The Mentality of Hoarding as an Aspect of Social Neglience in the Social Imagination...

 

Before I tackle hoarding as an aspect of social negligence in the social imagination, let's look at what hoarding or the mentality of hoarding is ... What is hoarding?

    According to the Anxiety and Depression Association of America, hoarding is a mental health disorder which occurs when a person has difficulty discarding items that have no apparent use or value to them. Essentially, that means a person who has difficulty discarding items that they think they need is the result of a hidden anxiety. 

    Now, you may say or think, "so what, who cares....why don't you just leave them alone?" Well, the retaining of these possessions results in excessive clutter and impairs the functioning of the person’s living space and, as a result, can harm relationships with others, especially those in the home or wanting to visit. 

    Typically, there are three reasons people save these items – sentimental value, an intended use or function, and intrinsic beauty. Although these valuations underlie the rationale for why most people save things, for people with Hoarding Disorder, the value attached to possessions is applied more broadly and experienced more intensely and can reach a point where the individual items are lost within the clutter and the individual’s worry about their possessions has overtaken their ability to live comfortably.

    How is Hoarding Disorder Diagnosed?

    One of the challenges of diagnosing Hoarding Disorder is that it’s rarely an independent, self-motivated decision to seek treatment. There is often encouragement or even intervention from loved ones concerned about the safety, wellbeing, and functioning of the individual. With Hoarding Disorder, there is a higher likelihood than OCD for a person to have poor insight, and that can also be a contributing challenge to proper diagnosis. 

    As compared to other anxiety disorders, there seems to be more shame and embarrassment related to Hoarding Disorder, with a fear of being judged by the community. This can perpetuate a secrecy around hoarding behaviors and deter individuals from seeking assistance.

In the United States, diagnosing Hoarding Disorder is based on criteria set forth by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Its current edition, the DSM 5-TR, sets forth four primary criteria for the diagnosis of Hoarding Disorder – persistent difficulty parting with possessions regardless of value, a perceived need to save items, accumulating of items that has resulted in significant clutter, and that the behavior and/or clutter are time-consuming or cause clinically significant distress or impairment in various areas of functioning, including work, school, or social life. 

    Who Gets Hoarding Disorder?

• Approximately 80%-90% of people with Hoarding Disorder also struggle with excessive acquisition (DSM-5-TR)
• Rates of Hoarding Disorder vary greatly due in part to a lack of self-disclosure and awareness about the disorder, but range from 1.5% to 6% (DSM-5-TR)
• Symptoms often first emerge before the age of 19, although typically do not seek treatment until their 50s, despite the clinically significant impairment often occurring by 30s (DSM-5-TR) 

COMMENTARY: How is hoarding an aspect of social negligence? If you recall, the last blog post concerned the concept of negligence which is the failure to act. In the case of hoarding, the failure to act is the lack of will or mental strength to detach from material objects which possess no social value unto itself (as an object)... other than the use of it by social actors. 

Hoarding is when someone, an individual, acquires things in huge quantities to be used (not always all at once) or stops using an object or possession that could be used by other social actors... thus, it become a social negligence to hoard. Which in my opinion, has a huge social impact in the social imagination. This is one of the worst social pitfalls found in all societies.

There is a question to be posed... which asks whose problem is it? Is it the individual's (the one who hoards) or is it societies? Well, that is the same question we can ask about all social pitfalls... whose to blame. Since, its an anxiety, its likely to be categorized by psychologists as an personal attribute stemming from a lack of correct social engagement. In saying that, it becomes the problem for social psychologists and sociologists like myself. We must address the cause and solution. 

I recommend, stable family life, whereby parents set an example of simply frugality and sustainability of personal and family items and all other possessions including the home containing all things basic and necessary for a satisfactory life. This life should be lived in a stable community which embraces the same attitude.

Largely, my criticism is that Americans have too much and out of guilt they refuse to let go of things that they no longer need or ever needed is more likely the case. Take a look around, logistic centers, corporate and private are everywhere... I am not saying that people should live on basics, but they should be happy with basics and limit their excessive luxury lusts for more.

Sounds like a communist point of view... perhaps. Whatever to say, I strongly think that capitalism is fundamental, if it remains local; that is, in the hands of the people in the place where they are. Thus, it such local control would naturally regulate the gluttony of products we see today across the country and in our ports. But, you may say inasmuch that is to be taken seriously into consideration... I am not truly addressing the problem or root cause of the said mental health issue of 'hoarding' which stems from acute anxiety. 

Anxiety, as a thing or experience in itself, is a mental health disorder involving persistent and excessive worry in the mind of an individual so much so that interferes with daily activities. This ongoing worry and tension may be accompanied by physical symptoms, such as restlessness which gives way to more hoarding.

Maybe, the answer is that people don't feel secure in the place where they are and therefore hoarding makes them feel secure. Could their social imagination be damaged by family dysfunction? Or perhaps by being trapped by a lack of positive social interaction over time in a secure environment? 

Could hoarding be solved by a larger imposed political system? I hardly doubt that an extensive study of communism could show such a system provides the necessary feeling of security needed to assure hoarding is not to be practiced. Nor would such a study prove that such an ism would guarantee a sense of security that it would eliminate anxiety in citizens nor could it be proven to solve the problem hoarding period. 

On the other hand capitalism would certainly give people a reason to be productive (start acting, start behaving) for their own well being rather than depending on the state which at the end of the day gives so few basics, one would probably start to hoard out of fear (insecurity) of never having... 

Please post your comments on this topic below if you know a hoarder and what solutions were put forward. 

 

Online source:

 https://adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/obsessive-compulsive-disorder-ocd/hoarding-basics

Everyday Negligence Committed by Members of Society... in the Social Imagination!

 

Negligence, for a basic definition, is the failure to behave with the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised under the same circumstances. Either a person’s actions or omissions of actions can be found negligent. The omission of actions is considered negligent only when the person had a duty to act (e.g., a duty to help someone because of one’s own previous conduct)... [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligenc].

Now, let us take note of what negligence is in context of a formed society whereby we expect individuals to be held accountable for their failure to behave. Negligence is a tort that is a major focus point in how people and organizations interact with each other in a society. How the tort of negligence developed is critical for understanding who is held accountable when a civil wrong has occurred. Negligence focuses on three basic elements: a duty of care, a breach of said duty, and causation of damage... [https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Negligence-And-Its-Impact-On-Society].

Having sorted out the basic concept of negligence, we must ask what is a tort since its not a cake in this respect? Just go online and you will learn that torts are legal wrongs that one party suffers at the hands of another. Negligence is a form of tort which evolved because some types of loss or damage occur between parties that have no contract between them; and therefore, there is nothing for one party to sue the other over. 

Also, you will learn or perhaps already know, from first hand experience, that there are numerous specific torts including: trespassing, assault, batter, products liability and intentional infliction of emotional distress. There are also separate areas of tort law including: nuisance, defamation, invasion of privacy, and a category of economic torts. 

In reference to the later above mentioned, I think that 'economic torts' should cover any loss of value to private property due to an 'eye sore nuisance' which if I am not mistaken usually falls under most county/township laws or ordinances against anyone who is and or has been dumping garbage illegally or setting up house 'squatting' illegally. 

Most people have no idea that their everyday behavior has a negative impact on society. Most people think that they do no wrong, no harm, and or do not create problems for society. Until, they get a knock on the door, a letter in the mail and a fine to pay. 

I imagine that everyone reading this post has had an encounter with everyday negligence committed by someone or that they themselves committed. There are whistle blowers out there (do good neighbors) and they are right to do so. If you are going to talk to the talk then walk the walk and clean up your act. 

Stop using more than you need, stop driving too fast, stop throwing garbage out your car window, stop playing loud music thinking everyone wants to hear it... and, stop texting as you drive. Start picking up what you left laying around in the yard since last week and start attending local municipal meetings, and attending church. 

Start mowing your lawn rather than park on it. Start taking in your garbage cans after they have been emptied, and try keeping your dog on its leash. Try using a turn signal, and start fixing what needs to be fixed when it breaks down. Start putting things in their proper place, and stop wasting food, water, gas, and electricity... the list can go on. 

Stop thinking you are entitled to be whoever you want to be and be who you were born to be. Stop eating junk food, stop drinking too much, stop smoking period, stop taking drugs, and stop thinking animals are people. Remember, negligence is the failure to act/behave in a way that reasonable people would; people who actually think first then act accordingly.

Also, do not procrastinate, and stop applauding and enabling mediocrity. Stop being lazy and stop cheating on tests and taxes, stop stop stop...Stop hoarding, stop bragging, stop jay walking, stop pissing and pooping in public, and stop passing the buck. Stop failing in relationships: spouses toward spouses, parents to children and neighbors toward neighbors.

 

EVERYDAY STOP BEING CARELESS AND START BEING CAREFUL... STOP TORTING! WHY? WHY NOT!

And, thank God He sent His Son!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ONLINE SOURCES:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence

https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Negligence-And-Its-Impact-On-Society-FK2NKJ9W3PT8X 

The Road to "Nowheresville" in the Social Imagination...

 

 

Utopia – literally “nowheresville” – was the name of an imaginary republic described by Thomas More in which all social conflict and distress has been overcome. There have been many versions of Utopia over the years, many of them visions of socialist society. Although Marx and Engels defined their own socialism in opposition to Utopian Socialism (which had many advocates in the early nineteenth century), they had immense respect for the great Utopian socialists like Charles Fourier and Robert Owen.

 

The problems with Utopian socialism are that it does not concern itself with how to get there, presuming that the power of its own vision is sufficient, or with who the agent of the struggle for socialism may be, and, instead of deriving its ideal from criticism of existing conditions, it plucks its vision ready-made from the creator’s own mind. Further, it gives no guidance as to how we should act here and now, in the really existing world, confining itself to telling us how to act as if everyone were to recognize the same ethical principles [Thomas Moore pictured].

Plato wrote The Republic in 360 BCE, an idealization of a slave society with a rigid class system, divided between philosophers, warriors and commoners. Justice and social stability were ensured because everyone was assigned to a station in life appropriate to their interests and virtues. The structure of the Republic was an image of Plato’s conception of the structure of the human being: Reason, Spirit and Desire. The above excerpts were taken from ~ https://www.marxists.org/subject/utopian/index.htm

 

 

COMMENTARY: Over 40 versions of Utopia were published between 1700 and 1850. So, a good question to ask why the social imagination of some or maybe a majority of human beings is 'hell bent' on Utopia and it always seem to necessarily become socialist ... communist? Well, Plato was right, the necessary structure of the 'created' human being has built in reason, spirit and desire (indeed, 'created' as I could not possibly think/believe that an evolving ape would ever possess reason/spirit/desire). The problem is that most writers and thinkers or dreamers have not embraced the fact that this is a fallen condition. This 'program' is corrupt but it will be rebooted by the Creator not by the creation. 

For non-believers, evolutionist atheists all I can say is this... Reiterating, Thomas Moore, the problem with Utopian socialism is that it does not concern itself with how to get there, presuming that the power of its own vision is sufficient, or with who the agent of the struggle for socialism may be, and, instead of deriving its ideal from criticism of existing conditions, it plucks its vision ready-made ... TM

Do you know why proponents of socialism do that? Because, the truth in any 'organized' society regarding actual means and ways needs real capital. And, capital flow controls waste as much as it controls outcomes. Get it? With any kind of socialism, there is no fair or just way forward or sustainability. Why? As Roman Emperor Claudius said, "When the money runs out you better look out". Indeed, that's about capital. Socialism does not generate capital. It takes and consumes capital until there is nothing left. You may tell me there is no fair or just way forward or sustainability in a free market... the answer is that in a FREE market there is always a way forward for everyone who is willing to partake. Socialism is the road to "Nowheresville" ~ Thomas Moore.

 

Higher Education... a Waste of Time and Money in the Social Imagination!

    

                                         College is for clowns...

    Famed former Wall Street broker Jordan Belfort commented on the diminishing value of a college education, after a new report found some college students learned less than high school graduates a decade after their enrollment. College is a "complete waste of time" for most students, he believes.

"If you want to be a professional, a doctor, a lawyer, an accountant or something that really requires a degree then yes, you should go to college, and you should try to go to the best school you can and make the most of it," Belfort said while on "Varney & Company" on Tuesday. 

"But all of these other sort of softer subjects like gender studies and all this other stuff, what are you going to do with that stuff, honestly? So I think it’s a complete waste of time," he added [https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/wolf-of-wall-street-says-college-complete-waste-time-students-avoid-plague].

    As we age and begin to ponder what we want to do when we “grow up,” higher education soon enters into the equation. But in the 21st century, would it be ridiculous to contemplate that there is more than one path? Sentiments that college is a waste of time have slowly bubbled up into the mainstream.

    Perhaps you’ve even encountered such a perspective yourself. Organizations like Praxis and Mike Rowe have long asserted that college isn’t synonymous with success. And that a good living is possible without the burden of time and money that college requires... If I asked you to list people from the last 50 years whom you’d consider to be the wealthiest, who would come to mind?

    I’m betting you’d name people like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, whose products run the world. Or maybe Mark Zuckerberg, whose company possesses the world’s greatest contact database. What about the late Walt Disney, a name that represents one of the largest media empires in existence. There’s Michael Dell, who made computing affordable for the massess. And Richard Branson, with a business model that permeates droves of different verticals.

    If that’s not good enough, how about someone in our own industry? Indeed, you can find many who come from various places on the spectrum of life, there is one thing that is true for them all. Every single one of them were college dropouts. That is, if they even went to college at all [https://careeroncommand.com/college-is-a-waste-of-time/].

 

COMMENTARY: College education is a racket, always has been. Sure, a lot of people think that college gives a person a leg up in life. Speaking as a sociologist, its only the circle of friends and acquaintances that you create at college that actually gives you that 'leg up', if you are clever about it. What about doctors and surgeons? They can be trained the same as a car mechanic. And, that goes for lawyers too and engineers.

Thousands of intelligent people (college grad and not) have been passed by for someone who 'knew someone' on the inside or through similar circles of 'butt kissing'. No, I don't have a chip on my shoulder like you want to think I do. I just despise nepotism and the who's who crap along with all the politically correct virtue signally one has to do in order to get noticed or appreciated let alone ahead. 

Those people named above in the article excerpts, who were not college grads, still became incredibly successful because they were smart, bold risk takers and they made sure that they were in the right place at the right time in order to get noticed. If they did not, they still persevered rather than blame anyone or anything.  

 

Migrants Don't Want Junk Food Socialism... They want Good Food Capitalism! Its all in their Social Imagination!

 

Migrants at Chicago’s largest shelter call food horrible, rather buy their own meals as city spends millions...

WGN NEWS CHICAGO ~ March 14 2024

By: Lourdes Duarte and Peter Curi

As the city of Chicago spends millions of dollars on food for migrant shelters, some asylum seekers are now buying their own meals.

Former shelter residents can be seen outside the largest shelter in Chicago as they’ve created a make-shift business to provide an alternative for the food some are calling “horrible.”

New arrivals are choosing to use their own money to pay for food even as the city signs a multimillion dollar contracts with two different businesses.

Seventy Seven Communities Meal Service (501c3) has already been paid $3.7 million to feed migrants, but could stand to make as much as $45 million.

A second company, 14 Parish (501c3) has received $3.8 million with the potential to make as much as $57.6 million.

The residents who are choosing to skip the free food…and eat outside gave us pictures of the city provided meals, saying they may look fine but taste terrible.

The city even switched vendors earlier this year hoping to address the issues – but trouble has come up again.

The sent us this statement saying it collects feedback from residents on the food service, adding: “The City seeks to work with our food service provider partners to continually improve food options for residents based on the feedback we receive.”

WGN Investigates did contact the food vendor for the Pilsen shelter – 14 Parish. They said that they’re meeting all the nutritional requirements in the city contract.

Meanwhile, the story also brings up some questions about how much food is provided at shelters. There is no mandate in place but it is part of the city’s effort to meet the basic needs of new arrivals.

 

COMMENTARY: There is no need to say more unless you can't put 2 and 2 together.

ONLINE SOURCE ~  https://wgntv.com/news/wgn-investigates/migrants-at-chicagos-largest-shelter-call-food-horrible-rather-buy-their-own-meals-as-city-spends-millions/

 

 

*The so-called food service providers are registered 501c3s [making a profit???] supposedly following state guidelines... ohh scary!