In the late Eighties and Nineties, the psychiatric profession became infatuated with “recovered memory”, which was conceived in the US but also captivated Europe, including Britain. Practitioners claimed that patients sexually abused as children would naturally repress any recollection of their suffering as too painful, but therapists could employ specialised techniques to retrieve these terrible experiences and so heal the patients’ trauma. As a profusion of books, articles and documentaries cultivated a larger cultural fascination, the recovered memory juggernaut resulted in countless adults “remembering” early childhood abuse, usually by parents. Patients would exhume recollections of having been subject to parental rape or oral sex when they were babies. Accusations followed. Families were torn apart.
In hindsight, it’s now accepted that the therapists were frequently implanting these “memories” in their suggestible patients. Recovered memory was a social mania — a.k.a. a moral panic, social contagion, mass formation psychosis, or mass hysteria. In the throes of the popular delirium, many people found this exercise in psychic archaeology wholly convincing (and no little titillating). For a few years, recovered memories were even accepted as factual testimony in American courts. Only from a distance does the sordid psychological dowsing look barmy.
For me, since roughly 2012, what has therefore been more disturbing than the content of any given hysteria is our continuing susceptibility to collective derangement, which can spread and take hold with alarming rapidity in a digital era. To examine the unnerving phenomenon of the communal fever, often destructive but rarely contested at its height, in my most recent novel Mania I invented my own. Suddenly everyone accepts that all humans are equally intelligent, and “cognitive discrimination” is “the last great civil rights fight”. In other words, there’s no such thing as stupid. Because that assertion is itself stupid, my concocted mania seems apt.
Within the astonishingly short time frame of 10 years, I count four real-life collective crazes: transgenderism, #MeToo, Covid lockdowns (which spawned sub-crazes over masks and vaccines), and Black Lives Matter. I also worry we’re already in the grip of social mania number five.
Take trans. Gender-identity disorder was not that long ago an extraordinarily rare psychiatric diagnosis largely constrained to men. Abruptly circa 2012 — on the heels of such a successful crusade for gay rights and even gay marriage that homosexuality became passé — a profusion of television documentaries hit our screens about little boys who wore dresses and played with dolls. Fast-forward to the present, and the renamed diagnosis has exploded by thousands of percent across the West and now pertains abundantly to girls. Teachers tell toddlers that they have to decide whether they’re a girl or a boy or something in-between. We’re subjecting children to powerful, life-altering experimental drugs and surgically removing healthy breasts and genitals, even at the cost of permanent sexual dysfunction and infertility. “Some people are born in the wrong body” has become a truism, which sounds to me as medically credible as phrenology or bloodletting.
The social mania displays a few consistent characteristics. First and foremost, it never seems like a social mania at the time. In the thick of a widespread preoccupation, its precepts simply seem like the truth. Trans women are women; get over it. Or: masculinity is toxic; virtually all women have been subject to sexual torment and male abuse of power; regarding any accusations they make, no matter how far-fetched or petty, women must be believed. Or: Covid-19 is so lethal, and such a threat to our endurance as a species, that we’ve no choice but to shut down our whole economies and abdicate our every civil liberty to contain the disease. Or: all Western countries are “systemically racist”; all white people are genetically racist; the police are all racist (even if they’re black) and should be defunded or abolished; the only remedy for “structural racism” is anti-meritocratic, over-compensatory racial quotas in hiring and education.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAnd all the while, in the societies given to manias, birth rates collapse. The culture of death?
I’m not sure. In Ancient Rome, the birth rate also fell, but I did not hear about panics of this kind there. Rather, this is due to the influence of the Internet, which, with falling birth rates, enhances women’s natural tendency to mass psychosis. Take a closer look at all the epidemics of recent years. Each time, women are their most active participants, raising the degree of psychosis to the limit, and this tendency is expressed more clearly the more rights they have in a particular country and the fewer children they have per capita.
Birth rates fall. Manias continue. One doesn’t cause the other either way. They are both – what’s the clever word – epiphenomena.
Nothing like this. They are interconnected. The fewer children a woman has, the more actively she participates in public life and the more actively she brings emotions into this life, which, mutually reinforcing, become irrational. The same can be said about young people, but men are much less prone to hysterics.
I think Sigmund Freud would love you. I
So true, men are so calm, so rational, they never shout or swear or murder their families or engage in coercive control or shoot up their schoolmates or start wars or stone women for adultery or throw gay men off roofs or lynch folk they don’t like or ram cars in road rage incidents or behead aid workers on camera or kill maim and and rape over a thousand people peacefully enjoying an music festival. No, men don’t do these things because they are so calm and rational and not prone to hysterics. Sorry no, men DO do these things. It’s not hysteria, it’s TESTERIA,
It’s not a total answer but it may be interesting – given some of the examples you raise – when they’re not killing people, there is a peculiar docility, even womanliness, to Arab men.
During evolutionary time females selected for these qualities in males – sexual selection. Recent female dominance in social production (including universities, media) moves society towards emotional safety due to greater female empathy and away from truth seeking. The pathology appears to be females under 30 without babies – a situation unprecedented not only for humans but in the last 4 billion years of life on earth.
They still do. We’re still in “evolutionary time”.
Actually he has a point, if a somewhat colourfully put one, that women are generally more neurotic than men. It’s one of the few big five personality traits where there are significant differences between the sexes.
Anyone who thinks El Uro. Is a crank has only to listen to Woman’s Hour to change their. minds. ” Behaviours”, “Learnings” the full vocabulary of the semi- educated on full display. Wo-mania central.
Say what? Birth rates are declining across the globe. China has amongst the lowest in the world. I doubt the feminist movement is burning up the CCP.
“I doubt the feminist movement is burning up the CCP.”
Why would you doubt that? It was a foundational principle of Maoism (indeed of all the totalizing Communist revolutionaries) to attack the bonds of familial love, to turn women into units of economic production, and to undermine the natural authority structure of the family. Only the state knows how to raise a child, only the state has any authority, only the state can help you, protect you, love you.
Except in, you know, high birth rate countries. All of Africa, south east Asia, Gaza even.
The only countries with high birth rates are countries where women have no control over their own fertility and marital rape is not a crime.
The remaining countries with high birth rates have low rates of industrialization.
The reason for the plummeting birth rate is totally different – it was 40 years of the one child policy combined with Chinese culture.
A few years back, many men in Africa were in a panic because they believed witches could steal their genitals. Like pickpocketing? But far more dire for the victim! I don’t think that female psychosis was the major factor in that one.
In parts of south east Asia there are regular outbreaks of shrinking p***s anxiety. Usually men in one country think men in another are the cause – through polluting food etc.
Many African men also believed that sex with a virgin cured Aids so rape of children and BABIES was/is common. I don’t think women were responsible for that either.
“…in Ancient Rome the birth rate also fell…” Yes indeed, and at least partly as a result the Empire collapsed under the weight of foreign immigration/invasion. Sound familiar? (But at least the Romans put up a fight)
Tacitus talks about these sorts of panics, generally in the context of ‘our modern weak leadership is unable to quell them’ but also ‘everybody has become an informer and how one accusation causes dozens of similar ones to surface — sometimes because corruption was widespread, but sometime because of fabricated complaints. It seems that what we call ‘virtue signalling’ today was alive and very well in ancient Rome, too.
The panic we’re talking about here is panic for completely absurd reasons. It has nothing in common with Ancient Rome. The only such example that I know of is the prohibition on women mourning their husbands and sons after the defeat at the Battle of Cannae, but you must admit that women then had a good reason to cry.
As for the example of Tacitus, as far as I understand, it was about the desire to make money. Most of today’s idiots want to make the world a better place – this is a much more dangerous desire.
dangerous comment there el – but i think stats might support you………………….
Birth rates collapse in every society as it industrializes. It has little to do with manias of any kind and much to do with families retreating from agricultural lifestyles and into suburban and urban lifestyles. Families get smaller, education gets more specialized, women enter the workplace, families get smaller still, wash, rinse, repeat.
Thank you so much, Leonel! You have hit the mark. We have become a society of idiots living in a crowd, a maddened herd that panics at any reason and rushes in any direction, trampling its own relatives as it runs.
I completely agree. Another outstanding article. You make mention of “a maddened herd”. it was five years ago, in 2019, that Douglas Murray wrote and published “The Madness of Crowds”, headlining therein “Gender, Race and Identity”. No mention there of climate change, but Lionel Schriver is absolutely correct to flag it up now.
Great essay. My only minor disagreement is that climate hysteria is one of the original manias of the modern age, not the most recent, and seems to be outlasting the author’s other examples.
I view these manias as a form of cultural neurosis that occurs in affluent, though economically stagnant, societies where people lack fundamental beliefs that animate their lives (as religions used to), and there are no new frontiers to conquer (sorry, the internet doesn’t count). There is no useful outlet for people’s natural energy and inherent tendency to compete, so we create monsters to slay.
I thought that too about the “climate mania” claim. Perhaps it’s just… ahem… a slow burner?
It’s probable there’s always been cultural manias, but their spread and reach is now exacerbated by the internet. How we learn to adapt to this new paradigm will be of huge consequence. It’s good to see essays such as this begin to explore that process.
Of course, we’ll see the usual comments going off at a tangent and seeking to blame some group or other; it’s already happening, someone ranting on about women. Is this why witches became a thing? That was another mania, and took hold in highly religious societies which demonstrates that it’s not necessarily a fall in religious belief that leads to an increase in mania.
Perhaps it’s a deflection from the massive upward transfer of wealth that’s taken place in most Western societies since the 1980s. The majority of these fads have tended to be promoted by the elites and their servants in the media.
“Luxury Beliefs” is the phrase. Those that start it and push it ever wider are those that are wealthy enough to avoid the downsides of it. The biggest currently is Net Zero, but Lockdowns ran it a close second.
Maybe I’m mistaken, but I’m pretty sure there was a clear pivot by the *very same people* from covid to climate in the run up to COP26 in Glasgow. The ridiculous COVID briefings by the LARPers at IndySAGE were joined by climate briefings.
It was the end of summer 2021, when it was becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the hysteria over COVID – everyone had had it by then & realised it wasn’t a big deal for most. The IndySAGE spokesman released a statement about “keeping the energy going” – might as well have said keeping the gravy train rolling.
The climate hysteria is a bit older. But remember here in the UK it took off in response to the radical 2007 EU Climate initiative led by an East European ex-Communist Commissioner. Ed Milliband naturally adopted it for the EU compliant Blairite State. At its root lie the usual core anti discriminatory and victimhood genetic codes of elite leftist Western progressive ideology. In this instance, the victimhood of the developing world and the Evil of the capitalist West. So it fits.
Maybe the Climate Change “mania” has been going on so long because, dare I say it, the climate is changing and this is actually affecting the lives and liveliehood of millions of people. Whether or not humans are responsible for it and have any ability to effect a change is irrelevant. People are scared, so do you expect them to not even TRY to do something about it?
Perhaps this is because it has more of the earmarks of a religion than a mania.
It is difficult to say that Muslims are atheists or they live in wealthy societies, but the Arab Spring or the reaction of Muslims to caricatures of their prophet was the same hysterical madness.
Dubai doesn’t look short of a pound or two.
I was going to note the same thing. Climate change hysteria is 35 years old now, which is remarkably long. Maybe because there is an underlying kernel of truth to the claims of CO2 being a greenhouse gas. On the bright side, I do think it’s starting to die a slow death – if only because the reality of net zero is kicking govts in the teeth..
I think there’s an underlying kernel of truth in all these things. Weinstein was a creep (but how representative was that sordid Hollywood world?), CO2 gas does change the composition of the atmosphere (but how big is the magnitude of this effect compared to solar irradiance, cloud albedo…?), some people are genuinely uncomfortable with their biological sex (but how many?), Covid did kill some otherwise healthy people (but how many?)
“some people are genuinely uncomfortable with their biological sex (but how many?)”
Agree that some always have but did they, let alone society, actually think they were of the opposite sex?
Well, within the narrower circle of my friends and acquaintances there are two transgender people who had a full gender reassignment long before transgender mania broke out. Through my close personal contact with them, I am convinced that their gender dysphoria was real. Interestingly, neither person felt that they could align themselves with th recent transgender movement.
‘Gender dysphoria’ – i.e., the self-reported discomfort of some people with the sex of their bodies – is certainly real. I don’t think anyone thinks these people are just pretending they are in distress. The question is how do we understand and respond to it. Is the right solution to change their bodies, or their minds? And more importantly, will we understand this is not some inevitable genetic condition, but caused by social changes. It’s the result of mental disorders coming to fruition in societies where sex roles are fluid, sexual aberrations are glorified, and sexuality is now a topic of public interest. In 1700 people with the same underlying medical disorders would have found their mental illness expressed in a different way – but today, we get men insisting they should be able to beat up women on the pitch.
There’s no denying — or there shouldn’t be — that COVID killed a lot of people. To think otherwise is also a denial of reality. One needn’t support lockdowns and the rest to admit that.
At one point during the pandemic I read a report on average age of death from Covid in the UK. It was 82 years old. The average lifespan in the UK is about 82 years. Covid was brutal to the very old and very frail, but the insanity began when we decided young and healthy people were at an elevated risk when they definitely weren’t.
Correct. And the data was available from quite early on; there were a number of cruise ships, hotels and resorts where everyone was basically shut in till it had run its course and the data was pretty clear – under the age of 50 covid was 99.98% survivable.
Quite so. You could blame journalists, the courts, politicians, or social media but the growing tendency is to discard nuance and proportionality for thrilling headlines and catchy slogans.
Good point.
The best cons always contain a grain of truth. That’s what makes them plausible.
It’s actually much older than 35 years – in the 60s we were warned about the coming of the next ice age – and if you look up Tony Heller on his YouTube channel – Realclimatescience – you see lots of even older and more egregious misinformation from the press at the time.
Well, no. The hysteria only began in the nineties. I know because I introduced the greenhouse gas/global warming theory to my research organisation in 1989. Prior to that, no one there had ever hear of it. I wrote some economic papers on the implications, and then – whoosh – a load of others jumped on it and before one knew it, we and the universities were spewing out papers at a prodigious rate. It was the new thing. Everybody seemed to love the idea of impending catastrophe … at some time in the future. Meanwhile. there was money to be made, careers created, out of all the possible ramifications: CO2 reduction strategies, international co-operation, adaptation pathways. The possibilities were endless, and the great thing was that you did not have to know what you were talking about. So the great climate change industry began.
Footnote: from this point, I was barred from further promotion. My voice did not join the clamorous majority. I was the grit in the great machine. So I found pastures new.
It all started when NASA climate scientist James Hanson appeared before Congress in 1989. It took a few years to really ramp up though.
I remember that too. However, CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
So is water vapour – and considerably more prevalent – but I don’t see any great push towards zero clouds….
Meantime, there is still so much money to be made from climate change!
Probably more to do with the scarecety of charging points. The enthusiasm for electric cars seems to have quelled too.
I think if you look, the fast majority of EVs were sold as a second car, and to orgs with large fleets.
35 years is nothing. Eugenics started in the 1920’s and Sweden still had a eugenics based sterilisation programme running until the mid 1970’s.
Then there was Lysenkoism in the USSR which started again in the 1920’s and didn’t fade out until the late 1960’s.
Once pseudoscience becomes politicised it can be very hard to shift.
Climate Change mania outlasted the other ones, because too much money and political power is invested in this scam…
I agree with your position, the mania on climate change is possibly the oldest of these manias and doesn’t seem to abate. Probably because it’s too lucrative financially and affords the maniacal elites immense power over the masses.
Right on the mark!
Great piece. More like this. Fewer “Beyonce has ruined Jolene” articles. Too much Shriver is never enough.
The author sadly has completely misinterpreted the intentions of those who are passionate about raising climate change awareness and has clumsily lumped them in with genuine passing manias. As others have noted, the subject of climate change has been around since the 1980’s and sidelined by governments until quite recently because of economic protectionism, which we still see here with the dismissal of net zero initiatives.
The threats from climate change are very real – forget the existantial crisis hyperbole, what we will see is mass migration, international conflict, droughts, flooding and starvation. This will come in increasing phases over the next decades – then you will see hysteria of a different kind.
The thing about manias is that their greatest adherents are usually the last to know they are in the grip of one.
I’ve been a subscriber to UnHerd long enough to remember Robbie K saying the same thing about covid lockdowns.
Afraid of a little debate Graham?
…and I suppose the thing about sceptics is that it’s easier to cry ‘it’s just the latest fad’ than engage with the argument? Especially when the argument is very, very complex, and requires real rather than YouTube skills and experience. I certainly fall prey to that weakness myself.
Climate change enquiry began over 40 years ago, 40 years from now people will look back and curse this generation for the problems they will have. 40 years after that humanity will still be dealing with it. That is not a ‘mania’, it is reality.
You appear to have but a superficial knowledge of the subject about which you are apparently so passionate. Ever thought that with the (unknown) lags in the system, the simple correlations upon which so much is based might be spurious? Ever thought that the activities of a small group of nations might not be able swing the climate pattern of the entire world? Ever thought that if your version of climate change were to occur that there might be a lot more desirable places to live than western Europe and migration patterns might be reversed? You really don’t know the answers but you would impoverish the entire country with foolish net zero policies. Perhaps if you are wealthy enough you’ll be alright (Jack), but the great majority will be heading back to the living standards of the 1940s, or worse.
I have no time for people like you who really believe that they and they alone have the answers and the rest of us are thick or blind. For the record, I have actually worked on this subject, unlike (I suspect) you.
Well, I studied climate change as part of my degree in Ecology, does that count?
Given your apparent experience of the subject it’s really pitiful to suggest that some countries’ climates will improve and become more pleasant. The UK for example will quite likely become colder and wetter as the Gulf Stream collapses further.
Maybe one should read up on it?
There’s no evidence for your “reality”.
It did. I remember clearly the predictions that tomorrow or the day after we would all freeze to death. Global cooling was all the rage.
You make a good point. An accusation of moral panic can become the ultimate mass ad hominem. You no longer have to present facts and arguments -just diagnose moral panic.
Im not saying you are right or wrong about climate change. Just that dismissal of an issue as a panic on the basis of a social diagnosis is itself risky and questionable.
I suspect that there is always a kernel of truth in these hypotheses – as there undoubtedly is with climate change – but that isn’t really the reason why people adopt them with such fervour.
I’m sure you are right, but my point is really that it is too easy to dismiss views you disagree with as moral panic. Anxiety about German intentions prior to World War Two were dismissed by many as a moral panic.
People are animated about this because unlike the other examples in the article there is time pressure on inaction. This is also compounded by the oil industry and their well funded and effective campaigns to muddy the waters with reasonable sounding ‘experts’ and publications.
Why not refute the argument rather than smear those who make it?
Amazing that people are still sceptical isn’t it? You’d have thought that once the Maldives disappeared beneath the waves all those years ago – exactly as predicted by the experts – they’d have woken up.
Gosh, did they? And you do know that sea levels have been rising since the end of the Ice Age, dont you?
Yes, how foolish and short sighted were those developers of the billion dollar resorts that they built there, and continue to, along with the runways for their private jets. All to see it vanish so quickly. Them were pretty dum, ain’t they?
I recently came across this, which I found interesting.
https://youtu.be/55n-Zdv_Bwc?si=TUU65cB_dyiFqIJ-
If you search YouTube for this clip by name you will struggle to find it but will find debunks. The one I watched made some good points but he rather undermined himself by saying nobody is getting hysterical about this.
I’m not scientifically literate enough to have an informed opinion on the subject matter but Shriver is spot on with her diagnosis of a social contagion.
How long does a crisis have to exist without impact before we can srand down? If India and Saudi Arabia, plus most developing countries dont think there is a crisis, why do we?
Robbie K, I was going to write something roughly the same, but you beat me to it. Defining manias, as the article attempts to do, is certainly worthy if it gives us a tool to preempt them and the harm they cause. As a side note, it’s interesting to me that the illiberal pro-US mania that arose from so-called 9/11 is not mentioned in this item — it was just as or more impactful than the other manias named. Getting back to the topic of climate change and by extension environmentalism, no, I don’t see my and some others’ preference for riding a bicycle, donating to protests against logging old-growth forests, etc., creating a sense of terror for proponents of consumer capitalism anytime soon. That should be obvious. As an environmentalist opposed to woke illiberalism, I find the frequent coalition of anti-wokeness anti-environmentalism extremely curious. It seems to me a form of slander against environmentalism. I’d like to know what’s behind this — i.e., where some people find a connection between wokeness and environmentalism… because I don’t really see ‘woke’ types giving a damn about climate change, and I see wokeness as just another branch of consumerist individualism, which is antithetical to peace with the natural environment. Can someone enlighten me?
Excellent point. It seems to be simply a trend of the right wing, who will happily lump anything they consider as left wing in with the other woke subjects – the author is totally guilty of the same thing and appears to be merely creating clickbait, which is a shame.
Of course many of us hold what are typically seen as left or right wing views that span the political divide, which can cause confusion in many people, like the audience here.
‘Pot’ and ‘kettle’ spring to mind.
I trust science and the increasing evidence for the effects of greenhouse gases on the global climate.
What I don’t trust is activism that promotes hysteria about the subject, while automatically rejecting practical solutions to the problem. Small wonder that so many people are cynical about the very existence of greenhouse warming.
Fair comment.
very fair comment – Lionel was not critiquing climate change per se – but rather the semi-religious hysteria that has accompanied it. For whatever reasons our climate IS changing. But big perspective planning is called for – not stupid simplistic fixes-that will often cause way more grief than rising temps etc. IF strident ‘no to everything’ groups would spend more time trying to figure out real alternatives they would discover that there is actually not a whole lot that can be done in a hurry. Robbie I would like to hear some useful , realistic solutions from you – seriously – because I cant personally come up with many that have much chance of making much of a difference – except for the hard ones – eg EVERYONE STOP BUYING SHITE AND MASSIVE NEW HOUSES AND NEW CARS – AND BE OK WITH LESS. I see little of that happening where i live – and anyway economies would crash ie h sapiens are screwwed by their own greed and will now have to live thru the karma of that. Pity about the young ones who did not cause this – no wonder they are dropping out and ‘lying down’.
The threat from the Climate Change Agenda is very real.
The Climate has been called by Judith Curry, a past professor in the subject, as a wicked problem: yes, it can be predicted but, as it needs so much information about the initial conditions and so much calculation, the prediction would take longer that it actually happening. Most of the issues can be explained at the level of A’ level Physics, but the Dept of Energy has a preponderance of History and PPE graduates! I wonder why? 🙂
Just like many modern emergencies, the Climate Emergency proponents act as though they were attacking the Establishment when they are the Establishment. They don’t respond to questions very kindly or with understanding, so Scientific discussion is usually impossible. There is plenty of evidence that our own Sun plays a significant part. While the chief activist organisation in the UK, the BBC, won’t here of it, the BRICs continue to get on with their industrialisation.
The sun plays zero part in the greenhouse effect other than providing the energy. The disgraced Curry is a radical, whilst she should not be silenced folks really should take what she says with a large pinch of salt.
No, Robbie K, the misinterpretation is yours. We skeptics of climate alarmism interpret the alarmist’s intentions just fine. You’re convinced, on the basis of models and “expert” opinion, that the earth’s biosphere — and therefore humanity — is at risk of collapse. On the basis of this belief, you demand the 8+ billion of your fellow humans abandon plentiful, cheap, portable, and reliable power, which is the basis of modernity and prosperity. Because many of those 8+ billion people reject your demands, you are increasingly willing to force us to do so. The idea that your fears are not well supported by objective, verifiable evidence, rather than models, is beyond your comprehension, even though it is a fact. In this regard, your beliefs are exactly like the other manias the author listed, and far, far more dangerous.
Why do I get the feeling that if the theory of anthropogenic climate change were irrefutably proved false you’d be terribly disappointed.
Climate change awareness began earlier than the 1980s. The majority of climate scientists predicted warming from CO2 emissions in the early 70s, and data supporting this prediction increased throughout the 1970s.
Yes. But there is not a shred of evidence that climate change is caused by anything that people do. The climate is changing anyway. Warmer in some places, colder in some others. The change is caused by increasing solar radiation, part and parcel of the sunspot cycle.
While it might be politic to take some precautions like restoring the public drinking fountains and installing forced air ventilation in buildings, the wholesale demolition of the coal fired power stations has already turned out to be disastrous.
Last night (early hours of 16/04/24) I experienced the first power cut since the electricity rationing ended in 1974. I doubt it will be the last.
Read ‘1970’s for ‘1980’s – Limits to growth (Meadows et al 1972). The Club of Rome was not, and is not, a cult. What climate and human society have in common is they are complex systems with global connectivity, and chains or cycles of cause and effect are hard to pin down. However that’s where the analogy between reality and narrative stops.
Agree. Would love to see more Shriver articles. That she’s on point is clear but her style is such a winner.
The Spectator. She’s often there.
Totally agree, Lionel is a wonderful writer.
The “climate change” scare began on the German pan-left, when East and West Germany still existed. The thrust of the movement was anti-capitalism: capitalism was to blame for the state of the German forests. It turned out that the real ecological slayer was monopoly state capitalism as practised in East Germany and Czechoslovakia. But the cause was ideally suited to the metamorphosis of the prevailing Marxist-Leninist ideology required of the collapse of the USSR. Now the capitalist West was the great polluter. China, India and Russia were tiny offenders. In any case, if they were offenders they weren’t the target. The next step was the conversion of the Californian oligarchy to the cause with the help of the internet. Behold, 96% of professional publications support the “climate change” thesis. North Korean levels of approbation. And “the science speaks with one voice”. You bet it does with that amount of money, prestige, publicity attached. Its a story from rags to riches.
A link to The Climate Movie, a debunk of the narrative, has been posted twice on here – by myself and somebody else. They appeared, disappeared, reappeared and at the moment have gone again.
Somebody is very determined it doesn’t get much exposure.
I think you’ll find it’s the dissenting comments that are being suppressed yet again. This site’s moderation system is ridiculous.
Here we go, they’ve disappeared again. It’s either an utter farce or by design.
I think people click the Report Comment icon next to the comment and the system removes that comment and any responses to it until the moderator has cleared it. Complete overkill!
In fact, why don’t you try replying to this comment and then hit Report Comment on this one? Then we can see what happens.
That’s part of the problem. Quite ironic really given the articles on here about wokey students no platforming people yet folks can’t handle a bit of debate.
The links were posted in response to your comments. It’s the links that are attracting the censorship, which then takes down the thread.
People with strong arguments do not need to close down opposing voices.
That doesn’t make sense – how many times does a link need to be moderated? Most people want and enjoy a lively debate, there does seem to be a minority who would rather shut it down.
Couldn’t agree more
You mean that film by Clintel?
Thank you. The actual name is “Climate: The Movie”. I found it by searching on using “Clintel”
Yes sorry. Seems all my posts are being flagged now.
Try again
https://youtu.be/55n-Zdv_Bwc?si=U0cZbgnSEHlxqHms
I watched it last night. It’s great to see “doubt” so clearly expressed by such prominent scientists.
The people in the propaganda film have a history of climate change denial, that’s why they are in it.
The well known climate deniers include a Nobel Laureate, a former member of the IPCC and several professors. How does “we know they have a different opinion” possibly translate into “therefore we don’t need to listen to them.”
Try actually watching it.
Having come across this video I’ve actively looked for debunks of it.
Here’s one
maxresdefault.jpg
Mallen responds to ‘Climate – The Movie’ (part 1)
youtu.be
There is much here that makes sense but much that is logically debatable and, of course, it starts with the ad hominem argument which is always seems to be the first line of defence.
There’s plenty more where that came from
https://skepticalscience.com/climate-the-movie-a-hot-mess-of-cold-myths.html
https://www.desmog.com/2024/03/21/climate-the-movie-martin-durkin-co2-coalition-heartland-institute-cfact-climate-denial/
“Climate change denial” – so I’m inferring that you haven’t actually watched the film, because if you had you’d know that none of those involved are denying that climate change occurs. That would be a bit silly given what we know about ice ages and interglacial periods. What they are saying is that is does change, and is changing, however on the basis of the data to date there isn’t really any cause for concern much less the hysteria that one sees daily in the press, television and online.
Like Galileo and Copernicus had a history of heliocentric denial and should therefore be ignored, you mean?
And how about climate change itself? About to ruin a large proportion of Britsh crops this year: farmers are very worried. You seem to know nothing about the science.
i thought the Beyonce has ruined Jolene article was excellent, as so many of Kat Rosenfeld’s articles are. At the same time, I wish Lionel Shriver contributed more often with her clever insights.
Interesting read for sure – if only to summarize and list all the recent manias. It begs a number of questions though, not that I expect the author to answer them. Why does there seem to be more of these recently? Are they intentional? How are they manufactured? What is the role of govt and NGOs? It seems to me there is an entire class of pseudo intellectuals whose very existence depends on maintaining the facade of some moral panic or another. Interesting essay, but there may be a bigger story here.
Thomas Sowell has discussed the role of intellectuals. He says they used to be quite low paid university staff, satisfied with thinking and offering different opinions. Now they have become highly paid by governments and they provide the government with stupid answers that they want to enable them to increase their power over us.
There is hardly such a thing as a disinterested academic these days. They are nearly all looking around for the next research grant, the next conference abroad, the next “paper” to lengthen their cv – because they think that publication numbers are more important than intrinsic merit. And yes – they will give Government departments the answers they want because they want another research commission next year.
I think the role of the pervasive power of social media cannot be discounted in the recent and rapid surge of “manias”. Misinformation of all sorts can spread like wildfire, ginning up people’s fears.
The answer, I think, is that man is an inherently and unavoidably religious animal. Everything – everything – depends on which religion he adopts.
Today we have vast swathes of the richest and most intelligent people ever alive on earth, whose spiritual vacuums must be filled with *something*. So they have a religious dedication to the (alleged) virtue and morality of these progressive manias, combined with a (shall we say) religious disinterest in counter-evidence, combined with an utter conviction in the transcendental significance of the cause. Together these amount to self-righteousness, willful blindness and totalizing worldview – the perfect recipe.
“vast swathes of ….most intelligent people ever alive on earth”
I wonder where these people are hiding.
Except than Hitler, Stalin and Mao hated and got rid of religion.
You’re right that religion can do the same thing, but it’s not limited to religion. Fauci wasn’t a cleric. I don’t know what we should call this human tendency.
Don’t call it religion if you don’t want to, but the common factor of all the manias is anti-virtue, anti-justice and anti-prosperity, which to put another name to it from a cultural standpoint would be ‘rebellion’. Classically, rebellion attacks the social order as being ‘unjust’, ‘unfair’ and seeks revenge.
BLM? Trans? MeToo? COVID mandates? Climate? These manias have their roots in resentment – not without a grain of truth. Since modern thought has rejected God, it seeks to find spiritual strength from anti-God rebellion, often parading as “Science”. The common factor is that they are all completely self-destructive.
We call this tendency ‘religion.’
Your comment is akin to someone saying that black is a color. And then another person saying it is actually the absence of color. And another person saying, no, it’s the presence of all colors at once.
There are some limited uses of the word ‘religion’ where Maoism, Stalinism, Nazism are not ‘religions’ – they denied the existence of God. And yet they relied upon transcendental reasoning to justify their claims! There are many more uses of the word ‘religion’ where these movements do fit – totalizing worldviews, received on faith, enormous ethical commitments, ultimately grounded on transcendental claims, etc.
You can trace the euthanasia mania over 100 years, tho eugenics tokk a beating after WW2.
Look at the feminisation of politics – indulging in surfeit of compassion, empathy, feeling rather than reason and evidence- and the tendency for women, particularly teenage girls to both spread and be susceptible to social contagions as well as the happy co-incidence of global social media.
And the demonisation of Israel over the war in Gaza?
How about the Israeli belief that the current campaign will wipe out Hamas and not just make things worse?
Keep the down votes coming! Dissent not tolerated, Hamas will definitely be wiped out, right??
Do you ever wonder why the German people rejected Nazism when they were defeated at the end of WW2, but the Gazans will not (in your view) reject Hamas at the end of Israel’s campaign?
I support the Israeli action but your point is valid; clearly, the action might make things worse.
I don’t understand the down votes.
You seem to confuse disagreement with rejection of your right to an opiniion. Only the wokey left seem to do that.
I respectfully suggest you are jumping to conclusions. In fact, I know you are.
I read an interesting piece in the WSJ today saying the Israelis are in talks with the Palestinian Authority/Fatah to take over Gaza once the shooting stops. As you know, if there is one group that hates Hamas more than Israelis, it is Fatah who lost the bloody battle with Hamas for control of Gaza. Fatah will be able to root out and destroy the remnants of Hamas in a way that is impossible for the IDF. So it is entirely possible that Hamas will be wiped out.
As for unintended consequences, the Israelis are hesitant about this plan because they fear Fatah controlling both the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Perhaps the cure will be worse than the disease.
Perhaps Israel shouldn’t have encouraged Hamas in order to undermine Fatah. My enemy’s enemy is not necessarily my friend after all.
Yes I read that too, a classic case of my enemies enemy. The PA have no live for Hamas since they killed their people in 2007.
I up-voted you but down-voting is not lack of tolerance, it’s just disagreement.
How on Earth would wiping out Hamas make things worse? They are a murdering terrorist blood lust cult. Their destruction would relieve everyone in that region – and it would be a very good start.
Well, much that I’d like to see that result, the Israeli action could simply solidify support against them. The overthrow of Saddam doesn’t seem to have made us the best pals of the Iraqi people.
To be clear,I support the Israeli action but it could make things worse, this is not an unreasonable argument.
Where did I say it would be a bad thing? I’m just saying it’s not going to happen.
Because the west is freaking stupid and hypocritical and doesnt (want to) understand it is a global religious war against the one jewish state.
The NY Times ran a piece in 2016 about Hamas executing one of its own for being gay. Now they wouldn’t dare print it. The only way in which Hamas did anything wrong on Oct. 7, maybe, was raping women. That every university in the Middle East has no gay student organization except Israel cannot be written. That Jews are the the only colonizers and racists to be pursued and killed (the “Jewish Empire” where there are 3,000 year old Jewish archeological remains is judged worse than the Ottoman, Russian, German, British, French, Belgian, Japanese, Chinese, Islamic or any other in the world), that Hitler is lauded…it is a mania, but a very old one. It has tapped into and become another outbreak of hatred of Jews. And if you dare call it for what it is, you’re one of them. McCarthy was a universally condemned amateur in comparison to the Jew hatred in academia and media and on the streets of NYC and London.
Shriver!
Now that is what a true kick a$$ intellectual heavyweight sounds like…
Maybe all these moral hysterias each form up within — and as part of — a wider morally-founded interpretative paradigm of the times (which is also expressed in myriad other ways than just the hysteria). Going back to the Salem witch trials, it’s Puritanism. For the “repressed memories” it was the 70’s-to-90’s belief in “liberation of the self from civilisational repression” (“find yourself”), climate change hysteria is a symptom of the cultural frame that capitalism/modernity/consumerism is toxic to nature (arguably there were earlier panics in this long-standing metanarrative, e.g. “silent spring” and “population bomb”). We’re familiar with the consecutive hysterias around transgenderism and BLM, based on “oppressed tribal authenticity versus oppressive fake universalism”. The hysteria is founded in the basic human archetypes of what is pure and what is dangerous. As a mass performative act, it serves to enhance the paradigm’s purity/danger distinction as a shared sensory experience, and affirm the moral framework as not just valid but group-bonding and existentially vital. You would die to defend it. Also, it needs villains to be believable, so there will be a hunt for outsiders to sacrifice. Surely there’s more to think through on this
Does anyone remember the „needle spiking“ social panic from a couple years ago? Where supposedly women were randomly pricked with needles at parties and such? No substances were ever discovered in the self-identified victims‘ blood. None of the „victims“ ended up being assaulted or robbed. No guy was ever caught carrying a needle on him. Not to forget that it doesn‘t make any sense to begin with, plus you would‘ve been able to find instructions or discussions about the method in creepy communities online somewhere. But our media ran with it unquestioningly, reporting new cases of needle spiking almost daily yelling „Believe Women!“. Then suddenly, after one woman was actually sentenced for purposefully lying to police for attention, the media stopped talking about it. Did they ever admit they were the ones fueling an imagined epidemic? Of course not. Business as usual and they‘ll quickly jump to the next thing.
I don’t think this one has completely died yet.
Similar ‘urban myths’ abounded – and are still revived – concerning razor blades in Halloween candy (in the US), and razor blades underneath political stickers (here in the UK). I suppose that it’s not impossible that there was once an occurrence of these phenomena, but the manner in which baseless hysteria is continually weaponised shows that some at least are fully aware of our psychological propensity to believe BS.
Maybe, but spiking drinks with drugs does happen a lot. My 22 year old niece had her drink spiked a couple of years ago in a night club, and she was very ill from it overnight. Plus my 24 year old son had his drink spiked 2 years ago at a party in Newquay, with a drug that made him hallucinate and pass out. We had to drive to Newquay (from Kent) in the middle of the night to rescue him in response to his terrified telephone calls. We enlisted the help of the police to help us find him (he had passed out at that stage in a Sainsbury’s car park, and his phone was dead). We eventually found him in the morning, ultimately unscathed thank goodness, and when we met up with the police they said there had been a spate of drink spikings in Newquay that summer and it was a real problem.
No, spiking drinks absolutely does happen and is disgusting. But there‘s nobody running around with needles poking random people.
In the late 19th Century, there was the needle women. They would stick needles in their bodies sometimes very deeply. They would not stop and it became a contagion. Experts think that the strict social norms of the time led to deep frustrations for women, who for the the most part, were stuck at home. You can only do needle point for so long before you go batty.
Whatever happened to the people whose kidneys were being stolen?
The media just got bored and moved on to something else, as it tends to. Doesn’t mean the issue went away.
This has been a great read, and just reinforced my burgeoning realization: EVERY slope is slippery! Stick it on your bumper!
and all generalizations are false
It’s completely understandable why people are passionate about climate change, since frustrations have grown from more reasoned voices seemingly ignored for so long. What is less understandable however is why there are still so many who are sceptical and dismissive.
This is attributable to cognative dissonance. When people consider a subject which appears to have two sides of equal merit then naturally they will choose the one that offers less resistance and inconvenience. Over time these biasses become embedded and immovable, despite the huge body of evidence and current impacts.
Hence why there is hysteria on both sides of the debate.
Climate change believer hysteria: “We’re all gonna die!!! Arrrgh!!! Do something now!!!
Climate change skeptic hysteria: “hmm, I see another study showing no actual loss of ice …”
Also the earth will burn up in 10 years, maybe 9 now, a prophecy enunciated by an apparently sane UN head. Well, Britain should be spared at least.
I think you’ll find the hysteria is entirely on one side. It’s precisely because of completely “over the top” claims about “we’re all doomed” when the Earth’s climate has constantly changed, and will continue to do so, that there’s now a fairly measured reaction.
It’s the speed of change, not the fact of change which worries climate scientists.
Absolutely
Not true. We’re constantly told that the absolute rise in temperatures is a serious problem. Also that the rising sea levels from this (which depend on the absolute temperature and not its rate of increase) are a serious problem.
Whether you choose to believe that – or what the precise balance of climate winners and losers is [a warmer climate might be a net benefit for the UK] – is another matter.
They have no idra what caused the Ice Age interstadial 16000 years ago, nor the Younger Dryas event 1500 years later. But we know it happened quickly in both cases.
Totally agree. What people rarely realise is the CO2 creating the greenhouse effect now, will likely persist in the atmosphere for two hundred years – hence the clamour for immediate reductions.
Yes. Would you prefer it to get colder or warmer. I’m for warmer. Same for co2 levels. Prior to the industrial revolution these were getting dangerously close to the mimima required for life. So one could turn the alarmist narrative on it’s head and quite reasonably claim that we Brits and our coal burning saved humanity from extinction.
It’s all about narrative.
Patrick Moore argues exactly this: that if it were not for human activity, the long term carbon cycle would have eventually destroyed the viability of most photosynthesising life. It’s an interesting theory and does seem to have a lot of the facts on its side, but it’s also prone to a degree of parochiality relating to geological timescales, in my opinion.
Any chance this could be accepted in lieu of reparations for slavery?
I don’t think that’s cognitive distance at all.It’s just having a different opinion.Most people agree, we should try to do better, but the climate industry has become a cult and it’s now as bad as Big Pharma!!
Things like “just stop oil”,for instance, is a great modern phenomenon. “Just” implies, it’s easy to do, “stop”, there’s only one option….. We should aim to use less oil but you can’t just stop it. Even wind turbines use diesel engines to start them and oil to lubricate. It’s a fantasy to just stop oil, imo. If we had a proper debate, people would be more on board with it I believe and some balance…… Otherwise it’s a danger of collapsing in a few years, under its own contradictions.
Robbie is correct – cognitive dissonance affects people on both sides of the debate. It’s a behavioural effect. It doesn’t – can cannot – take sides. I don’t agree with him about many things, but he’s absolutely correct on this.
I know I suffer from cognitive dissonance on a range of issues, most notably Brexit. I’m so sure I’m right (pro-Brexit) that I won’t even read or evaluate arguments against it now. We lose the ability to evaluate things objectively.
I disagree with him and you together. At the moment I hear “anti-vaxxer”, or “climate change denier”, or “old white male”, I understand there is no reason for debate, in front of me is a psychopath and I must take care of my health.
When I hear the phrase “old White male”, I understand it as my moral duty to immediately cause the speaker as much offence as possible.
A mania may be best identified by the non-acceptability of any dissent. Given the opprobrium directed at “climate sceptics”, it seems reasonable to think that some proponents are indeed in a mania.
There’s been a number of independently-minded people who distinguish between “climate change” and “CO2 based anthropogenic warming”. Judith Curry and various contributors to her “Climate etc” blog are among them. The hysterics like to strawman their opposition as “climate deniers”. Yet, the prevailing sceptical position is to agree warming is happening (though still firmly keeping a sceptical eye on the claims made there), but strongly questioning the CO2 causation claims. And really, when you look at the hysterics, their main interest is actually in the anthropogenic CO2 aspect (“Just Stop Oil”) because it resonates with age-old moral narratives of human evil (“how dare you”) and redemption (net zero). Rising temperatures are like a stage prop in their medieval moral drama of good people against bad people. CO2 hysteria is a real worry, because very possibly it’s a complete and potentially fatal diversion from reality, which is that resilience and mitigation measures are prudent, but not the mania of attempting to completely reinvent society, economy, and technology in a few short years, or the associated power grab for a collectivist global technocracy. Economies are being weakened by political consequences of net zero hysteria, rather than strengthened for future resilience; and trillions of dollars are being wasted on possibly (probably?) totally useless net zero measures instead of on mitigation measures.
“What is less understandable however is why there are still so many who are sceptical and dismissive.
This is attributable to cognative dissonance.”
Actually it’s not. It’s attributable to the problem that the continually growing observational evidence keeps falsifying the dangerous warming conjecture, which is now supported wholly upon evidence tampering and computer models that have to be deliberately pre-programmed to produce dangerous warming trends.
It is those who refuse to accept that they have been lied to who suffer from cognitive dissonance.
I posted a reply (to your earlier comment) containing a link to a film attacking the climate narrative. The film itself is clearly a polemic but has enough credible voices and data to open a sensible debate.
Both have now disappeared. It will be interesting to see if they reappear.
If you search YouTube for the film by its name you will struggle to find it but debunks of it do come up. If the science is so settled why the very obvious attempts to suppress any dissenting voices?
See below comments re your propaganda film.
May I respectfully suggest that you watch the recently released Climate The Movie – The Cold Truth which presents some of the objections of the sceptics on this issue in a very watchable way.
I watched it at https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/03/20/climate-the-movie-watch-here/
Apparently climate change is an “invented scare”, an assault on “freedom and prosperity”. The movie is full of tired old rehashed myths and is an obvious appeal to the sceptical with reasonable sounding cherry picked ‘facts’.
Turns out it is directed by an established denier, funded by organisations who are established deniers and represents guests who are established deniers.
This is nothing more than propaganda. I suspect it has roots in the oil industry, they continually fund this kind of thing – all in the name of profit at the expense of humanity. It’s utterly criminal.
I posted an answer in the higher thread
A point I feel Lionel has missed in this otherwise excellent piece is the absurdities that happen when one mania collides with another. Think back to the initial flush of BLM…right in the middle of the first summer of the pandemic. You know, when we were all sitting locked in our homes thinking it was for the greater good, and had police cars prowling around our neighbourhoods to make sure no one was engaging in such subversive behaviour as sitting on a park bench.
All of a sudden, that need to socially distance which had been governing our lives for 3 months evaporated as people poured out onto the street to protest for an issue which had zero to do with many of their lives. It was as if the righteousness of the BLM issue rendered the covid virus intransmissible. Weirdly, when the people who were against the vaccine protested, it didn’t work out quite that way.
These manias are one of the biggets reasons why I’ve started to think that the Japanese concept of hikikomori is quite a good idea.
Indeed. But… but… the almost total avoidance of social contact leads to reduced marriages and births. I suspect the Powers That Be are not concerned about stacks of old people being cared for by robots in big warehouse dormitories but the loss of tax revenue and need for bureaucratic jobs to farm it.
This will burn in my brain for a very long time. That laid bare for me the big lie about lockdowns, social distancing etc. When 1500 health professionals published a letter supporting riots – structural racism being more life threatening than Covid – a big, glowing lightbulb went off in my head.
It’s the “progressive stack” in action. The “stack” is the hierarchy of “victim” groups and is used, when there is conflict between the interests of different “victim” groups, to decide which one is favored. In this case the BLM enthusiasts were favored over the general population.
Not all of us bought into the hype and locked ourselves away. Some of us went about our business unmasked, unshot, and unconcerned – just like we did with Swine Flu in 2009. It seemed obvious to me that the entire thing was concocted as an exercise in control. And now we know it was – war gamed by the WHO in October 2019.
These hideous human experiments aren’t organic. They are planned and enacted by our malign governments.
I live in the Free State of Idaho and had the luxury of living my life with little or no disruption. Restaurants still required masks, but fortunately, the virus only operates in the narrow band of air that one breathes when standing and doesn’t operate in the air just above the table where you sit. That was a mercy.
And the rioting, looting and mindless destruction that resulted in 2 dozen deaths was part of a great racial reckoning, while the January 6th riot was a crime against democracy. And the elites wonder why they’re so deeply hated.
It’s interesting to wonder why communities have evolved the tendency to obsess simultaneously. I wonder if social manias have the same significance as a nation going to war? In war, the population acts as a unified group behind the flag and hatred of the enemy obsesses the nation’s consciousness – in a similar way to a social mania. Then, once peace is declared, psychological relief is felt, and soon enough all is forgiven.
There might be something to that. One worrisome trend I’ve noticed in recent political discourse is the tendency to dehumanize those who espouse different views.
Exemplified in the UnHerd comments section, tbh.
To be fair, almost all comment sections ultimately become much more echo chamber like in nature. Personally most of the comments tend to align with my own, so it is enjoyable. I have yet to see a publication that hasn’t fallen down this hole.
‘Opponents of lockdowns were granny killers;’
The next mania will be euthanising grannies.
Well, Matthew Parris thinks it’s inevitable.
Matthew Parris thinks it’s not just inevitable but is a great idea. He also recommends shrinking prisons and releasing non-violent prisoners. It does make life a little easier, though, in that when Parris approves of something, I can automatically reject it without the bother of thinking it through.
But he does not believe in euthanising murderers.
The weird world of Matthew Parris.
Yes, it’s already under way.
It’s the compassionate thing to do, apparently.
I must disclose an interest, as a grandparent.
Whew! Thank god I never had kids. I may be safe from the granny killers.
An utterly brilliant article. I could hug her.
Great piece. The only thing I’d add is that both transgenderism and the reaction to it have elements of social contagion about them. And the latter has more characteristics of a moral panic.
Obviously many will feel the panic is justified: which is, of course, a characteristic of all moral panics.
There’s a loony, creepy kind of anti-transness that you used to see on social media, I don’t know if it is still there – it could be found by typing in things like ‘poopwound.’
It’s every bit as disgusting as the ‘lgbt’ Reddit moderators with names like Flopsy-Wopsy who are actually 49 year old unemployed furries from Aberdeen, with 14 year old girlfriends.
Hey – what do you have against Aberdeen 🙂
I think what is missing fro LS’s list of moral panic criteria is a clear way to distinguish moral panics from justified concerns. My general rule is that if the concern is way out of proportion to the cause then it is probably a moral panic. It’s a bit like individuals being triggered by something insignificant.
However, I think this is the criteria most people use: if I am concerned, it’s a genuine concern; if others are concerned but I’m not, it’s a moral panic.
Could we include the mania over Brexit and the prejudices revealed by many remainers in this list?
That’s less mania, and more resentment – that they have to grow old with the people they raised – and taught, if they work in education (which a lot of them do.)
They would rather grow old somewhere with more traditional family values, respect for age etc, that is, the values they did not themselves pass on.
Climate change concern is not historically a ‘mania’. It is based on genuine findings and solid research. However the language of mania has crept up on us in recent years. Climate change sceptics (important for rigorous discourse) are now ‘climate change deniers!’ and global warming has been rebranded as ‘Global Heating!’Emotive language that stirs fear and hysteria rather than practical, productive debate and action.
The rest follows – see above.
“Heating” has already become “boiling” . A case of exponential hyperbole, perhaps.
Was 152 degrees Fahrenheit in Iraq last year hot enough for you to say boiling?
Yes. I believe the high temperature that made the news was at an airport in Iran (easy to confuse with Iraq, I guess) and a “heat index” temperature “feels like 66C” combo of 40 Celsius (104F) plus high humidity. I might indeed say “boiling”, or even “roasting” , along with a few swear words, were I there at that time.
Actually blood letting wasn’t necessarily bad if you suffered from haemochromatosis! So with that possible exception I agree!
I don’t know what heamochromatosis is, but I love that you are defending blood letting.
Superb, superb, superb. And a novel by LS on this topic will be *terrific*.
I am a long-time Climate Sceptic and was a Lockdown Sceptic throughout the pandemic. I thought from the beginning that BLM and Metoo were just the latest loony left jamborees. I have always believed Transvestites are Transvestites.
Can I get a medal?
Defo, a pink sparkly one.
Bravo. This is beyond important as each mania is playing out in everyone’s heads. This is not normal political debate. This is Orwellian mind bending – reshaping and perverting the very nature of our popular mass culture. At its root lies the human rights legal revolution of the post 90s progressive EU/UK states. It is this new 25 year ideological State which first supercharged the hysterias in trans or feminism via its twisted CRT influenced 2-level 2010 Equality laws: the mothership. Obsessed with identity based greviance and victimhood, we have seen the Mania Collective – cynical progressive Left, Fake Tories, judicial Overlords, ideological bbc and the toxic engine of social media – whip up and foment a powerful Me Me emotive anti discriminatory hysteria that is now shredding all communal bonds as well as making us sick. We have developed a totally twisted culture of individual entitlement and Soviet like State dependence. Wfh madness and zero productivity. Sick note culture with 4m depressed. Bizarre Council- bankrupting gender pay settlements. Teachers in hiding from unchecked religious mobs. Millionaire Doctors trashing their Oaths to get richer. And next up our right to Euthanize the Weak. We are in a Cage. And no one is fighting the people’s corner. So long as Equality Laws are pump primed by the Big State and defended by the Supreme Red Guard Judicial Defenders of Progressivism, we are trapped.
How about Paedo Panic / Operation Yewtree?
The other way to frame it is that the Left are always looking for a new figure of the revolutionary proletariat. There is CRT and BLM but the facticity of ethnic minorities and post-colonialism/multiculturalism doesn’t have legs as sufficiently subversive.
In contrast, Queer philosophy has provided a huge political opportunity for post-Marxists. Again, there was a materiality to transsexuality being rooted in hormonal imbalance and s-xual kinks. But when young and old can realise their alternatively gendered soul to upset heteronormative social structures?
That’s a political figure of which Marx, Lenin and Mao would be proud.
I think there is something in what you say, but Lenin and Mao would be ashamed, it’s so ridiculous. I suspect Marx would say something about history repeating itself as farce.
I live in a World of stuff and regimes created by men. In this World, some places called ‘The West’ have recently experimented with giving women power and influence in decision making. This article perfectly describes a few of the many outcomes we could expect. Welcome to the big picture!: if we continue the experiment, ‘The West’ is guaranteed extinction but the men-run human race will survive just as before.
Oh, for goodness sake! Why are you so afraid of women?
Look who’s writing the most thought-provoking articles for Unherd: Kathleen Stock, Mary Harrington, Kat Rosenfield and… Lionel Shriver. Notice anything, there?
Fear?… where did you dig that up?
Yes, I completely agree they are superb journalists, but as such they are functionaries, not visionaries with direct power and influence in decision making and practical implementation. Our entire civilisation has always and will always depend on visionaries and, out at the tail of the curve, men far exceed women. That’s why attempting 50:50 sex ratios in this vital attribute will result in stagnation, demoralisation and incompetence amongst the mass of functionaries: look around … notice anything over the last 40 years?
Jesus wept . . .
This is just black and white thinking. Is the name a clue?
Aris, Fazi and david patrikarakos actually write the best articles on subjects that actually matter like the wars going on in my opinion. And Philip pilkington and a man I can’t remember the name of Joel something, that occasionally writes stuff about the economy, also important sh*t. Not this cultural bullsh*t that only women on university campuses care about and talk about.
Some of the articles by one of the women you mention are the most wordy superfluous sh*t I have ever read in my life about issues I have never come across in actual real life and hadn’t even heard of until I started reading here. Not all of them, stock is always pretty good, but when it comes to real life issues that affect your average person I’m afraid the wars and the economy are more interesting to me.
This article is in my wordy and superfluous category. She’s a bit out of date only now adding ‘climate hysteria’ to her list mass hysterias. She may want to consider that actually globally, the world is becoming more unstable and our access to resources is threatened, look how Germany has to cut back on energy for example, look how much your electric bill has increased, don’t you think this ‘climate hysteria’ might be being pushed by global institutions because they saw this global instability coming? That a push to get people to use less resources and energy might fit nicely with having to cut back as a result of the emerging multi polar world? There’s a war on guys, but don’t look at that, hug a penguin and feel happy you are using
less electric.
The complete lack of any opposition to the Ukraine war should tell you something.
The complete lack of discussion about the destruction of the free market by sanctions should tell you something.
That it is useful for government in times of war to have any number of reasons for lynching people should tell you why cancel culture is so prevelant at the moment.
The incels’ incel! You’ve been listening to too much Andrew Tate.
Cheers, that was amusing! ‘incel’? …. ‘andrew tate’? I have just googled these terms as they were meaningless to me. Eh… well…in ma eighties, three wives, four weans, ten granweans … and tate is a total t****r … how wrong can you be!
Oh dear. What authors like Jordan Peterson write and talk about is instructive and important in our current social/cultural climate. Take responsibility for yourself and your actions and don’t be a slave to victimhood…. unfortunately, there are always going to be responses like this gentleman’s from some people.
I understand where you are coming from though, women in leadership may have been compelled to exhibit extremely masculine behaviour to be a viable contenders their male counterparts perhaps what you are observing is the result of this.
Lionel, great, but… what about Gaza? You don’t see that as the fifth?
Great article as usual.
Has anyone considered that this apparently-remarkable ability of digital social networks to drive moral panics – with the seemingly unintentional property of easy anonymity on the part of anyone willing to take the necessary measures – might actually be evidence that Western culture is under sustained attack by quasi-state actors elsewhere on the planet? I won’t speculate who exactly because I don’t know, this is just guesswork.
But I do have a good reason for making the speculation in the first place, namely that these digitally-driven moral panics are always bad for Western economies and societies, never good. That’s a consistent trend that should have any rational person asking cui bono. (I’m aware of course that Hanlon’s Razor might apply here, but I think this is one issue where we really ought to look further than that – there is a limit to how far stupidity on its own can get without being stopped).
And I have one minor example where a hostile foreign power used activist western networks for it’s own narrow gain: Russia’s successful funding and strategic guidance given to anti-fracking activists in Western Europe. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s a matter of public record following investigations by NATO with the findings forming part of a speech by Anders Fogh Rasmussen in 2014. The part I find so amazing about this is that the Western activists receiving this assistance cannot seriously imagine that any victory they achieved with this help was the result of Russia sharing their own concerns: they must have known that Russia’s motive was great power politics to Russia’s advantage and to the disadvantage of their own nations.
Another example where I have no direct evidence but it’s one of those times where the circumstances are impossible to ignore: the growth of Chinese influence in Western academic institutions combined with the explosion of on-campus woke ideology: it would be idiotic to suppose that this is happening in the teeth of any opposition by China, given the extent to which China can exert influence if it wants to. We are forced to conclude that the Chinese government must approve of this, I think.
Yeah, I dunno. I think our own woke idiots have plenty of agency of their own. I think the Chinese and Russians would have a hard time staying sufficiently ahead of the curve, coming up with the ideas that woke cultural consumers would find hip enough, to be leading all this. Judith Butler in Chinglish? Nah. Remember too, the big Trump-Russia conspiracy ended up being that Russia’s “electoral interference” was like the proverbial p*ss in the ocean. Actually, come to think of it, that was yet another mass hysteria — TDS.
A matter of public record? Surely Yes Minister educated us years ago to beware of state investigations? In this connection Lord Ismay’s famous adage, USSR out, USA in, Germany down, set forth the Treaty’s foundations would appear such reports possibly specious.
The long wished for changes* of energy policy and LNG imports have proved an economic disaster for the average European…
*Senate draft bill of sanctions against an ally in December 2021 regarding Nordstream fortunately failed.
I suspect its likely – I researched using the help of Chinese I know, what happened when students tried to start LGBTQI groups in Chinese universities.
The groups get their WeChat accounts deleted and this kills them stone dead.
Usually that is enough, in China. You know who did it, so you take the hint.
Anyone persistent who tries to re-organise offline, is summoned to a CCP session where they are told very forcefully that China has 56 ethnic minorities, social cohesion is paramount, and that starting boutique identities, fomenting silly-season opressions, whackdoodle gender flags and so on, will see them moved to the countryside to work on a farm for the next 35 years, if they are fool enough to keep it up.
One recent mania not mentioned by people: the week after Diana’s death, when it seemed as if almost everyone lost their heads in a frenzy of therapeutic hyper-emotionalism. But of course we all went back to normal after her funeral.
Theodore Dalrymple wrote that one up.
It’s a bit long in the tooth, but I agree Diana was a harbinger of what would come.
Even my mother cried.
I wondered why you left out Climate Change in your list. Then I realised that you were keeping the best till last.
These manias have another common feature: each one seems to be more damaging than the last. Climate change will ruin us if it doesn’t collapse soon. But so much human and financial capital has been invested in it that it won’t go quietly.
Phrenology is sound science
“Yet both the priests and disciples of moral panics are driven by good intentions. They genuinely believe they are doing God’s work. Aggressively virtuous, “wokeness” is one big bundle of mania.”
Only half right, the “priests” are not driven by good intentions though the majority of their misguided disciples most likely are. The priests are driven by a lust for money and power. This was true of all of them but especially of BLM, Covid and is even more so of Net Zero.
An excellent article.
Hence the old saying: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I am surprised that climate alarmism was not mentioned and many say that it will be the next cause of lockdown. It might result in a permanent closure of the economy because we will not have reliable power. As it is we already have unaffordable power. Climate alarmism is interesting because it was initially just a few scientists predicting another ice age, then it became global warming but nothing really happened until the politicians embraced it.
This is a feature of mass psychosis and in particular it needs the participation of the ruling classes for it to damage society. It was the same with witchcraft – it needed the witch finders for it to have the impact it did. Hitler apparently said – Everything I am, I am through you alone. In other words what he did was only possible because of support by the German people.
What concerns me about both covid and sex change is that it is supported by the NHS and I cannot see that private hospitals are any different. How did health care produce this nonsense. I saw a reference to a paper a few days ago with one author being Antony Fauci. It said quite clearly that covid and flu vaccines cannot work because the virus grows in the mucus membranes and takes about 5 days or so to pass into the blood stream where the vaccines might work. By then the worst is over, so the vaccines do not stop infection, do not prevent transmission and are only like to reduce symptoms slightly.
Why does all the happen? My only assumption is that most of the human race does not want to face reality and will believe anything governments say to convince them that they are controlling risks. As the state controls more of our life, with care of the elderly and child care and hands out money taken as taxation from others this can only get worse.
The biggest mistake politicians make is not mentioned in this article and it is the belief that they can control the economy. Inflation is not a natural characteristic of the economy, it is due to the printing of worthless money. They bail out banks because they could not let them fail. They should let Thames Water fail. I doubt it will happen because the government operates to ensure that profits remain in private hands and losses are socialised and added to public debt, now so large that we will never pay it off. It is the economy that will destroy civilisation.
Read the article again…to the end this time.
Great article, best one for ages.
But for Koreans to troop down the streets of Seoul chanting, “Black lives matter!” when the country has hardly any black people was insensible. Likewise, Britons chanting “Hands up, don’t shoot!” when their constabulary is unarmed.
Yes and ‘Gays support Palestine’.
My mate the Chemsex Imam has not forgiven me for suggesting that he can now go to Gaza, should his religious ardour prove harder than his ___, as there’s nothing there higher than a storey for Hamas to throw him from.
Proof reader please!
“Manias are fuelled by emotion. The cult of trans has capitalised on our yearning to seem enlightened and compassionate. Because the celebration and promotion of transgenderism has capitalised on our yearning to seem enlightened and compassionate…”
“for Koreans to troop down the streets of Seoul chanting, “Black lives matter!” when the country has hardly any black people was INSENSIBLE”.
Common denominator? Liberals in the media, entertainment, education driving the latest mania for the warm feeling of control and self-congratulation.
Ah, yes, common denominator: over-educated, middle-class faddists exercising their luxury beliefs. Woke is class war.
Warmism started out as a theory and i for one thought it deserved investigation and test when i first heard it c 1990. Once it failed the evidential tests i lost interest. However many academics have their careers hitched to the warmist wagon and it gives communists an ideological shelter after the collapse of their USSR and PRC’s flight into the free market. Add on actual fruitloops like Pack-ham and King Charles and its a strong mania – at least as strong as the Inquisition or Witchcraft manias from 3-500 years ago. The info above gives clues as to the causes of mania- the academics want to stay paid, the commies don’t want to admit they’ve failed and the fruitloops both freely admit to emotional problems due to bullying and ostracisation at school, so i guess they just want to get even with the rest of us? So the cause is the frailty of human nature, and manias will be with us as long as we are humans. If we were to become purely rational like the Vulcans in Star Trek we’d lose the manias but be more boring for it ? – also didn’t Spock’s home planet die despite the scientific purity of Vulcan culture ? Star Trek mania anyone? (A belief system that only interprets events via the Star Trek Universe – much like Ken Livingstones lawyer’s claim -“my client can only interpret current events through the concept of the Third Reich and the holocaust”)
You’re forgetting Pon-Fahr.
Right on. Glad to see added gender confusion and trans mania. Another, in Canada anyway, is anticolonianism, how white people destroyed indigenous culture, murdered their kids and keep them on their reserves like political prisoners. Apparently there is not two sides ( or more) to this story.
Trust the Shriver to deliver in succinct and deliciously summary form what the whole ghastliness of her topic indeed now requires? But i for one would be even further edified to know how she might comport the observations made here with those she offered in an essay last year, that one concerning the supposed irremovability of and, dare i say it – necessity of permanent *stigma* regarding such things as prostitution and (gag me with a spoon) “sexualization” of younger beings ? How are the likes of these not inextricably woven into the recovered memory phenomenon? How will Shriver propose to separate them out in any coherent fashion, when she doesn’t even have the pluck to include in her survey of moral panics the most wretched one of all – because basically a necromantic, hyperhypocritical blitzkrieg – that of Yewtree and Jimmy Savile?
Why does she not have ‘the pluck’ ? I can’t see any online stuff that indicates she had much involvement in Yewtree/Savile.
Maybe they’re not forefront in her mind ? Pretty long ago now.
Honestly puzzled why you think this is a huge omission on her behalf.
Pro Palestine movement fits the rubric.
One can theorize that it’s not mania but a playbook. The agressive, absolutist, binary minset is a characteristic, not an effect. You will find many of the same agents involved in all the above causes, with very little deviation.
The faith militante.
The only point I’d take issue with in this article is that the climate change mania is driven by the very best of intentions.
It’s isn’t. It’s driven by powerful vested interests, with a lot of money. It’s all a grift.
Next moral panic?! The one UnHerd is fully involved in propagating about transgender people is still quite underway.
Shame you are getting downvotes. I made a similar point. Whatever one’s view on the trans issue, it does have many of the characteristics of a moral panic.
A small number of dedicated feminists and realists sounding the alarm about gender identity ideology’s misogyny, homophobia and medical harm to vulnerable children, as well as the threat to freedom of speech, in the face of almost global capture by this mania of all institutions, is not a ‘moral panic’. You are peering into the wrong end of the telescope.
I’m afraid this is precisely what people in the throes of a moral panic say.
So, denial of proof of guilt now, is it?
You’d make a good witchfinder, if nothing else.
I’ve given you an upvote, on the assumption that your first ‘of’ is meant to be an ‘is’.
I’d make a terrible witchfinder. I’m way too sceptical. I’d be burned at the stake for failing to believe in witches.
Does not exist in the first place as you imagine it, has nothing of the next two in reality, and the only harm to children is sought by the likes of you.
With good reason. Children are being given life altering drugs and surgery, often after being groomed into believing fantasies about being born into the wrong body.
No such thing exists.
Talia gets all his downvotes because he supports child mutilation.
She does not and that is what you are here to support — the idea that some children are only worth being abused.
Are children ‘assigned’ a sex at birth or is it observed? Do you think that science will develop to such an extent that, to use your terminology, transgender people could be identified in utero?
You cannot ‘assign’ something that you can’t keep somewhere else. So it’s pretty much a case of ‘Where’s the foetus going to gestate? In a box?”
You appear to have misunderstood my comment. ‘Assigned’ is the term used by activists to describe how a baby’s sex is identified. It is as though it is a random process rather than an observable fact. As believers in gender identity theory maintain that being transgender is a fact of nature, it follows that they may believe that science may be used to identify such people and that we needn’t merely rely on assertion as per current practice.
I know the way they use the word ‘assigning’, I was pointing out that my way of debunking it, is to insist on the traditional meaning.
Their version of assigning, of course ends up being more akin to a type of magic. (I think even they know that their ‘science’ isn’t designed to be load-bearing. It’s only posturing.)
Ok, thanks. Good point.
No it your delusion the term implies randomnesses and it is your delusion it always accurate. You can justify nothing you have claimed of it.
Nonsense, an assignment can be a mark on paper with consequences.
Don’t take up work in a law firm, darling.
Well actually, Unherd is publishing writers who are concerned about the number of people who aren’t transgender but who are, for whatever reason, either pretending to be or are vulnerable to corrupt authority on the matter.
You can talk twaddle around this all you like, but it will remain a real problem irrespective of your politics.
No, it is not, because there is no reasonable basis on which to pretend they exist in excess of 1 in about 45,000 — and quite possibly far less — or that that number can be improved without hurting far more people.
It is a fake problem, one ginned up for the purpose of getting maintaining, and being seen to get away with abusing power.
Thank you for this.
Of course, in a variation of the adage “just because you’re paranoid does not mean they’re not out to get you”, just because there’s a mania does not mean there isn’t an underlying issue, which risks getting buried under first the mania and then the awakening.
What can be done about it? Already the first writer on the “Psychology of Masses”, Gustave Le Bon, observed that it only takes a minority, though a sizeable minority, to dispel a brewing mania. So we all have to work on our media savvy – just like the increase in road traffic forced us to learn the new survival skill of looking left and right before stepping into the road, so we’ll have to learn to pause and reflect when confronted with new information.
We live in interesting times…
Definitely buying the book.
Helen Joyce covered these manias and hysterias in a chapter of her book “Trans”. Unlike the other manias though, this one seemed to spread underground, hidden from the view of most people other than the initiated, and is hardly covered in the media at all, most refuse to touch it with a bargepole. Especially the BBC, shamefully.
It all goes back to Brexit. The herd were easily provoked into action to “Stop Brexit”. They didn’t stop it, but they certainly paralysed the political class and ground it to a standstill. Then Project Contagion spread to “punishing Boris (seen as the main “Brexit figurehead”), and fellow-travellers (Raab, Patel, Braverman). Pausing only for BLM, the Alphabet People and Palestine. Boris stepping forward as ringmaster for Net Zero didn’t rehabilitate him, because forgiveness isn’t part of the Project.
Finally, onwards to disposing of the Tory Party altogether, the final deliverable over the next 8 months.
What then for Project Contagion with a Labour majority government esconced, media, civil service and public services cowed into submission? Mission accomplished and cheer up a bit? Because like all activist/terror groups they are unable to go gently into the good night. Their missions define them, enable funding (Gov and external) and with it their whole way of life.
No shots fired and barely a vote cast. Whoever unleashed this madness may find themselves in the firing line sooner than they think.
There was I thinking that Brexit itself was a mania. Few people seemed bothered by EU membership until Cameron called the referendum, and then the masses were whipped up by tabloid paranoias of Syrian refugees being herded here by Angela Merkel, and so forth.
Well, Merkel did open the borders. Was it only the “tabloids” (most papers use this format now) that reported that? I don’t read the tabloids but I still knew about it. Even the BBC reported on it. Were the incomers all Syrian, or even refugees? What do we actually know about them, apart from anecdotal stuff?
The common element among the four manias described is that each represents a first-world problem. In other words, society has become so affluent and so comfortable that we have to imagine catastrophic concerns because so very few legitimate ones exist. As another poster noted, climate change is missing from the list and it, too, follows that same path.
You think anyone in a genuine third-world country, or even an emerging economy, is pearl-clutching over carbon emissions? Of course, not; the fear porn is confined largely to the West. Because in the absence of real grinding poverty, genuine dictatorship (though we are flirting with this one), and the presence of diseases that do not exist in the Western world, we have to invent crises. And crisis-stoking and maintenance is an industry unto itself.
I feel like the author should mention Dr Mathias Desmet no?
Maybe she’s not heard of him.
I am not a doctor or a scientist. But I can see when it stops making sense. When governments punish those who have not been vaccinated when we can all see that vaccinations don’t stop transmission. When we are told we can go to a restaurant but must wear a mask when we stand up. When we are told that infection does not give you any natural immunity. When we are told that puberty doesn’t matter. When we are told that children have a gendered soul and their bodies should be changed to match it.
I live in Alberta Canada and it often is minus 20 in the winter and sometimes minus 45 C. We are being told that we should rely on sun and wind and that we cannot export our LNG to countries that rely on coal because – you know climate change. Doesn’t make sense.
Can’t wait to read MANIA. If I become a trans-woman can I then join the #MeToo movement? Life is rather boring as an elderly, privileged, white, heterosexual male. I need a new interest now I’ve become bored by Wordle.
Wait a minute, weren‘t most of these „social manias“ and „moral panics“ ventures by progressives and tyrannical bureaucracies and elites??? Is there an new „narrative“ in town that all was just almost harmless playful lunacy.?
As usual, The Truth lies in a middle ground. In this case, somewhere between believing specious claims of (therapist implanted) “recovered memory” and on the other hand, completely denying that repressed memories are even possible (I have experienced them myself in a way that was possible to factually confirm).
Given that culture evolves dialectically, i guess the hysteria phase is a Thesis move, the necessary backlash that follows that is an Antithesis move, and the move that (hopefully) follows is a Synthesis move, where we acknowledge the phenomenon but find reasonable ways to separate fact from fantasy.
Hopefully, the particular hysterias of today will successfully traverse the dialectic and arrive at a reasonable and facts-based Synthesis.
The Owls usually prevail at some point, and get to write up the history. The Roosters though don’t read anything until the time of later history revision, so as not to disturb the pretense that the sh** didn’t really happen, and anyway, this time it’s different.
There’s reason to believe transgenderism is merely the hors d’ouevre; the main course will be transhumanism. Along the way, we will be served various bonne bouches such as extreme body positivity, trans-racialism and trans-ableism.
Canada’s euthanasia programme, MAiD, forms part of this picture, too, as it’s being extended to people who are merely unhappy, and even to children.
I have been wondering lately if progressive politics can have an end-point? As others have said, Stonewall only took up transgenderism after it achieved it’s aim of legalising same sex marriage. Instead of closing the charity down as a resounding success, it sought a new goal. If we extend this to progressivism generally, what do we see?
Yes, ‘progressivism’ (sorry) can never end else it become conservative.
Spot on. I liken it all to the Salem witch trials in 17th century Massachusets – mass hysteria, nobody wanting to go against the narrative lest they end up burnt, and most people keeping their heads below the parapet for the same reason. The mad minority kept the flames burning and then some even turned on each other. Rather like the French Revolution, it got madder and madder, and better to turn on your fellow fanatics before they turned on you. We can see this looking back, but it is much harder to see what will halt this current madness. It’s all looking too Orwellian for me.
Emotions are contagious. They couldn’t work any other way.
The Captain Tom phenomenon, as a phenomenon, combined two powerful components. The NHS, virtually a state religion, and the moral scripture of the Second World War. If the good Captain appears to have been packaged, advertised and marketed to provide a supporting legitimisation of the Covid measures and the mania, it’s probably because he was.
Assisted dying may be introduced for one compassionate and humane reason (though no one’s body needs any assistance to die), it has every opportunity to develop mania characteristics as the criteria to allow such a state-assisted end are multiplied.
Mental health, especially as it’s promoted to children, is another fertile field for mania characteristics.
Apply Ms Shriver’s checklist to the West and Russia. When does a phobia become a mania? Did the Russomania of Imperial Germany only lay dormant?
As for Climate, revolutions are always advanced by separating the young from their parents. The oldies are harangued by the young for the selfish profligacy that they feel endangers them; whether by the good Greta or in the hideous film by Leni Riefenstahl.
I’d like to know when media will take responsibility for their promotion and allegiance to all these manias. Even Lionel admitted some cowardice on the trans issue, four years to be quiet when you have a megaphone is too long.
Also, I don’t agree that these manias are fueled by good intentions. I’ve seen the joyous malevolence in people. It’s bats**t crazy.
One last point, Lionel left out the mania for supporting terrorists like Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. That’s the latest thing surely, Jew hatred.
Very good point about hipster antisemitism.
…Brilliant, as always. For what it’s worth, my own theory is that these manias are a displacement activity in the face of genuine, traditional and very real threats that we actually DO face…most immediately Czar Putin’s determination to restore the Empire of all the Russias by military force…
…and slightly more distantly the Celestial Emperor Xi’s ambition to recreate the “Middle Kingdom”, enjoying dominion over the Whole World as it did in IT’s corner of the world for Millennia…
…and the genuine likelihood that eventually a New Caliph will indeed arise, and we WILL see the Black Banners of the Prophet at the Iron Gates, or leading an invasion fleet towards Greece, Italy or Spain…
…but the problem with these genuine threats…which we CAN confront…is that they require action beyond emoting on social media, wailing incontinently on the streets, or chucking paint around art galleries and museums…
…these require our getting tooled up, rebuilding the armed forces…and getting a great many teens and twenties into uniform, and into the field.
But for said teens and twenties, that looks a bit tough, a bit scary…and a bit judgemental about dangerous people who do indeed hate us and want to kill us, and will do so if they can…but quite a lot of whom are not white, thereby making self-defence Waay..CIST!
Unlike the aforementioned performative nonsense, which can safely be undertaken within currently acceptable social norms…and mostly involves being obnoxious to older white people who are not likely to respond by shooting you in the head…
There must be a word for the phenomenon of reading something, nodding away, and then suddenly – – WHAT? Like changing into reverse at 70mph on the motorway – a metamorphosis into the swivel-eyed – –
I can think of two more manias in our recent history, one in the process of materialising, and one on the horizon.
The first of these was wearing pyjamas in public. This phenomenon was typically a matter of slobbish people visiting their local shops and dropping their kids off at school. A variant on the theme was the wearing of “onesies”.
The second, perhaps localised to my home town Bristol, was going barefoot: for a year or two 10-12 years ago, young middle class men took to wandering barefoot around streets in the hipster quarters risking cuts from broken glass and infections from dog mess.
The third is polyamory. Polyamory is basically the woke rebranding of 70’s suburban swinging. Its proponents are typically very boring and self-centred.
The fourth, which again seems to be a Bristolian thing, is the burgeoning phenomenon of middle-class public defecation. The favourite spot for this pastime is presently the St Werburghs mound, a favourite resort of Bristolian hipsters after a night of cocaine and ketamine. A friend whose dog has developed a taste for human faeces has sadly had to find somewhere else to exercise him.
If they have that much of an urge to shit in public (the hipsters, not the dogs), I’d wonder what they’re cutting the K and charlie with. But all of these substances are cut with something nasty these days.
Where is the barefoot wandering undertaken? Wouldn’t fancy a barefoot jaunt up to Clifton as given how steep it is, it’d surely have the skin off your feet pretty fast. And, with all those bars along Stoke’s Croft, there’s got to be a lot of broken glass there of a Friday night.
Polyamory Horror Stories : getting a lift back from the funeral of a tortured but misguided friend who’d thought he was trans, with your typical overweight, techy polyamoric couple, and having them both hit on me.
That was the last time I saw anyone in that ‘friend group.’.
The barefoot craze only lasted a year or two before subsiding several years ago. It most certainly was a Stokes Croft/Picton Street phenomenon. Rest assured that I share your befuddlement. Likewise regarding the physical unattractiveness of most exponents of polyamory.
These things may be daft, but they are hardly manias.
Though the mania could be seeing signs of imminent social collapse in every daft fad.
How long have you been working for the Bristol Tourist Board?
Fart, ooh! long.
I have not met one ‘recovered memory’ patient in recent years who did not have a pre-existing animosity to his or her parents. When it first started, it could be more random as to who the ‘abuser’ was. I think it’s become mainly tactical in recent years.
“In 2020, even tweeting “All lives matter” got you sacked.”
White lives matter. I capitalise “White” while not capitalising “black”. I only read books written by White men. And I want the non-White roles in my play The Senseless Counterfeit to be played by White actors in blackface.
One of the best unherd articles I have read for some time. I have just cancelled my subscription because of the utter drivel they have been churning out. I now may have to reinstate it.
Superb! Thank you
The Climate Crisis is one of the few issues which has associated with it “numerical evidence”, which will wax and wane over time, and appears to be waxing at the moment. So it’s like there’s a flame of variable brightness fanning it. So, I think it behaves like a mania – people will be either reactive or excessively proactive, and some will attempt to strike a balance – but that unfortunately doesn’t say anything about what the “correct” attitude to it might be, social attitude, governmental attitude. That’s a matter for perpetual self-judgement, and some deference to those who have more time invested in it (the “experts”, and also the “shamans” as well…)
The manias outlined here were not iniversally accepted, from my experience there was deep and widespread scepticism.
That does not seem to be the case with those who consider themselves educated, especially if the hold postions of authority. These people make up the bulk of the protestors we see on our streeets.
The question is that with the people who once formed the bedrock of social stability now being the agents of disorder and strife what on earth can be done about it?
Interesting article as far as some social issues are concerned, lots of hype out there for sure, mostly driven by social media and agenda driven woke tribalism. However, the author obviously has his own mania driven biases, including anti vax and climate change denial. Obviously a mania driven believer in conspiracies and hidden government agendas, smacks of Trumpism and follower of Bannon, and promotes social chaos. There are many manias that he choses to ignore, for instance the anti science mania, the climate change and environmental degradation denial mania, the cryto mania, now the AI mania , the conspiracy theories mania. The world is full of manias, maybe it’s time to get off the laptops and cell phones and get back into the” real world” , and start dealing with real world issues that affect people. We were lucky (this time) that covid did not kill more people, mostly grannies and papies who for the most part are not on social media, because maybe next time we won’t be so lucky, read the history of the 1918- 1919 influenza which killed an estimated 50-100 million people, including many young people and soldiers (many died in 3 or 4 days). As for climate change, listen to Greta, you may actually learn something useful. Or read the real science, if it’s not too much effort.
Brilliant
I don’t dispute the notion that people get sucked into manias, I just think it is much, much worse than I ever remember it when I was a child back in the 60s/70s. Our capacity for independent thought seems to be hostage to social media now and I never really appreciated it until I saw my FB account being flooded with nonsense about poor little Johnny gasping his last because selfish people like me did not hide behind the sofa. And the book that always comes to mind when I think about the latest nonsense du jour is Saramago’s ‘Blindness’. I thought it was just a bit OTT when I first read it 20 odd years ago, but now I realise how how perceptive and prescient he was.
The upside of democracy is that people get to have a say. The downside of democracy is that people get to have a say. We manage to live with that contradiction because the wealth effects of free markets and free inquiry are so manifest. Curiously, though, the more egalitarian democracies become, the louder is the airing of grievances, and the greater is the hypersensitivity to harm. As Shelby Steele remarked “Anger in the oppressed is the response to perceived opportunity, not to injustice. And expressions of anger escalate not with more injustice but with less injustice…”
That last nth of injustice, unfairness, harm evoke the fiercest outcries.
Of Jonathan Haidt’s six moral foundations, the pairings Care/Harm, Fairness/Cheating skew strongly left, to the point they are the only two of the six that the very liberal person really cares about. ( Strong conservatives, it should be noted, tend to be moderate with regard to all six foundations. How interesting! We should give ourselves a pat on the back )
Women also care more about Caring than men, skew left politically, and are evidently experiencing something like a mental health crisis, particularly young women. Certainly women have had more reason to be ‘woke’ to the possibility of harm in the fraught history of Getting to Know You.
Make of that what you will ( there is a replication crisis in all of these social sciences, remember ), but Haidt, a self-confessed liberal, is credible and his findings are based on a very large data set ( 15,000 the last I looked a few years ago ). There’s likely something to it.
There is harm lurking somewhere in all of these manias.
Woke is the purest expression of hypersensitivity to the possibility of harm. The word was born in black wariness of ‘the man’, but through several mild transformations is now a pejorative for the tender sentiments and manias of white liberals. The grifters are circling them like hyenas just beyond the cast of firelight.
Perhaps it all comes down to this: humans may not be well suited to affluence and idleness. If they can’t suffer from actual harms, they will, as in the fable of the pea and princess, suffer from the merest intimation of harm. Or just make it up.
I’ll drop anything to read a Lionel Shriver essay.
I like Ms. Shriver, and she is one of my favorite authors. However, she has Covid all wrong. She fails to mention that over a million people died in a little under two years. And some people are still dying. Many of the anti-masks people—two radio hosts in their forties and my neighbor’s son, who was 38. People watched with horror as the disease raged through New York City and Italy. I was scared. I’ll admit that some cities failed to open their schools when the threat to children was small. But I think scientists did the best they could when dealing with a virus they had never seen.
Yes Covid was devastating for the very old and very frail. Those huge numbers of deaths were largely among those two groups. There were outliers–there always are. In any ordinary year, some young people, and even children, die of the flu and other diseases. The reaction by governments was driven by fear and panic and, in the end, did more harm than good.
I’m sorry but the data does not bear this out. Without the hysteria, lockdowns, obsessive testing and the isolation of the old and frail in care homes where they suffered neglect, I think it is unlikely anyone would have even noticed a pandemic. The media drove it and government policies caused most of the damage.
I agree with some of these ‘manias’ being fashionable drivel, but have serious reservations about the climate change debate; unlike her other targets climate change is measurable – it’s not based on people’s anxious feelings about social injustices and personal preferences, you can get your sliderule out and use maths to describe it. It always tickles me when comments accuse science and scientists of being deceitful or conspiratorial – they may be wrong, they may be mistaken in their measurements or their hypotheses, but the last thing any professional scientist is going to do is put their name to something they don’t believe to be true, because sooner or later other scientists will call them out and they hate that. It is partly ‘powered by emotion’ because anybody who has grasped how serious it could be is scared. As the apt cliche has it, ‘There is no planet B’. From where I stand it is the climate change questioners who have to demonstrate their better understanding of the facts; I’m going with the actual scientists, nearly all of whom say it’s time to worry, not the armchair climatologists. The idea that scientists are collaborating to deceive the rest of us is Ludicrous with a capital L.
“…you can get your sliderule out and use maths to describe it.”
My old maths teacher had a problem with constipation once. She used a ruler to work it out…
Funnily enough my own maths teacher suffered in that way too, but he preferred to work it out with a pencil and paper. Must be something in their diet?
Yes, but. I presume that manias issue from the human need to detect and unite against a frightful enemy or existential peril.
And obviously anyone in the political or activist line is interested in the mania game, because power.
Chaps like Crane Brinton in Anatomy of Revolution say that manias (or reigns of terror) usually occur in politics when the revolution is failing. And it can’t be because its ideas are rubbish. No, it has to be the enemy.
And that brings us to Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt and his notion of the political being the distinction between friend and enemy. And the moral being the distinction between good and evil. And, I would say, the religious being the distinction between God and Satan.
Still, experts agree, you can’t be too careful about extreme right-wing hate speech.
Social manias have a long and storied history. Unfortunately, when I was a schoolgirl I was also caught up in one such mania. Fortunately, it was Beatlemania and did me and my friends no lasting harm. (Paul still rules, btw.)
I lived 42 years married to a spouse who suffered depression, bi-polar disorder (undifferentiated, whatever that was), paranoia, schizophrenia, paranoid schizophrenia, agoraphobia, visual and aural hallucinations, and other illnesses whose names I have forgotten over the decades. Brilliant woman, had an earned doctorate, Summa cum Laude, from a top Ivy League university. These diagnoses, over those 42 years, were from the top psychiatrists in the country. I was fortunate to have excellent medical insurance and was financially able to afford what was not covered by insurance. In all those years I learned two lessons: 1) medical science still has no handle on the causes and cure of mental illness, and 2) I never met a psychiatrist or therapist who wasn’t crazier than his or her patients.
Whenever I say something like your last point in public, it turns out I’m talking to a psychologist or similar practitioner. Some of them agree with me!
How many of the predictions about what will happen due to climate change have actually come true? In Australia, an expert on mammals made a prediction in 2007 (when the country was in the grip of an extended drought) that as the ground was so hot and dry that even the rain that fell would not be enough to fill our rivers and dams. Despite numerous floods since 2010 when that drought broke, the mammal expert has not once admitted that maybe, perhaps, he might have gotten it wrong. The ground in my locality is so wet after all the rain we’ve had this year it can’t absorb anymore and it just runs off into the storm water drains and eventually into the local creek which rose 5 metres in half an hour when the last storm dumped just over 50mm (which is about average for a storm in my part of the world). Normally that amount of rain would result in a rise of less than a metre.
Over twenty years later, Michael Crichton’s thesis still holds up!
…Bravo Lionel. Especially on your conclusion on climate alarmism. Some ten years before Greta appeared on the international scene, Richard Landes, then a History Prof at Boston Uni, wrote a truly insightful historical analysis of collective manias, (or millennialism to historians) titled, “Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience”. The iteration of these manias being instigated through young female personalities, across different cultures, is truly astonishing.
Psychiatrist here. You echo my thoughts. Just in the last week, the pastor of my church was extolling the reality and the rights of trans gender teens and a therapist with whom I have had a working relationship for over 10 years wrote me an excoriating letter due to my recommendation everyone go slow with a 11 years old natal male patient with autism, ADHD, generalized anxiety, several suicide attempts and hospitalizations, whereas the therapist (both the boy’s and the parents) and the pediatrician were pushing hard for puberty blockers. And after three years, the child is still wreaking havoc in the home, still on the carousel of outpatient programs, still being blitzed with medications. And the similarities to the Salem witch trials and the ‘recovered memory’ movement are uncanny. This mania has taken over a small vocal and radical tribe in the medical community, overturning reason and commonsense, tossing aside evidence based medicine and the scientific method, and proving to me that many of my colleagues are cowards or oblivious or quite mad. What is tragic, in contrast of other trends and fads — remember the grapefruit diet or parachute pants? — this one is taking minors, often confused and depressed and hungering for stability and identity, and equally uninformed or misinformed parents, down the road to potentially ‘irreversible damage,’
Brilliant.
Interestingly, in the spot where I live, sand is encroaching on the sea at a rapid rate. About 6 months ago an old (100 years approximately) jetty was dug up. Funny thing was it is over a km to the nearest water
This is not only the best article I’ve ever read by Lionel Shriver, it’s also the best distillation of the set of tactics employed during each mass psychoses – which have become all the more frequent due to the products of information technology. Great stuff.
Some of these manias seem to be deliberate creations by forces that care for nothing but grabbing power.
Take Covid policy. How was it that every policy implemented was systematically the opposite of the correct one? It clearly wasn’t random do-something-anything panic. And when the forces of reason provided political cover (in the Great Barrington Declaration) for a policy reversal, why did all the governments refuse to use the cover to return to sanity?
I just found this really good climate change video that ties in with this article:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqcDyHdbYd4
Manias also distract us from more significant realities. Articles like this, and our most earnest conversations and debates, should end with, “Meanwhile….”
Having just read that the ludicrous ECHR has concluded that Switzerland has failed to protect some +70 year old women (not sure they wanted to include men in this nonsense) from the effects of climate change, it is a mania that has taken over organisations, national and international, to the point of nonsense. A few days ago, when Rishi Sunak suggested we may leave the ECHR, there were screams of pain about leaving such an august body. If we left tomorrow, it would not be soon enough given the gibberish they promulgate.
I have been reading recently about Vibe Shift, which generally means cultural shift. (Maybe one of the other commentators has already made reference to this.) It is being used today to denote the shift from mindsets that were so inbedded in our culture just a few short years ago that if you cricized or challenged them, you were deemed racist, misogynist, stupid, or whatever else that is bad. Even Lionel Trilling, one of our braver souls, had to keep her “journalist mouth shut” when trying to address some of the harms resulting from transgenderism. Now, however, in one fell swope, she can openly criticize five sacred cows of the left – transgenderism, #MeToo, Covid lockdowns, BLM, and climate change – without being destroyed by social media. If indeed we are going through this Vibe Shift, I can sense life getting better in this country.
If you were masked up at every opportunity during COVID and insisting that others do so too, yet somehow found the courage to brave Corona in order to join a BLM riot or Gay Pride Parade, then that’s a sure sign you were in the grip of a mania.
You nailed it again, Lionel. Can’t wait to read the new book!
The comments have this sense of relief, agreeing with the article that ‘those lot over there are stupid, they believe in manias. Thank goodness I don’t.’ The thing is everyone has a bee-in-the-bonnet about something, and everyone is wrong at least some of the time, with particular blind-spots on things that are strongly believed. Very few people try to prove themselves wrong, preferring to live with a blissful confirmation bias. With AI we’re going to have to get an awful lot better at doubt and skepticism.
Agree with a lot of this, but the brush is too broad for me. I half expected her to say that fear of Putin is also a mania (just like fear of Hitler was too of course…). The implication that there’s nothing but hot air behind everything – that trying to “smooth the curve” to protect the NHS was just part of the mania and had no practical function (clearly didn’t go into a hospital at the time – shocking). Touching at the end on climate crisis may be intended to provoke – and there may be some hyperbole in some teenage quarters. But I can see the Shriver script going beyond justifiable skepticism into downright pig-headed denial – “Crisis? What crisis?” could be the last thing she ever says
Looking at the heavily biased comments below it would seem that conspiracy theory, anti-science climate denial also qualifies as a mania – albeit thankfully among a tiny minority
Spot on article.
While reading, not knowing what to expect, and seeing no mention of the ‘climate’ mania (or mass formation) amongst all the other manias (till right at the end), I formulated a question for the comments section: Is questioning the climate crisis the current unmentionable? Since the writer made this very point so deftly, I hope she will keep her job.
A key point, mostly overlooked in the comments is this: “All manias thrive on our desire to be included by our own herd and on our anxiety about being exiled — or, if you will, about being UnHerded.” Bravo! Or needing a cause to believe in, self sacrificially, like a religion.
Thy UK Cass report finally putting a nail in the coffin of the trans delusion- poor if any evidence to support the diagnosis – extensive harm to children, bullying of critics of transgender, although conclusive was spun in the media, especially commercial Tv, as not enough facilities for MORE of this dangerous and harmful treatment. This is a weed that will be only rooted out by vast damages awarded to those who have been harmed
Nonsense liar, Cass is a fraud who merely excluded all the data which included would have refuted her preferred results. In fact, she excluded 93%~99% of the data.
Great article. The only thing I’d add is that climate alarmism isn’t very new and its growing prominence predates at least two or three of the others on your list. Greta Thunberg was famous before Covid or BLM.
And like you, I don’t think this is necessarily the place to argue about how much truth there is to “climate change”. It isn’t necessary to deny the science behind climate change entirely to be nevertheless concerned about alarmism that can do more harm than good. Even social manias can contain a seed of truth: Covid WAS a nasty new virus that killed lots of people; racism IS real and it’s wrong; some women ARE abused by men. In fact arguably the most successful manias do contain at least some truth, which is what gives them such power and makes them harder to resist when they mutate into something even worse than the problems they were supposed to solve.
Great article but there were places where I laughed so hard I could hardly keep reading!
Excellent summary thanks Lionel ! The only course of action is to regard h sapiens as a primitive race and to get some comfort out of being (hopefully) not too affected – and maybe to kinda enjoy the latest folly …………..
The climate change mania is already here, and has been for a while. But it’s old and not quite as exegent at the moment as hating and killing Jews. This one may hang in for a while, sadly, since the shame it carries is global.
We exchange each for a more outrageous one as the reactions to the last one, fade. We want a bigger bang for the buck; the agitators like Schwab and Soros are getting old and impatient. You actually hit on the next possible one — euthanasia. The Right to Die. We can write the slogans, design the flags, put out the talking points, assemble all kinds of statistics, tell stories…. you get the idea. It’s not hard.
We have become an adolescent society, craving attention, immediate gratification, importance, fame, and immortality.
To learn and change, one must mature. It’s it to late?
We may get there with climate change hysteria, but don’t forget what’s right in our faces: the mania over Israeli “genocide”. This is mania number 5. We are here.