#doublethink

[siryouarebeingmocked]

"I hate how people on my left-wing political team act like caring is zero sum. How can I blame right-wingers for something we've been openly doing for decades?"

You’re not exactly free of sin yourself, buddy. Feminists regularly claim that discussions of men’s issues are only done to disrupt feminists.

Same with BLM and #AllLivesMatter, which they never provide any evidence of.

Come to think, a lot of pro-trans progressives have declared that TERFs are “right-wing” just because they disagree with mainstream progressives on one issue. 

Even though they’re radical progressives by definition.

(source)

The actual problem is that pro-Palestine people are making up standards to preserve their black and white narrative. 

Israel have to be the bad guys, Palestine have to be innocent victims.

This is not isolated to the left or right, or even this one issue. People do it all the time, on any subject.

[defire]

Fun things about trauma bonds I learned in the cult

(Specifically talking about the bond between victims of the same abuse)

Content: real-life scenarios, ptsd, trauma bond, forced labor, doublethink, emotional repression

Feels like they are the only ones that could ever understand you

Having similar conditioned responses

Having similar extreme responses--things that should be just funny become choking-hazard hilarious, things that should get a chuckle get a synchronous shrug

On that note, often saying the exact same thing in the exact same tone

Specific things like whumper's tone of voice when they say a certain thing, would be a joke when they weren't there

Singing to cope with many hours of forced hard labor, immediately going silent when whumper entered

Talking about the trauma was OFF LIMITS, only code-speak that whumper couldn't understand could be used to warn each other

Only certain feelings were allowed to be shown because we had been conditioned that some feelings were "not safe"

Openly admitting to each other that it wasn't safe inside the house with whumper and then telling outsiders that we were totally safe and thinking we were telling the truth both times

All saying exactly the same lines to strangers (example "we are all wretches" *shrug*)

Married-couple-level nonverbal communication.

"do you want this extra food? I'll sneak it to you under the table." "Give it to [other victim]." "Watch out, whumper's looking." All happened nonverbally with eye and head movements right in front of whumper.

Working together seamlessly (or else!)

As soon as you leave the cult, the pressure that forced the bond in the first place, the trauma-bond relationship can fall apart

No good relationship ever feels as intense or close as the trauma bond, and you wonder what you're doing wrong. Till you realize you aren't panicking constantly--that's the main difference

[tilbageidanmark]

Dear Leader

[crimson-and-clover-1717]

Ed’s Initial Intentions regarding Stede

Thank you so much for your attention to the poll. The consensus is it’s complicated - and I sort of agree - although I’m swayed towards Fascination alone.

This is my interpretation…

Stede causes Ed to access hidden or denied parts of himself before they’ve even met. And it causes a change in Ed’s behaviour. Ed’s come across many rich or aristocratic folks to rob whom he would see killed without issue; but not someone who’s also a pirate, doing their own original thing, and who seems ambivalent towards Blackbeard’s existence. It’s dopamine to Ed’s novelty-starved brain. It’s not as if Ed carries out a usual raid on the Revenge intending to kill Stede, only to find himself unexpectedly charmed. Ed’s bewitched even before he meets Stede, which means Ed’s entire approach and thought-processes are altered.

Killing Stede and the crew isn’t necessarily off the table should the need arise, but I don’t think it’s actively on in any capacity. There’s no plan, and there’s no ‘uszh’ for once either. Because none of this is uszh. Ed’s engagement with the Revenge is not his normal MO. History’s most brilliant tactician is free-styling. Possibly free-falling.

At the end of 102, Izzy states, ‘Captain says follow that ship.’ And Fang answers ‘Oh really? Why?’ To which Izzy replies, ‘How should I know? The man’s half-insane.’ This conversation shows this isn’t usual strategy. Even Fang asks why - he thought they’d seen the last of those ‘fancyboys’. And Ivan’s sad he didn’t get the chance to murder them, which seems the usual way of things. Plus they’d already had the chance to take or plunder the ship when it ran aground, so this stalking manoeuvre is out of the ordinary. It feels like wasted time and energy.

By the start of episode three, Blackbeard’s ship is a few hundred yards out from the Revenge, and Izzy’s trying to manipulate Ed into usual strategy again by suggesting opening fire, or boarding and throwing the Revenge crew to the sharks. Instead, Ed wants to wait until they make landfall and invite them aboard his ship. Ed’s doing something very different again because he’s unwittingly engaging with an unfamiliar part of himself. And interestingly ‘Go suck eggs in Hell’ appears not to insult, but to somewhat seduce him further. Before meeting Stede, he’s already out of his depth emotionally, and acting out of character, literally.

Despite what Ed would do normally, I just cannot see him landing on the Revenge with the active intent of plundering the ship and / or killing Stede and the crew. His words and actions suggest he’s already through the looking-glass.

So, to The Plan. We have three interesting moments which lead up to its revelation: the clothes swap, ‘careful of your face’ and ‘show me the ways of an aristocrat’.

For me, the three strands, which have no previous connection (other than Ed and Stede playing together), come together in Ed’s mind somewhere between Ed leaving Stede on the lookout, and Ed speaking with Izzy below: a matter of seconds. It reminds me of Keyser Söze in The Usual Suspects, pulling together disparate ideas into a cohesive story spontaneously. It’s the mind of a quick-thinker. And it’s in-keeping with Ed’s ability of reacting in the moment to the moment when necessary.

I think Ed also feels forced to perform Blackbeard for Izzy because Izzy’s threatening to leave pushes on that white father-figure emotional bruise. At this stage, Ed doesn’t have enough emotional loyalty to Stede to not voice such a plan; whilst his identity is still too caught in Izzy’s web to let him go - ‘you’re needed here’. For me, the plan to kill Stede is brought about in the moment via an act of psychological coercive control.

But Ed’s also kicking the can down the road. It’s a sort of Faustian bargain. Why not promise Izzy both their souls if it means Ed and Stede can hang out a little longer? Yet on another level Ed’s possibly hoping the debt won’t be called in, such is the complexity of the push and pull here. He’s putting it on the tab, the never-never. He’ll out-manoeuvre it if he decides that’s what he wants. Of course there’s doublethink going on because Ed’s in the middle of an identity crisis.

Ed daren’t admit his real reason for wanting to stay on the Revenge. He can’t comprehend himself even how deep this goes. His look as he turns is one of exhaustion and confusion. Stede Bonnet has him rattled. What started as a trickle of unease and ennui before they’d even met is now a whirlpool of unidentifiable feelings around both Stede, and Ed’s own perception of self.

Ed’s free-falling in liminal space.

[kkillustration]

2+2=5

[yapoholics-anonymous]

the doublethink is crazy

[syabm]

Hamas has repeatedly oversaturated the Dome, to the point that anti-Israel nutters claimed some sort of Coventry-style deliberate vulnerability on Oct 7th.

Israel also admits it. I don’t think they’ve ever claimed to be invulnerable to Hamas’ rockets.

Also, what sort of concentration camp lets people shoot rockets? Doesn’t sound very oppressed to me.

So Israel is shooting Palestinians trying to get into Egypt? And every single person who tries to leave Gaza is shot?

"I am going to use a term that makes the vast majority of people think of Nazi death camps and nothing else, but if you point out what I'm doing, you're wrong.

You should only take my words in the literal interpretation (I made up), even though my words are dripping with subtext at all times."

HominisHostilis is now doing the exact same dishonest/delusional things he used to mock people like aridara for, down to quietly dropping points he was proven wrong on, and blocking folks so he can get the last word. 

Sad!

https://www.tumblr.com/return-of-the-blech/786742565440569345/did-i-seriously-just-read-the-argument-you-cant

“Palestinians weren’t allowed to leave and got shot if they tried!”

“They were allowed to leave all the time, and not just into Israel.”

“Okay, but Israel still controlled their border with Palestine! And also Egypt’s border, somehow!”

Yes, that’s...that’s what borders are for. Describing it overdramatically doesn’t make it bad. 

He also provided Wikipedia (?) screenshots that said, um, Egypt closed their only border crossing with Palestine. Nothing to support the claim that anyone trying to leave would get shot, and he stopped pretending to care about the Iron Dome at all.

Also, I wonder how Israel is “occupying” a country they physically pulled out of a long time ago.

Also, may I point to the irony of a supposed anti-authority anarchist providing unsourced screenshots (from a notoriously biased website) that cite “experts” as if it’s automatically truth.

OP isn’t even a strawman. It’s another example of people making up a guy to be smug about. 

That, or mistaking their own beliefs for something Israel has claimed. They want to believe Israel can’t be hurt by Hamas, so they assume the Dome is a perfect defense. 

[sillycourtjester]

"The term “doublethink” finds its origins in George Orwell’s seminal work, “1984.” Coined within the dystopian context of the novel, doublethink encapsulates the Orwellian concept of holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously and accepting both as true."

Orwell introduces this term as a key element of the Party’s psychological manipulation, illustrating how the totalitarian regime suppresses dissent and enforces conformity by compelling citizens to embrace mutually exclusive ideas."

Doublethink: Major Characteristics

Simultaneous Acceptance of Contradictions

Manipulation of Reality

Suppression of Critical Thought

Language as a Tool of Control

Psychological Conditioning

Doublethink: Relevant Terms

Language Manipulation: Strategic use of language for control.

Authoritarianism: Centralized control, conflicting beliefs.

Propaganda Techniques: Methods to influence public opinion.

State Control: Mechanisms for information manipulation.

Conformity: Alignment with group beliefs.

Psychological Manipulation: Techniques influencing thoughts and behaviors.

Doublethink in Literature & Literary Theory

[acurtist]

When someone tries to set ILLITERACY and IGNORANCE as exemplary standards. 😠

Know the reality of what they truly wish for you. 🧐

[siryouarebeingmocked]

Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.

Irony is, insulting Cir-c, personally, is still better than insulting half the people on Earth and pretending you’re totally just kidding.

[skateisawesome]

one thing everybody should know about me is that english is my favourite subject and solitaire is my favourite book so hold onto your popcorn while i introduce you to a concept that i love.

doublethink is the idea that two opposing concepts can be true at the same time. its from the book 1984 by george orwell. **

solitaire (and most of alice osemans books tbh) have this concept all over them. tori is depressed. she can also feel joy. michael is angry. but he is also grateful. tara can be confident in her sexuality. she can also not want to tell anyone. isaac can feel attraction towards james. this does not erase him being aroace. jane can be both a good and bad parent.

this idea of confliction is so beautiful to me and i think part of the reason that alice osemans books have absolutely captured me.

**thank you to derellenbogen who actually let me know that this is not what doublethink means. so this is actually not quite true and a better word would be juxtaposition!!

[tilbageidanmark]

2024

[toscanoirriverente]

[sunder-the-gold]

Ranking "Theory of Mind" according to a person's ability to understand contradiction and opposition

Absolute Mind-Blind: Individuals at this stage exhibit no Theory of Mind (ToM), meaning they cannot attribute mental states, intentions, or perspectives to others; their perception remains entirely self-referential, lacking any awareness of independent thoughts beyond their own, rendering interaction with others purely reactive and devoid of understanding.

Partial Mind-Blind: At this level, a minimal ToM emerges, limited to immediate, practical needs—such as attributing basic sensory-based mental states like “they need to see it”—but individuals assume others share their context or knowledge, interpreting disagreement or misunderstanding as malice or defiance rather than a difference in perspective, which restricts their ability to model others’ minds beyond surface-level assumptions.

Argumentative Switcher: People here rapidly shift between contradictory models to achieve short-term goals, like winning arguments, using a shallow ToM to adopt others’ views tactically without depth or commitment; their flexibility serves immediate advantage rather than genuine understanding, resulting in a superficial grasp of perspectives that lacks conviction or consistency.

Doublethink Practitioner: This stage involves actively maintaining belief in at least one model, and maybe as many as two. The individual can maintain two contradictory “true” models—such as a taught ideology and personal experience—suppressing internal conflict through conviction, allowing for deep reasoning and persuasive articulation within at least one model; however, the focus remains inward, with little capacity to construct or engage with external “false” models, limiting broader perspective-taking.

Strategic Pretender: At this level, individuals demonstrate a high ToM that allows them to accurately model the minds of people whose beliefs contradict their own, and thus to understand disagreements as a difference in values or beliefs, rather than simply assuming all opposition is driven by irrationality or malice. Furthermore, being able to accurately model the "false" beliefs of others gives Strategic Pretenders the ability to persuade or deceive others according to their own logic. However, they assume external “false” models are inherently untrue, avoiding abstract questioning of their own “true” model(s).

Reflective Hedger: At this level, people can hold contradictory models while both acknowledging the contradiction and considering the possibility that either might be true or false. They keep the competing models in mind while seeking to refine or resolve them through evidence and testing. They use an advanced ToM to deeply engage with others’ perspectives while questioning the validity of their own “true” model(s); they remain open to adopting elements of another’s worldview at an abstract level, showing introspective flexibility to test and adjust beliefs, though they do not necessarily display the ability to fully integrate seemingly contradictory models into a unified framework.

Transcendent Synthesizer: This stage features exceptional ToM and cognitive integration, where individuals can begin with a robust but incomplete “true” model, encounter a contradictory model that explains unresolved experiences, and synthesize them into a single, cohesive paradigm by reconciling their core truths and adjusting peripheral assumptions; this creates a unified truth that withstands scrutiny, transcending initial contradictions to form a holistic understanding.

[burnitalldownism]

It’s funny the people who most often misattribute the socialist George Orwell’s ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ to anything they don’t like.

They use it as a boogeyman for cultural, demographic and social changes. All while they’re the ones trying to change/erase history.

1984 was all about changing/erasing history as a means of control under a totalitarian and fascist technostate.

That was the whole ass point of the narrative!

[susanoos-wife]

People online, especially on here, love to complain about men any chance they get and all the shit they complain about is incredibly stupid but the worst of it all is when people try to convince other people that masculinity is somehow both toxic and fragile at the same time like that's not a classic "the enemy is both a terrifying force of evil and also weak and pathetic" double-think bullshit belief that Nazis and fascists employ against any group of people they don't like. Being a sexist piece of shit is embarrassing enough but being a hypocritical piece of shit about it is even worse.