1. Academic mobbing is a non-violent, sophisticated, ‘ganging up’ behaviour adopted by academicians to “wear and tear” a colleague down emotionally through unjustified accusation, humiliation, general harassment and emotional abuse
2. These are directed at the target under a veil of lies and justifications so that they are “hidden” to others and difficult to prove. Bullies use mobbing activities to hide their own weaknesses and incompetence.
3. Targets selected are often intelligent, innovative high achievers, with good integrity & principles. Mobbing activities appear trivial & innocuous on its own but the frequency of their occurrence over time indicates an aggressive manipulation to “eliminate” the target.
4. Mobbing activities typically progress through five stereotypical phases that begins with an unsolved minor conflict between two workers and ultimately escalates into a senseless mobbing whereby the target is stigmatized and victimized to justify the behaviours of the bullies
6. Reasons why bystanders do not support target
Colleagues have no understanding or experience of bullying, psychological violence, etc.
Few have integrity & moral courage to stand up against the bully. They pretend nothing is happening then it won’t happen to them
7. (their turn will come eventually).
They lack critical thinking skills and analytic abilities, cannot see through facade or bully’s mask of deceit.
8. Bullies poison the atmosphere and actively poison people’s minds against the target, to regard target a threat to organization, as having “mental health problem”. They use implied threats of disciplinary action against anyone who is friendly to the target.
9. They form alliance with colleagues with same behaviour profile.
When there is conflict, most people want to be on winning side or on side they think will survive.
Some gain gratification (perverse feeling of satisfaction) in witnessing the sufferings of the target.
10. Bullying is subtle and behind closed doors. Comprises of hundreds of incidents which out of context and in isolation are trivial.
Bystanders do not see the full picture.
Bystanders are hoodwinked by bully’s ruses for abdicating responsibility and evading accountability
12. This campaign of negative communication ends up poisoning the entire workplace or faculty. All members of the group are exposed, and the well-known psycho-sociological phenomenon of peer pressure empowers the instigators to recruit a large majority.
13. These recruits either become active mobbers, if they apply these tactics aggressively, or they become passive mobbers, if they look the other way and pretend the violence doesn’t exist.
14. Negative communication frames the target as someone who is impossible to work with and who threatens the organization. The following characteristics are invariably attributed to the target, made out to be someone who:
is a troublemaker,
doesn’t listen to advice,
is detrimental to the organization,
isn’t a team player,
is mentally ill,
asks too many questions,
doesn’t share the group’s culture,
has a difficult personality,
resists injustice,
isn’t social, or
is a bully.
Resistance
As academics, we are due to witness a new mobbing campaign being instigated sooner or later, provided we aren’t the target. A sure sign is when a negative and apparently universal opinion of a colleague takes hold.
As an elimination strategy starts to form and initial attempts are made to recruit us, we must ask ourselves:
Dr. Callahan can run around the world picking clinical isolates out of disease outbreaks and prioritize things that way.
"If I were, you know, doing things, I might do what I know. I might resynthesize SARS, put a toxin on it, infect myself, and cough on people"
Dr. Callahan:
"Yes. We find avian influenza disquieting in the extreme, and the reasons are basically that most of the work is already being done for the terrorists.
Several of those countries have become more difficult to work with in recent history" (China)
Working alongside investigative journalist Sharri Markson we uncovered that over the past decade, the U.S. has funded over 60 projects at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
WCW and Markson found that the National Institutes of Health, United States Agency for International Development, Department of Defense, and Department of Energy all funneled YOUR tax dollars to the Wuhan Animal Lab.
A few people have recently proposed changing the R in DRASTIC from "Radical" to "Rational".
Reminder, since May 2020, DRASTIC is:
Decentralised Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating Covid-19
Please read some comments below which address this issue.
1. Changing that word in our acronym at this stage after nearly 2 years will be perceived as a sign of weakness 2. This vote is a waste of time. The acronym for drastic is in print in several books” 3. We will become a laughing stock
4. The meaning of radical is ambiguous, but as an adjective the meaning here is the Number 1 meaning
thorough, complete; change etc. nothing to do with a political point of view.
Peter Daszak and the EcoHealth Alliance (EHA) proposed injecting deadly chimeric bat coronaviruses collected by the Wuhan Institute of Virology into humanised and "batified" mice, and much, much more.