated, even by those we trust. It shows that we’re all susceptible to outside influences and the power structures we live in. Maybe if more people asked themselves what is the leader who I am trusting getting from me, rather than always thinking about what they hope to get from the leader, they might see more clearly?
I also think people need to be patiently walked through how their actions (or those of their leaders) are harming others. As Libby says, being defensive or emotional only makes it more challenging to have productive discussions with others so it’s hard with all the confusion and hurt going on. It might be a starting point to share that we are all human. We may have different religions, politics etc but our behaviours are universal. And I think, too, being able to draw parallels in history and identify commonalities between then and now can help people recognize that they are playing a part in empowering and propagating unethical and unlawful leadership, just like in Milgram’s Experiment.
-
I learned so much from all of your comments. I use these sources for news: PBS NewsHour, Heather Cox Richardson, Robert Hubbell, Robert Reich, Charlie Angus, Reuters Daily Briefing and The Associated Press’ The Morning Wire.
-
So many good insights and information given here today. There is so much in history that parallels certain current disturbing trends in the U.S, and in other countries as well, that it should be setting off alarm bells in people’s minds. This book is trying to sound that alarm.
Yes, there are certainly groups being stereotypically blamed for everything that’s going wrong by those who oppose or fear them; in the U.S., immigrants (not just the illegal ones) are often scapegoated this way. I live in the state where the supposed “cat eating immigrants” reside, and despite the proof from that community that it had no basis, this lie was perpetuated nationally as a catchy soundbite thrown out to stoke people’s fears of “otherness.” As others have mentioned, there are many other groups being blamed as well– transexuals are now considered a threat to our military’s ability to function; non-Christians, people of color, Democrats, and many other people are regularly blamed for whatever is wrong.As far as Milgram’s experiment goes, that is a sad and scary commentary on human nature. Some people, like Musk, find empathy to be a flaw, instead of something to build a better world on. These experiments showed that without empathy, people will often do the unthinkable if somebody else tells them it’s OK, and that it may happen insidiously. Do this little bad thing, it’s OK; then do more, and more, and more. Before you know it, you may have irreparably destroyed something, or someone. Somehow, these people were convinced by those running the experiment that what they were being asked to do was for a good reason, and that no matter the consequence, it was OK and good. They were told that they didn’t need to bother thinking about it, they were just supposed to do what was asked. It seems to have become more of a video game than a real experience for them. The victims suffered, and even died, and they were the executioners, but they could rationalize that dispassionately because it didn’t matter; they were told it was OK, and right. Some may even have enjoyed the power and the novelty of it. Maybe they were even praised for having done it; I don’t know about that in this case, but in real life when trying to control what people think and do, that is often the case. I think this is a good lesson to take note of, and it can be transferred to so many situations currently. There was no critical thinking going on here on the part of shockers in this experiment, and this led to cruel, inhumane actions.
How to make something positive to come out of this experiment? The example of what occurred should give us all pause to consider what we are capable of if we allow ourselves to be blindly led without stopping to consider the consequences. If we see something that isn’t right but allow ourselves to accept or ignore it without truly considering what it might lead to, we run the risk of slipping into the same sort of behaviors. We need to be self-aware, and critically think, and encourage others to do the same.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.