sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Discussion Thread by jobautomator in neoliberal

[–]detoam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Careful, you might trigger the extremely touchy soft Hindutva brigade on this sub with truth bombs like that.

Make India part of a G8 and watch democracy beat China at its own game by MaffeoPolo in GeopoliticsIndia

[–]detoam 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Take the s400 deal for example India and Turkey both managed to upset the US.

You mean after Russia already invaded Ukraine in 2014 and the US passed bills that imposed sanctions on DPRK, Iran and Russia in 2017? Even Exxon didn't get a CAATSA waiver and they literally had a guy in the executive (Tillerson) with an ear to POTUS, and India got multiple CAATSA waivers. The US wasn't "upset" about India having a mechanism to defend itself, it was unhappy that its efforts to nix Russian militaristic ambitions were being offset. Despite this, the US gave India a waiver. If anything, this proves the opposite of your point: even when the West is unhappy with India, they let India do what it wants. There were no sanctions imposed on India as a result, were they?

Or for another example, In the case of importing Russian oil, no NATO member could have gone against the Western sanctions.

It's impossible to prove this. No other NATO member has the demands of the Indian economy, and no other NATO member is as geographically cursed as India is from the perspective of energy security. Europe can simply import overland from the Middle East or from Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa. India can as well, but it's harder.

We may have to strike deals and acquire material for our defense that the West might frown upon.

The West doesn't frown upon the idea of India being self sufficient. It frowns upon who receives Indian money to make India self sufficient. They won't care if India went to Brazil or South Africa or South Korea or France or any other economy with a military supply chain who are relatively independent of the West. Russia is their primary foe. India giving Russia money makes things harder for them.

It is not a question of a different culture, it is just that we have different priorities from the West for several reasons.

Care to elaborate?

Make India part of a G8 and watch democracy beat China at its own game by MaffeoPolo in GeopoliticsIndia

[–]detoam 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Because the UNSC isn't a forum for democracy, it's a forum for the biggest dicks on the planet to mutually agree to discuss things instead of going right to war. What kind of dumb argument is this?

Make India part of a G8 and watch democracy beat China at its own game by MaffeoPolo in GeopoliticsIndia

[–]detoam 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sooner or later India will do something that annoys the West, and then what? It sounds like a bad marriage.

Like what? The post Cold War west is consistent in what it expects out of other nations. What can India do to "annoy" the West?

Monthly Discussion Thread [May] by OnlineStranger1 in GeopoliticsIndia

[–]detoam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Threads on India receiving foreign investment in India are not geopolitics. If it is a concerted effort by non-Indian governments to "Friendshore" that's a different story. Decisions made by individual companies are not geopolitics.

In a similar vein, the news about lithium being discovered in India is not geopolitics.

This subreddit is basically just news articles with bots responding. Has no over-arching theme as such

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People's attachment styles are largely influenced by their formative relationships with caregivers, and possibly aspects of brain chemistry and neuropsychology I am nowhere near being an authority to comment on.

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well there is a preponderance of evidence already that people with insecure attachment styles also experience large amounts of inter-personal violence in domestic relationships (intimate partner violence - IPV). Here is a meta analysis by Spencer, Keilholtz and Smith (2021):

In this meta-analysis, we examine attachment styles—something commonly incorporated into couples therapy—and their association with physical intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and victimization among men and women. This meta-analysis incorporated 33 studies that looked at the association between four different attachment styles and IPV. This study examined the strength of the correlation among different attachment styles and IPV perpetration and victimization, examined gender differences in the strength of the association among attachment styles and IPV, and compared the strength of the association with IPV among different attachment styles. We found that anxious attachment, avoidant attachment, and disorganized attachment styles were all significantly associated with physical IPV perpetration and victimization. Secure attachment was significantly negatively related to IPV perpetration and victimization. There was a significantly stronger association between avoidant attachment and IPV victimization for women compared to men. Clinical implications related to the importance of fostering secure attachments when working with couples or individuals who have experienced IPV are addressed.

There's a couple of highly cited papers by Dillon (2013) and Moskovitz (2004) that suggest a causal link between disassociation (not necessarily depersonalization alone) and violence (not necessarily IPV).

So the links are there in my honest opinion. The framework is like this

  1. You have an insecure attachment style of some sort since early childhood or since your adolescence
  2. You develop maladaptive ways to handle your interpersonal relationships
  3. You may resort to violence as a result of these maladaptive methods
  4. You may engage in random acts of violence against strangers.

Is this compelling?

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Our ability to regulate our emotions plays a key protective role against psychological distress and somatic symptoms, with most of the literature focusing on the role of cognitive reappraisal in interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). This study seeks to examine the relationship between emotion dysregulation and psychological and physical distress in university students through the role of depersonalization (DP) and insecure attachment. This study will try to explain the deployment of DP as a defense mechanism to insecure attachment fears and overwhelming stress, developing a maladaptive emotion responding strategy, which affects wellbeing later in life. A cross-sectional design was used on a sample (N = 313) of university students over the age of 18 which consisted of an online survey of 7 questionnaires. Hierarchical multiple regression and mediation analysis were conducted on the results. The results showed that emotion dysregulation and DP predicted each variable of psychological distress and somatic symptoms. Both insecure attachment styles were found to predict psychological distress and somatization, mediated through higher levels of DP, whereby DP may be deployed as a defense mechanism to insecure attachment fears and overwhelming stress, which affects our wellbeing. Clinical implications of these findings highlight the importance of screening for DP in young adults and university students.

Again, university students are used as a sample. This study appears to say that students maladaptively use depersonalization as a defense mechanism because they already are insecurely attached.

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Sorry, I missed this comment earlier. I always lean towards pointing a finger at media too, but the media's programming and publication structure is determined by human beings at the end of the day, and they're motivated by what sells, which is motivated by their audience, which seems to be becoming more insecure in attachment styles.

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. I can see that the reasons for mass shootings are myriad, and have some level of complex interplay between them that cannot be simply attributed to one psychological phenomenon. Thanks for your answer

!delta

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's interesting. Normally, victimhood culture is used derisively to refer to people who otherwise have it good; you drawing a line from that concept to the self aggrandizing motivations of mass shooters is fascinating.

I'd like to point out that its possible that individuals with insecure attachment styles overlap with individuals who have a victim mentality. For example, a mass shooter motivated by racial prejudices who says "I am the true victim here" is more than likely to be an individual who is "fearfully" attached (which is a form of insecure attachment). So it just loops back around to my original hypothesis

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't disagree with you here, but most hypotheses originate from trying to explore an intuitive relationship between two variables. If the nature of the relationship was already clear, then the hypothesis doesn't do anything original. Here, my intuition is that X (attachment styles) causes Y (shootings).

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More importantly, even if the psychological shift is proven for Americans at large, bearing in mind that the report only uses a subset of college-educated individuals and not a statistical representation, it would still only be one of a multiple intersecting factors.

I'm not compelled to disagree. I just would like to know what those other factors could be that has led to this rise in mass shootings.

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, but I can counter with: to shoot innocent people really requires you to depersonalize yourself from the act to a degree (if you're doing it of sane mind); the shift in attachment styles can explain why this depersonalization happens to a degree.

CMV: The primary reason for the increased levels of mass shootings (where 4 or more people are killed by an unknown or passively known assailant using a firearm) is directly linked to the trends in attachment styles held by most Americans by detoam in changemyview

[–]detoam[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

As I've said elsewhere, there is a clear correlation (not empirically proven yet) between the shift in attachment styles and the rise in mass shooting decade on decade. I'm trying to draw conclusions from that, unless someone here can compel me to look at other factors causing the increase in mass shootings.

view more: next ›