3 ms·

Everytime this gets brought up, I feel it fails to address the question "How is this overly different than the pre-internet area?". I can understand the disappo

Everytime this gets brought up, I feel it fails to address the question "How is this overly different than the pre-internet area?". I can understand the disappointment as to the failure of the Internet to deliver on the utopia we expected in the 90s, and there's a fantastic lecture on the idea of "the end of mainstream" (I will edit and add a link if I can dig it up) and how that's removed a lot of the old universal cultural touchstones (which despite being universal tended to be very exclusionary which is what fueled the explosion of niche communities online in the first place). I wasn't alive to comment, but I can't imagine the second half of the 20th century a booming time where you interacted with people outside of you geographic community (which generally shared your political, religious, and social beliefs). I know many of my parents old friends still live ~20miles from where they grew up and that's not overly uncommon. Put into that context it makes theses pieces on dividing Americans seem a little silly. Divided is the default state and has been since the nation's inception as a loose collection of independent governments.

neogodless 10y ago
I don't think it is overly different, but that doesn't mean the magnitude may have changed (and the divide accelerated.) It's kind of like going from silly Pepsi vs. Coke differences to grouping everyone and everything in your world into a huge group of "us vs. them" - everything is on your side or the other side. Obama and Trump. Second Amendment. Abortion. It's all "us vs. them" in one big foggy war, and the stakes are high for all of us.
mercer 10y ago
I think you make a good point there, and it's something that always bothered me about the typical left-right or urban-rural or facebook-echo-chamber explanation. I do think all these things play a role, but as you say, it's not like we lived in wonderful diversity before these things. Personally I think what changed, and the article does a good job highlighting that (which made it refreshing to me), is that the degree of our diversity (or lack thereof) has changed. In the army, or college, or church, you're forced to become close (or at least get to know somewhat intimately) many people who are potentially very different from yourself, lottery-style. There's a whole spectrum between that and the 'bubble' many of us live in these days (in part caused by the internet). There has always been segregation, we've always had a preference for friends and social groups that are relatively 'close' to us in various aspects. What changed, perhaps, is that we now have to luxury of avoiding 'others' almost entirely, where in past, through church and army and so on, we had to have meaningful (if not close) relationships to those 'others'.
devoply 10y ago
What has changed is social media. Where people used to sit in front of their TV and fed their daily dose of what they believe after an exhausting day at work they no longer do that. Instead they are plugged into their phones all waking hours where people like them are reinforcing their beliefs. So they come to believe that their opinions are not as out there. They feel less aliened and more empowered. So they think they can voice themselves how they want. And for blue collar workers, that has meant that they have taken over politics. And the elite don't know how to stop them. How to control and socially engineer social media. This was not possible without the Internet.

neogodless 10y ago

I don't think it is overly different, but that doesn't mean the magnitude may have changed (and the divide accelerated.) It's kind of like going from silly Pepsi vs. Coke differences to grouping everyone and everything in your world into a huge group of "us vs. them" - everything is on your side or the other side. Obama and Trump. Second Amendment. Abortion. It's all "us vs. them" in one big foggy war, and the stakes are high for all of us.

mercer 10y ago

I think you make a good point there, and it's something that always bothered me about the typical left-right or urban-rural or facebook-echo-chamber explanation. I do think all these things play a role, but as you say, it's not like we lived in wonderful diversity before these things. Personally I think what changed, and the article does a good job highlighting that (which made it refreshing to me), is that the degree of our diversity (or lack thereof) has changed. In the army, or college, or church, you're forced to become close (or at least get to know somewhat intimately) many people who are potentially very different from yourself, lottery-style. There's a whole spectrum between that and the 'bubble' many of us live in these days (in part caused by the internet). There has always been segregation, we've always had a preference for friends and social groups that are relatively 'close' to us in various aspects. What changed, perhaps, is that we now have to luxury of avoiding 'others' almost entirely, where in past, through church and army and so on, we had to have meaningful (if not close) relationships to those 'others'.

devoply 10y ago

What has changed is social media. Where people used to sit in front of their TV and fed their daily dose of what they believe after an exhausting day at work they no longer do that. Instead they are plugged into their phones all waking hours where people like them are reinforcing their beliefs. So they come to believe that their opinions are not as out there. They feel less aliened and more empowered. So they think they can voice themselves how they want. And for blue collar workers, that has meant that they have taken over politics. And the elite don't know how to stop them. How to control and socially engineer social media. This was not possible without the Internet.