MovieChat Forums > Greta Thunberg Discussion > Mental Illness Movements.

Mental Illness Movements.

posted 5 years ago by TheAdlerian (2092)
47 replies | jump to latest

Theodore Millon, famous personality theorist, talks about a type of Borderline Personality Disorder that fits this kid and the people behind her. It's not just her but all such topics, which I will explain.

Firstly, people with BPD tend to hate other people due to abuse they experienced as kids, then they generalize the human race as being bad due to said abuse. They have a pattern of being very "nice" to people and they setting them up for a fall.

Millon talks about a type that will get behind an unchangeable and unwinnable social cause, just to make others feel badly about themselves. So, the person makes themselves look good and the rest of us bad because it seems like we should agree but really we can't do anything about the issue, so we feel guilty and powerless.

An easy example is vegetarians who are focused on the treatment of animals. Almost no one wants animals to suffer, so we agree, yet it is natural for humans to eat meat and it is in fact essential. So, they look good defending animals, but make the rest of us feel guilty for doing what is natural. That's nothing to feel guilty about.

Regarding nature topics, the current trend is to be against "plastic" "oil" "carbon" and so forth. Our civilization is build on these things and no one will be able to change that unless new replacements are invented and even then it will take hundreds of years.

It is obvious that we must use oil, there must be cars, and so forth or else we will not have the modern civilization we must have to survive. So, this kid, and all like her are engaging in self-aggrandizing attacks to promote themselves while providing no solutions and making others feel shame they should not feel.

It's about time this gets articulated.

As a side note, you see almost NO ONE like this going after causes we actually could do something about such as poverty. That's because they aren't about helping people, but hurting people.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12224) 5 years ago

I'm still waiting for her to go to China, India, and Latin America to yell at them about how bad their pollution is, and seeing the look of shock on her face when they laugh at her and demand she be thrown out.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

They have a more logical focus of feeling the need to build a modern civilization. They don't romanticize living in a mud hut and eating chickens they raised, as some white people do.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12224) 5 years ago

This white person doesn't fantasize about that. You're thinking of crazy neohippies.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

They are almost always a type of white person though.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12224) 5 years ago

I romanticize living in a lovely [21st century] house by the ocean with a husband and 2 kids, and sled dogs running around in the yard. No white picket fences, though, the huskies would find that too easy to climb over. (That's from personal experience, by the way).

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

That's great.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 5 years ago

Amen!

😎

[–] Padeen (6459) 5 years ago

China actually leads the world in renewable energy infrastructure. They see it as a National Security issue. If only the US would take note and slash its bloated military budget, maybe then we could spend some of that money here at home, to invest in things that would actually benefit Americans?

[–] Satan2016 (23253) 5 years ago

China and India lead the world in new coal plants. Africa is trying to catch up.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 5 years ago

Amen!

😎

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I have to say that's an excellent take on the subject, Adlerian. I haven't seen it put that well before. You have a very good insight on the Disorder and you've summed up Millon very clearly and simply. Kudos.

I'd like to get some of his books but I find in this country they're quite exorbitantly priced. Can you recommend one in particular?

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

His books cost about a hundred dollars. That's because they are meant for people with their doctorate, etc. However, if you love the topic it is worth it. He's a genius on the topic.

Thanks for the interest in my topic!

I have heard celebs say that they were behind various causes because they felt lost and messed up psychologically. So, they weren't interested in whales or whatever, they were interested in trying to fill emptiness (another borderline trait). That's nothing as compared to the motive of trying to make people feel inferior for doing normal things though.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Yes, I think it would be worth the expense. Is there any particular one that you'd suggest, as being typical of his writings?

I can well believe that filling a void would be a motive of many of the folks who take up these causes. In fact, I'd go so far as to speculate that this world-wide phenomenon is a symptom of 21st Century people's need to fill a universal emptiness. Up till now, people who felt lost and impotent turned to "local" causes like saving whales etc. Now, they've gone the whole hog. Now, they're pretending to be nothing short of planetary rescuers. It must make them feel good, I suppose. But when this one fizzles out, the hangover will be devastating for them. I wonder what they'll do then.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

I agree.

The big issue I have is how they choose unwinnable causes, like every time, and then they almost always fizzle out, along with the spokesperson. That doesn't seem rewarding and I guess, as you've said, these people probably just end up depressed.

I can't think of one big active cause to actually solve a solvable problem. You'd think making progress would be a huge win and ego boost. But, that actually isn't the path of a Borderline.

They like to punish people and then hurt themselves when they end up feeling badly about having hurt people.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Yes, I think they don't pick a cause unless it's unwinnable.

They've written a script for their lives, but they haven't worked out the ending, so they improvise. If their lives were a screenplay, their film would never get made.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

It would be interesting to see a film where someone associated with a great cause was really behind it to demoralize people.

That sounds like a 70s movie but I'd watch it.

A fun movie in the same vein is the satire Thank You For Smoking. It's a cleaver social satire I saw years ago.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

"It would be interesting to see a film where someone associated with a great cause was really behind it to demoralize people."

I think I've already seen a few films like that already. Can't quite put my finger on names, though. Trouble with films like that, there's no satisfying payoff at the end. It's never edifying or entertaining to find out you've been a patsy.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

In the 70s, social commentary films were popular. I recall a good one from the 40s about a popular celeb who was supposed to be a nice guy from the country. All of it was marketing including his marriages, breakups, and everything. In the end he just kept going on.

They don't make movies like that anymore because they interfere with marketing lol.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

The big issue I have is how they choose unwinnable causes, like every time, and then they almost always fizzle out, along with the spokesperson. That doesn't seem rewarding and I guess, as you've said, these people probably just end up depressed.

On the contrary. They've picked a very winnable cause: the feeling of guiltiness.

The problem is that you think that a cause must be some problem that can be solved, and that's not necessarily true. A cause is anything that brings you some reward, and the feeling of guiltiness is a reward by itself. A highly appreciated one in XXIth century western society.

Choosing a problem that can´t be solved of at least properly measured is a rational choice there, since that makes to solve the problem more difficult, which increases the probability of feeling guilty in the future.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Kind of like, they've learned that they're no good at achieving anything, and that makes them feel bad, so they take up a cause that they know can't succeed, because then when they fail they can say it was unsolvable anyway.

Human nature.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

That's not all.

If they take down western legacy, they feel better when they compare to our ancestors. Western World in XIXth century and early XXth century?? They were a bunch of evil nazi misogynist racist bigots!!

If you can't be good enough, then slander the competition. We live in a world that belittles and despises those generations who built what we have now.

[–] triplea (3577) 5 years ago

100% these people will be protesting for interstellar preservation of we put footprints on the moon or leave rubbish (like a parachute) on Mars as part of a mission.

This is the biggest problem with modern communications technology giving any regular Joe a voice.

These people literally were the crazy person with 'the sky is falling' sign on your street corner 30 years ago.

[–] nte1igentwon (933) 5 years ago

Are you implying Greta has BPD? I believe she's autistic.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

She is not autistic.

Autistic people would not be interested in climate change or communicating about it.

Her family are show biz people and it's just more marketing crap.

[–] nte1igentwon (933) 5 years ago

Wow. Way to be totally misinformed and 100% wrong. Bless your heart! Not really, I'm a non-believer.😂😂😂

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

I have several grad degrees in psych, have 30 years experience, and started my career working with autistic and ID people.

So, you know nothing.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 5 years ago

Thirty years of experience in clinical psychology? As a clinician? I’m curious.

[–] nte1igentwon (933) 5 years ago

Those degrees must not be worth the paper they're printed on. Nice try at an appeal to authority, that authority supposedly being you, but that doesn't negate the fact you're wrong in your characterization of autism.

[–] nte1igentwon (933) 5 years ago

Also, a professional in the psychiatric field would never diagnose a person from a far without actually examining that person directly. At least not any pro worth a damn.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

With something so profound as autism, I don't even have to know much about her, just her surface details, in this case.

People with autism DO NOT CARE about others. They do not communicate with others well, if at all. They would not be able to address large groups of people, etc. This kid comes from a show biz family, is engaging in a show, and has an arrogant look on her face. A person with autism would not be capable. It's a paralyzing mental condition.

I started my career working with autistic people.

[–] nte1igentwon (933) 5 years ago

Pure utter and total bullshit. Autism is a spectrum and your over-generalization and assertions of absolutes leads me to believe with near certainty that you are not in any way a mental health professional.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 4 years ago

The word "spectrum" is stupid the way you use it.

It's in the DSM and has symptoms. It isn't just an opinion, you have to correctly diagnose it.

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

Regarding nature topics, the current trend is to be against "plastic" "oil" "carbon" and so forth. Our civilization is build on these things and no one will be able to change that unless new replacements are invented and even then it will take hundreds of years.

It is obvious that we must use oil, there must be cars, and so forth or else we will not have the modern civilization we must have to survive. So, this kid, and all like her are engaging in self-aggrandizing attacks to promote themselves while providing no solutions and making others feel shame they should not feel.

Wow. Seriously? There is no necessity for us to be using oil or single use disposable plastics. It most certainly will not take "hundreds of years" to change this. We don't have that long anyway. Cars can be run off batteries - continued research leads to higher storage densities and more rapid recharge cycles - or something like hydrogen fuel cells. Power plants can be the traditional green sources of wind, solar, and geothermal ... and also nuclear fusion.

You don't hear a lot about the latter these days but working fusion reactors actually exist. Current models are too inefficient for use in power plants, they take more energy to run than they put out, but that's just a matter of engineering, refining the designs to make them more efficient. We should spend the money to complete development now. In addition to generating power, thermonuclear rocket engines would open the solar system up to us. Mining asteroids instead of our own planet could provide the raw materials we need without the environmental destruction.

Something like say, fiberglass, could replace most plastics. And that's fully recyclable. It's glass after all. You just melt it down and reuse it. There are plenty of solutions. And unfortunately, delusions of the climate change deniers aside we are facing a disaster worse than anything humanity has experienced in recorded history. Net CO₂ emissions have to be lowered to zero over the coming decades. Period. The way to do that is not by scaling back our technology but by giving it a push forward. The old dirty industries and the jobs lost as they disappear will be made up for - and then some - by all the new industries and jobs being created.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Yes there is "necessity" because that's what our culture does and our economic system does.

You could probably makes one pair of shoes and pants that would last a lifetime, but we don't and won't because it's not how our culture works. Millions of people need straws, plastic cups, etc because our culture's work ethic makes people eat out, but on the run, and at times even need to toss trash out the window.

It's just the way it is and it will not change for hundreds of years.

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

Sure it will. Throwing trash out the window is a good metaphor for our entire society, and we need to stop doing that. "The way things are" can change pretty quickly. When we learned that our harmless freon appliances were causing a hole to be eaten in the ozone layer we moved quickly to ban its manufacture, and came up with alternatives. Because of that quick decisive response we didn't end up with a massive global erosion of the ozone layer that would've subjected us all to hazardous levels of UV radiation for many years. Humanity can avert disaster when it needs to.

The rough details have been mapped out already. We phase out carbon polluting technologies as quickly as possible, and replace the old equipment. Old power plants are decomissioned as new ones are brought online. We require all new cars to use zero emission engines by a certain date - say, 2030. We may have to do without single use plastic bags and other such convenient non-necessities, at least until recyclable substitutes become available (which in some cases they already are).

We've always known that in the long run we would have to make our lifestyle fully sustainable, or we'd ruin the Earth. Well time is running out on the long run. It's crunch time. If you don't understand that, maybe you need to do some more reading up on the subject.

[–] HAL9000 (935) 5 years ago

in the middleages people threw their trash and shit out of the window, until the pest culled them away and they learned their lesson and inrroduced sewers.
people only change behaviour after a crisis, if ever.

in order to change the economic global system a few millions have to die first.

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

That may be how it ends up happening, but it doesn't need to. If we have to go through a massive disaster and watch billions die before changing our ways that will be sad.

[–] HAL9000 (935) 5 years ago

history and individial behaviour teaches us. it needs to get ugly. thats how we are wired. you have to physically feel the consequences, not just know about them

[–] GotWood84 (384) 5 years ago

"It's only on the brink that people find the will to change. Only at the precipice do we evolve."

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

People STILL throw trash, diapers, etc out of windows. Take a walk and look.

What changed the middle ages was hundreds of years of inventing devices that made sanitation better. It wasn't like someone stood up and launched a movement to create sewers and water treatment plants, then they did.

Life does not work that way.

Currently, there is NO REPLACEMENT for anything being complained about. So, demanding change is ignorant and delusional.

[–] HAL9000 (935) 5 years ago

there are replacements, they are just more inconvenient, like bringing down the trash, not just throwing it out of the window. and also sanitation wasnt discovered by accident. it was science that researched bacteria and whatnot until they came to the conclusion the behaviour was the fault.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Stop being a moron.

I didn't say sanitation was "discovered by accident" because what does that even fucking mean. I said it took hundreds if not thousands of years to develop.

There have been cities in Europe for thousands of years and up until recently this technology wasn't developed.

Also, there are NO replacements because none of the nonsense you're thinking about has replaced anything. A replacement is when something actually replaces a thing, not just when it "could".

[–] HAL9000 (935) 5 years ago

so as long as i refuse to new a modern thing and use the old one, its not a replacement? intersting logic there

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Saying "we need to stop that" is just delusional nonsense.

How will you stop it?

You can't, so it's stupid to talk about it. People liter and dump trash since extreme ancient times. You will never ever get people to bring their own cups, containers, and wooden straws to a fast food place, lol.

No one will ever be able to change the way people live daily lives and how economic systems run unless they have hundreds of years to do it. The whole "we should" thing is total delusional nonsense.

[–] GotWood84 (384) 5 years ago

Our "culture" and our "economic system" does whatever the f ck we say it does.

"Millions of people need straws,"........ not even gonna touch this one.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

It does not do what we say it does. That's more delusional thinking.

You have almost zero influence in anything in your life.

Show up to McDonalds with your own cups, containers, etc and see how that goes. Bring some organic meat and ask them to fry it up for you. You'll pay double even!

The cops will be called.

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

This guy's a troll. Don't bother trying to debate him, he's just here to trigger people.