Thoughts about Mobbing research

Again I’m not trying to find and propose ideas from dialectical point of view, rather than to find options to proceed further examinations. If organized stalking is a form of social control against deviancy there should be some sort of pattern or predictability as to when to expect such measure. Even though vigilantes could be well organized, but vigilance doesn’t really explain it, since vigilantes are usually after swift and quick justice. There is always possibility of vigilantism in the case of pervasive and degrading rumors, but that’s more like an expected side effect rather than principle, being that immediate physical destruction of psychological stalking is not the goal.

If talking about organized stalking then level of discipline and motivation to perform certain task by public without immediate observation of reaction as being part of reward for this particular induced stimuli points to some authority figure and understanding of long term goals by those involved (not necessarily intricacies like NLP or behavioral conditioning).  Mobbing is the only phenomena that is very similar, not to mention widely publicized and researched, but it’s definition narrowly limits it to workplace. Extensive mobbing research doesn’t answer questions why and who. Anyone could be mobbed by anyone and most blame is put on workplace institution and organizational mismanagement (situational factors) thus diffusing accountability into collective blame and shifting focus from instigator individual responsibility. Mobbing could be also described by disruption tactics only at workplace. So if mobbing is so unpredictable and can only be suppressed by improving organization itself and raising awareness, could gangstalking be a spontaneous phenomena too? I seriously doubt it. What is interesting that person who is gangstalked is usually is harassed at workplace too, but not necessarily vice versa unless researchers dismiss that part as unrelated as it doesn’t incorporate into definition. I speculate the main reason mobbing is explored, not because deplorable nature of the crime, but it’s negative effects on business itself. So if typical scientific approach by multiple dedicated researchers failed to tackle mobbing core issues, what kind of prospect can we see for organized stalking issue? So they looked into patterns, methods, conditions, different forms of mobbing, correlated into sex factor, reactions of victims, consequences on victims life, but couldn’t find explanation of why except situational factors. They defined stages as to how mobbing usually occurs:

  1. The first phase is conflict. Mobbing develops from an unresolved conflict, which gradually loses importance, replaced instead by a personal dispute. Mobbing activities are not yet explicit, but there are first consequences, like irritability, depression, exhaustion, periodical weakness, headaches, sleep disorder, stomach trouble, etc
  2. In the second phase the conflict has been repressed, the victim’s personality becomes the target of the attacks. There are new activities of mobbing, communication is terminated. In this phase the attacked person changes a lot, and for colleagues becomes an “outsider”. There are the first disturbances between the victim and their social environment. The victim starts developing post-traumatic stress disorder.
  3. First disciplinary measures follow (third phase). Due to mobbing the victim becomes problematic, less concentrated, makes mistakes, is often absent- sick. As a result of the numerous disciplinary and other measures in this phase the case becomes public, and everybody gets to know, even those who didn’t know to that time that there is something wrong with the victim. A bad reputation follows them everywhere. In this phase the psychological and physical symptoms increase. There is also an increase in the abuse of medication and addiction to it. Alcoholism is frequent and there are first signs of suicidal inclinations.
  4. The fourth phase, comprises so called wrong diagnoses made by psychiatrists and psychologists when the victims seek help.
  5. The last phase represents termination of employment. After their dismissal many victims are incapable of working and they file for early retirement on medical grounds. If mobbing ends with termination of employment, the psychosomatic disorders are so severe that the individuals are permanently incapable of working and they file for early retirement on medical grounds.

Researchers note another similarities with gangstalking:

  • Most information can still be found on the Internet, and people (usually) do not start acquainting themselves with mobbing until they, or someone close, or colleagues, become victims. (thats not really a similarity, information on organized stalking is virtually non-existent in terms of finding real answers)
  • Superiors are, in many cases, the bullies, and this is the reason that they would not intervene, because it would mean intervening against themselves.
  • Eventually even family members and friends stop believing the victim, which throws them into even greater despair.
  • “mental effects were fully comparable with PTSD from war or prison camp experiences.

A lot of similar themes and outcomes, difference is localization of activity and techniques, not to mention surveillance and possible use of EM weapons. I guess question arises on how to engage researchers to look at this phenomena without prejudice of delusional or other psychiatric symptoms, emphasizing harm it’s causing on society and communities. If you take mobbing template and apply it to community or society it wouldn’t be far fetched to make correlations in many different areas except with wide array of extra harassment tools available to be applied towards targeted individuals.

Psychiatrists are fully aware of conundrum that group idea can’t be perceived as delusion:

The extent of the community, Dr. Bell said, poses a paradox to the traditional way delusion is defined under the diagnostic guidelines of the American Psychiatric Association, which says that if a belief is held by a person’s “culture or subculture,” it is not a delusion. The exception accounts for rituals of religious faith, for example.

http://www.nytimes.com/….

Sooner or later society will have to tackle this problem, but I doubt psychology can solve it in any form that would lead to some sort of solution as it would probably expose them as complicit in participating of designing many of the methods.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

One response to “Thoughts about Mobbing research

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s