Author Topic: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet  (Read 523 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« on: February 20, 2019, 06:10:59 PM »
+1
 In a Sky News poll, 78% of British people think the Home Secretary was right in revoking Shamima Begum’s British Citizenship.

She was 15 when she went to Syria, having been ‘radicalised’ over the Internet. The indoctrination had probably started years earlier. Most people don’t realise that what happened to her could happen to their own son, daughter, brother or sister.  Undue influence over the Internet is an insidious danger, but so little talked about or understood. If people don't 'get-it' when a 15 year old girls joins IS, how are they going to get it with likes of Molyneux and his defoo.
 
IMO now aged 19 after a further 4 years brainwashing and the loss of 3 babies, she deserves some compassion. The aim should be to “deradicalize” her, then perhaps she could speak out to help prevent it happening to others.

https://news.sky.com/story/shamima-begum-78-of-britons-support-revoking-is-brides-uk-citizenship-sky-data-poll-11643068


 

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Respect: +57
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2019, 06:06:54 AM »
0
Your point is that it is definitely possible for young people to read/listen to/watch things on the Internet, that influence them to think and act in ways they will most likely regret later on?

And you're concerned for them, as well as about the consequences on society of their actions, so you want to warn them, and warn people around them who could intervene, about the danger of undue influence over the Internet?

Because people generally realize this danger when it comes to in-real-life interactions, but aren't aware that cults can also recruit just over the Internet?
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

marly qq

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Respect: +38
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2019, 08:23:17 AM »
0
theres quite a severe difference between no longer seeing your family members and joining a literal terrorist organisation.

this girl is a very real potential danger to other british citizens and i'm fine with just cutting our losses with her.

megi

  • FDR Authority
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
  • Respect: +19
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2019, 06:16:40 PM »
0
> this girl is a very real potential danger to other british citizens and i'm fine with just cutting our losses with her.

That's very unsympathetic to the people who have nothing to do with her, who'll have to deal with this danger now from a UK citizen. Why not jail her in your country if you prove her any crimes? She was radicalized in UK anyway.

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2019, 02:00:35 PM »
+1
I agree with Megi, Britain shouldn't just palm her off onto some other country to deal with, she is British and should be dealt with here.

How she is dealt with is another matter. It's been reported that prisons are a breeding ground for radicalisation. Interesting that they are isolating "charismatic prisoners" as a means to try and reduce it. 

I recall seeing a video of a talk by cult expert Steven Hassan, where he talked about his time in the Moonies, he said he would have flown the plane into the twin towers if they'd told him to, after only a few weeks of 'brain-washing'

I see 'radicalisation' and cult 'undue influence' as the same thing, just different ideologies, and just like people can recover from cults, surely they can 'recover' from other ideologies. Teenagers rebel and often start looking for a cause, who is to say whether any of us couldn't also have been influenced in a similar way if caught at the right time.

The Lucifer Effect by Philip Zimbardo, of the Stanford Prison Experment makes an interesting read-  the key message being that we underestimate the situational effects when people do bad things, and tend to assume its inherent within the individual, but as shown in the SP experiments, we are all capable of far worse than we would have ourselves believe, given the right set of circumstances.


Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Respect: +57
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2019, 07:29:05 AM »
0
... as shown in the SP experiments, we are all capable of far worse than we would have ourselves believe, given the right set of circumstances.

As I understand, the Stanford prison experiment shows that students there, taken at random, had this kind of behavior in them, that showed itself when the conditions brought it out. It doesn't show that these students were born with it. The experimenters didn't control for that.

If I understand correctly, your view is that the kind of upbringing one goes through is not what matters most, what matters most is the situation one is put into?

And you're worried that this makes most people vulnerable to influence/radicalisation? Hence if we want safety, we have to keep watch on people?

lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2019, 01:37:36 PM »
+1
... as shown in the SP experiments, we are all capable of far worse than we would have ourselves believe, given the right set of circumstances.

As I understand, the Stanford prison experiment shows that students there, taken at random, had this kind of behavior in them, that showed itself when the conditions brought it out. It doesn't show that these students were born with it. The experimenters didn't control for that.

If I understand correctly, your view is that the kind of upbringing one goes through is not what matters most, what matters most is the situation one is put into?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I am not debating what 'matters most' as in nature / nurture, I'm saying that regardless of nature and nurture, situation and the influence of others could cause anyone to behave similarly. People don't realise their own susceptibility hence their readiness to condemn without trying to understand.

And you're worried that this makes most people vulnerable to influence/radicalisation? Hence if we want safety, we have to keep watch on people?
No, I'm not saying anything about keeping watch on people. Raising awareness is more to the point.


Faith

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Respect: +24
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2019, 06:00:24 PM »
0
Being immersed in a situation (like the participants of the SP experiment were) is a very different situation than reading online forums and becoming obsessed with them.

However, this girl is very young, and therefore more easily influenced ...but obviously she had mental health issues, or she would not have done this. Should Britian have taken a chance in hopes she had changed? I think they should have, but she would  need to be monitored.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2019, 06:03:25 PM by Faith »

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Respect: +57
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2019, 10:44:55 AM »
0
... as shown in the SP experiments, we are all capable of far worse than we would have ourselves believe, given the right set of circumstances.

As I understand, the Stanford prison experiment shows that students there, taken at random, had this kind of behavior in them, that showed itself when the conditions brought it out. It doesn't show that these students were born with it. The experimenters didn't control for that.

If I understand correctly, your view is that the kind of upbringing one goes through is not what matters most, what matters most is the situation one is put into?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I am not debating what 'matters most' as in nature / nurture, I'm saying that regardless of nature and nurture, situation and the influence of others could cause anyone to behave similarly. People don't realise their own susceptibility hence their readiness to condemn without trying to understand.

So, is it that you want these two things?

1) raising awareness about how undue influence, even when it's just over the internet, is a real danger, because anyone could fall victim to it

2) compassion and support for people who end up victims of undue influence, because that's what they need, instead of blame or punishment, since it wasn't their fault

I agree completely with point 2. And I agree with point 1 if we replace "anyone" by "almost anyone".

I just want to raise awareness that, from what I see, the reason almost everyone is so susceptible to situations and influence by others, is that most people encounter big obstacles while growing up, in the form of abuse and/or neglect, that leaves them with incompletely developed emotional/relational skills such as a healthy sense of self-worth.

A healthy sense of self-worth, protects you against undue influence. In addition to all the other benefits it affords. I want more people to grow up with that, and the other few essential emotional/relational skills, so we can all have more peace and freedom.

When you say that "we are all" capable of behavior such as in the Stanford Prison Experiment, I see that as going against raising awareness of the major impact of this untreated abuse/neglect on most people, and on society as a whole.

How does that sound to you?
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2019, 12:57:42 PM »
+1
Being immersed in a situation (like the participants of the SP experiment were) is a very different situation than reading online forums and becoming obsessed with them.

However, this girl is very young, and therefore more easily influenced ...but obviously she had mental health issues, or she would not have done this. Should Britian have taken a chance in hopes she had changed? I think they should have, but she would  need to be monitored.
True, the situation is different in many ways but parallels can be drawn. In the SPE, students selected to be guards went home to their normal lives between shifts, they were not immersed 24 hours. Yet it only took them a few days to start acting in ways they didn't think themselves capable of.

Shamima, and the two friends who went to Syria with her, probably reinforced each other's views daily at school, and may have sat in front of the computer being 'brainwashed' 4 /5 hours a day possibly for years before they actually left the country.

As for her having mental health issues, I don't think we can say that. That would imply anyone who gets influenced by a cult has mental health issues which isn't the case. On the SPE the students were screened for mental health issues prior to the study, yet it still went horribly wrong.

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2019, 05:18:03 AM »
0
... as shown in the SP experiments, we are all capable of far worse than we would have ourselves believe, given the right set of circumstances.

As I understand, the Stanford prison experiment shows that students there, taken at random, had this kind of behavior in them, that showed itself when the conditions brought it out. It doesn't show that these students were born with it. The experimenters didn't control for that.

If I understand correctly, your view is that the kind of upbringing one goes through is not what matters most, what matters most is the situation one is put into?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I am not debating what 'matters most' as in nature / nurture, I'm saying that regardless of nature and nurture, situation and the influence of others could cause anyone to behave similarly. People don't realise their own susceptibility hence their readiness to condemn without trying to understand.

So, is it that you want these two things?

1) raising awareness about how undue influence, even when it's just over the internet, is a real danger, because anyone could fall victim to it

2) compassion and support for people who end up victims of undue influence, because that's what they need, instead of blame or punishment, since it wasn't their fault

I agree completely with point 2. And I agree with point 1 if we replace "anyone" by "almost anyone".

I just want to raise awareness that, from what I see, the reason almost everyone is so susceptible to situations and influence by others, is that most people encounter big obstacles while growing up, in the form of abuse and/or neglect, that leaves them with incompletely developed emotional/relational skills such as a healthy sense of self-worth.

A healthy sense of self-worth, protects you against undue influence. In addition to all the other benefits it affords. I want more people to grow up with that, and the other few essential emotional/relational skills, so we can all have more peace and freedom.

When you say that "we are all" capable of behavior such as in the Stanford Prison Experiment, I see that as going against raising awareness of the major impact of this untreated abuse/neglect on most people, and on society as a whole.

How does that sound to you?
Not wanting to offend, and you seem like a genuinely caring person, but it sounds like projection. I have noticed from many of your posts that you bring most things around to an abusive childhood in the way that Stefan does.

Where is the obective evidence that an abusive childhood makes someone more susceptible to inlfuence?


Faith

  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Respect: +24
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2019, 04:01:24 PM »
0
As a side note - it's so sad to hear that this has resulted in the death of her baby (I believe her 3rd child to die)...
I wonder if the British government has any regrets about their decision.

My comment about her mental health was because she knowingly joined a terrorist organization (not just a cult)...so she went into this with an intent to harm people. This indicates she was not thinking rationally. 

Marc Moïni

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Respect: +57
    • marcmoini.com
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2019, 08:25:22 AM »
0
Not wanting to offend, and you seem like a genuinely caring person, but it sounds like projection. I have noticed from many of your posts that you bring most things around to an abusive childhood in the way that Stefan does.

Where is the obective evidence that an abusive childhood makes someone more susceptible to inlfuence?


You see no cause-and-effect here, so you suspect that people who do see that causal link are deluding themselves?

Here's a chart (attached) showing the clear links seen by the staff at two top trauma and addiction treatment centers, The Meadows in Wickenburg, Arizona, and South Pacific Private in Sydney, Australia

https://www.themeadows.com/
https://southpacificprivate.com.au/

If the chart doesn't appear, you can also see it here:
http://marcmoini.com/img/cl/piamellodyTable.jpg

and also in this video:
https://youtu.be/cU33PLAtSOA?t=41m13s

This is based on Pia Mellody's treatment model, which is used at both of these treatment centers. As you can see in the following link, the list of senior fellows at The Meadows includes top trauma experts: https://www.themeadows.com/about/senior-fellows/

The dark column in the chart lists the core issues that result from abuse and neglect in childhood. These issues are what makes people vulnerable not just to influence but also most of the other problems in life, according to the experts at these treatment centers, who have used this model for years to successfully treat trauma and addiction.

The last column "The Functional Adult", lists skills that people develop during the course of treatment. With these skills in place, I'm curious what evidence you can present for how undue influence would still be a danger.

I appreciate your interest in this. If I'm projecting, I'd like to know!

Oh, and about Molyneux, yes, he used to talk about child abuse and neglect contributing to most of the ills of society. But him saying that doesn't necessarily make it untrue, isn't it? Even a broken clock is right twice a day...
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 09:26:18 AM by Marc Moïni »
lessons from my journey out of confusion and despair:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEy_JSW_saSvsiG6wFnB8DeYUzT26-bA6

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2019, 11:22:05 AM »
0
As a side note - it's so sad to hear that this has resulted in the death of her baby (I believe her 3rd child to die)...
I wonder if the British government has any regrets about their decision.

My comment about her mental health was because she knowingly joined a terrorist organization (not just a cult)...so she went into this with an intent to harm people. This indicates she was not thinking rationally.
Yes, so sad about the baby who could have been saved.

I agree she would not have been thinking rationally, but was that before or after the 'brain-washing? Was she mentally ill at the age of 13 when she found stuff on the Internet, or did she become mentally ill 3 / 4 years down the line? Questions that might be able to be answered if she could be brought back to the UK.



Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +212
Re: Shamima Begum - undue influence over the Internet
« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2019, 11:43:44 AM »
0
Not wanting to offend, and you seem like a genuinely caring person, but it sounds like projection. I have noticed from many of your posts that you bring most things around to an abusive childhood in the way that Stefan does.

Where is the obective evidence that an abusive childhood makes someone more susceptible to inlfuence?


You see no cause-and-effect here, so you suspect that people who do see that causal link are deluding themselves?

I see no cause and effect here. If you see one please present evidence



Here's a chart (attached) showing the clear links seen by the staff at two top trauma and addiction treatment centers, The Meadows in Wickenburg, Arizona, and South Pacific Private in Sydney, Australia
https://www.themeadows.com/
https://southpacificprivate.com.au/

If the chart doesn't appear, you can also see it here:
http://marcmoini.com/img/cl/piamellodyTable.jpg

and also in this video:
https://youtu.be/cU33PLAtSOA?t=41m13s

Whilst these professionals appear highly credible, the model you have presented is not an evidenced study and there are no links to any published papers. However, I am not disputing that childhood trauma causes any or all of the problems listed, this is not my argument. I am taking about susceptibility to influence and I fail to see any mention of  it in anything you’ve presented.

This is based on Pia Mellody's treatment model, which is used at both of these treatment centers. As you can see in the following link, the list of senior fellows at The Meadows includes top trauma experts: https://www.themeadows.com/about/senior-fellows/

The dark column in the chart lists the core issues that result from abuse and neglect in childhood. These issues are what makes people vulnerable not just to influence but also most of the other problems in life, according to the experts at these treatment centers, who have used this model for years to successfully treat trauma and addiction.
I see no mention of vulnerability to influence on any of the links.

The last column "The Functional Adult", lists skills that people develop during the course of treatment. With these skills in place, I'm curious what evidence you can present for how undue influence would still be a danger.

My thread began by drawing comparisons between Shamima Begum and the people in the SPE.There was no mention of selecting people with or without trauma for the SPE, but they were screened for any mental health issues or contra-indicative factors before being allowed to take part. i.e they were ‘normal’ and ‘stable’.

Milgram’s obedience to authority is another example of ‘normal’ people being prepared to cause horrible suffering and even death to others on someone else’s say-so. People in the SPE and the Obedience to Authority experiments, obviously did not undergo Pia Melodie’s treatment program. So unless someone had carried out such experiments on people who had under gone it, then there is no evidence in existence for me to present. The onus is on you to prove otherwise as you are the one making the link. I am saying there is no link.

If I were to take an intuitive stab-in-the-dark, I would say that someone who had been abused or neglected as a child would have trust issues and would be less likely to be manipulated. A quick Google turned up this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/nurturing-resilience/201603/horrible-true-early-abuse-can-create-strength

I appreciate your interest in this. If I'm projecting, I'd like to know!
Have you considered it?

Oh, and about Molyneux, yes, he used to talk about child abuse and neglect contributing to most of the ills of society. But him saying that doesn't necessarily make it untrue, isn't it? Even a broken clock is right twice a day...

Yes, Molyneux must be correct at least some of the time, but my point is that he brings almost everything anyone says around to childhood trauma, and I feel both that that is incorrect and that you seem to be doing the same. Perhaps you might consider that not everyone suffered childhood trauma, and that childhood trauma isn't the only reason for things going wrong in people's lives, even though it is the case for some, and as you've indicated previously, for you yourself.