5 ms·

I doubt this would help. Judging by my Facebook feed Americans are perfectly capable of vicious, polarized discourse without foreign influence. In fact this may

I doubt this would help. Judging by my Facebook feed Americans are perfectly capable of vicious, polarized discourse without foreign influence. In fact this may backfire as it would allow the hateful in society to have more of a right to preach on these platforms as no one would be able to accuse them of being foreign trolls. Its probable that this level of discourse is here to stay and that the previous elevated, comparably "civilized" discourse was a result of broadcast media and its top-down structure.

sykhic 8y ago
Judging by my Facebook feed Americans are perfectly capable of vicious, polarized discourse without foreign influence. It's gotten quite bad in the U.S. Common political discourse has devolved into a back and forth of insults, hyperbolic accusations, and sometimes just plain insanity. I agree with you that this will probably be something that will last a while. If only we could get people to realize that believing something to be true merely because it reinforces a pre-conceived idea or because it's plausibly true is not a path toward finding the truth. How do you have a discussion with someone who believes the political equivalent of a flat Earth?
- jewelthief91 8y ago
  I am still hopeful that the hand wringing about social media is overblown. Flat earthers for example I believe are in two camps: the genuine loonies that have always been with us in small numbers and the large number of people who just want to pretend to have whacky beliefs for the entertainment value of holding them (think people who believe in crystal healing and such). As dissatisfying as it is, freaking out about people who hold beliefs for entertainment is counter productive. We also have to remember that discourse waxes and wanes in tone. Throughout the 1800s for example it wasn't uncommon for massive brawls to take place between what were essentially political gangs. Think of the brawls we see today between antifa and right wing groups. Also the 70s saw literally thousands of bombings in NYC by far left groups. Its probable that due to political realignment and inevitable shifts in technology we're going to see this going forward. The most important thing we can all do is keep faith in our fundamental freedoms, like freedom of speech.
  - sykhic 8y ago
    It seems to me that the problem now versus 30 years ago is one of scale. It's much easier sequester oneself from sources of information we don't like for political reasons. It's easier in terms of time and money to get masses of people to believe easily disprovable claims. The adage in politics has been, "All politics is local." Is that true anymore? Will it be true in 10 years? With demographic and economic changes and the power/scale of social media the U.S. is facing, I think the intermediate future does not look good for political discourse.
    - jewelthief91 8y ago
      I'm thinking that a lot of this perceived difference is that taking a political stance is much more natural on social media than previously in real life. Before you would have to care enough to find some place to set your soap box or buy a printing press. The crazies definitely were there but there were also a large segment of the population that would have gladly espoused whacky beliefs but didn't have the motivation and/or resources to do so. Now, proclaiming that the earth is flat takes about 10 minutes of account setup online. I'm just not convinced that it really matters as much as people think it does.
- mr_spothawk 8y ago
  > Common political discourse has devolved into a back and forth of insults, hyperbolic accusations, and sometimes just plain insanity. if i may: this example, and my own experience, is consistent with the newspapers from the american civil war, which i read lots of many years ago while my parents dragged me through the american South Eastern states and the myriad covil war national parks an monuments. further: > flat earth just dont. let them vote. and relax. and remember you arent in charge. if you want Texans (for instance) to vote differently, well then... move to Tecas, y'all!
- burlesona 8y ago
  This problem can cut both ways. Ie. if one dismisses the other person as the political equivalent of a "flat earther," they're not questioning their own assumptions or seeking to understand why the other person could feel something so strongly. Having lived in both deeply red and deeply blue states in the US, I think most people aren't as crazy or as far apart as they think they are. But many of the people who have lived their whole life in one camp have been trained to think that the other side is literally crazy, and that's a convenient excuse to be afraid of them and not bother seeking to understand them.
  - sykhic 8y ago
    Some ideas are so idiotic - like flat Earth belief - that one should not waste their time engaging with said ideas. There are people who deny that Sandy Hook happened. I see no need to understand such fools.
  - mistermann 8y ago
    > Having lived in both deeply red and deeply blue states in the US, I think most people aren't as crazy or as far apart as they think they are A good article along those lines: https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-the-narratives-b91ea06ddf63 https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-t... " Intractable conflicts feed upon themselves. The more we try to stop the conflict, the worse it gets. These feuds “seem to have a power of their own that is inexplicable and total, driving people and groups to act in ways that go against their best interests and sow the seeds of their ruin,” Coleman writes. “We often think we understand these conflicts and can choose how to react to them, that we have options. We are usually mistaken, however.” " " Once we get drawn in, the conflict takes control. Complexity collapses, and the us-versus-them narrative sucks the oxygen from the room. “Over time, people grow increasingly certain of the obvious rightness of their views and increasingly baffled by what seems like unreasonable, malicious, extreme or crazy beliefs and actions of others,” according to training literature from Resetting the Table, an organization that helps people talk across profound differences in the Middle East and the U.S. " If you're looking for it, you'll see this behavior everywhere online, including HN, and it's getting worse.
- sbov 8y ago
  > How do you have a discussion with someone who believes the political equivalent of a flat Earth? How can you decide if someone is the political equivalent of a flat Earther unless you actually attempt to have a discussion with them? All I really see online is people trying to collect the most virtual points (retweets and likes) within their own echo chamber rather than actually discuss things with people.
  - sykhic 8y ago
    The same way that I know the flat Earth position is insane.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    I don't need to have a discussion with the person sharing a photo of Nancy Pelosi "quoting" her as saying that a border will violate the rights of millions of illegal immigrants in order to know that this person's politics aren't connected to reality.
- collective-intl 8y ago
  The first step would be to not treat the other side like they are insane. I find that in politics, it's both sides that are often unreasonable.
clarkevans 8y ago
Is there something that can be done about our polarized discourse without trampling over our civil rights? I think this is necessary dialogue.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  First stop blaming the Russians and then tell your parties to work for the country and for themselves. I think best would be if people stopped calling themselves "Republicans" or "Democrats" and stopped identifying with a party.
  - mikec3010 8y ago
    I wish there were a way to dispel the tricks the media and politicians use to divide us such as religion and abortion. There are countless other issues that affect us, but many voters only care about 1 or 2 issues. The "polarizing issues" are then just proxies that won't have a material effect on most people anyway. But people are so susceptible to emotion, and I doubt there's a way around this.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > First stop blaming the Russians No, not going to stop blaming the guilty, including the Russians. > and then tell your parties to work for the country and for themselves. I've found that politicians in both major parties have the second part down pretty pat, so I’m more concerned with the first. > I think best would be if people stopped calling themselves "Republicans" or "Democrats" and stopped identifying with a party. I think it would best if people learned that—whether it's a country or a party—identifying with a group doesn't mean uncritical acceptance of everything done by the group, it's leaders, etc. OTOH, I see no reason for people not to identify with the major party that best represents them, given the nature of our political system, even if they are both trying to reform that party and the underlying system.
    - crazynick4 8y ago
      It would be more accurate to say 'the Russian government and affiliated parties' (or just 'Russian government', if you're into the whole brevity thing). Most Russians don't care what happens with American politics. We don't blame 'the Arabs' for 9/11, right?
mattigames 8y ago
It is probably a job for the next generation rather than this one; this generation wasn't ready for this boom of communication we are living in; all these social platforms where created for the economical benefit of their creators (FB, twitter) and not any sort of societal benefit; so yeah I think that the solution must start from early school years where children should be taught to doubt all sources of information -internet and peers alike-, investigate better, know that extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, they should also learn to discuss important topics with people with completely opposite views and to stay calm while doing so. A world where a black kid can discuss with a nazi kid about racism and neither of them lose their heads over it (just as an extreme unlikely example to state my point).
- ralston 8y ago
  > "this generation wasn't ready for this boom of communication we are living in" I definitely think we will look back on my generation (Generation Y) as the guinea pigs for this whole "connected social world" thing. So far it's been too much, too fast, and we have done an abysmal job handling it.
- jewelthief91 8y ago
  Ideally the "nazi" kid will be guided towards the light but I get what you're saying.
skywhopper 8y ago
This is true, but it's amplified by the ugliness that you yourself don't realize is being pushed by malicious actors. Hateful, untruthful memes, conspiracy theories, Reddit comments, Twitter posts, and more are being constantly generated by entire buildings full of people who barely know what role they are playing in providing fodder for Infowars, Fox News, and the rabid extremists looking for hateful storylines to retweet, share, and like. All of that filters down to regular innocent people and distorts what seems like normal, what seems fringe, and destroys trust in everything a person sees or reads online. Sure, a lot of this is just people at their worst, and Americans being themselves, but your reluctance to admit that it's partially fueled by organized forces that don't have any particular mission beyond sowing discord and chaos is part of the problem here.
- jewelthief91 8y ago
  I find it far fetched that all of this is down to a massive conspiracy. Certainly there are actors that do this but they seem to just be amplifying by some small amount preexisting trends.
- collective-intl 8y ago
  This is dubious. Conspiracies are overrated.

sykhic 8y ago

Judging by my Facebook feed Americans are perfectly capable of vicious, polarized discourse without foreign influence. It's gotten quite bad in the U.S. Common political discourse has devolved into a back and forth of insults, hyperbolic accusations, and sometimes just plain insanity. I agree with you that this will probably be something that will last a while. If only we could get people to realize that believing something to be true merely because it reinforces a pre-conceived idea or because it's plausibly true is not a path toward finding the truth. How do you have a discussion with someone who believes the political equivalent of a flat Earth?

jewelthief91 8y ago
I am still hopeful that the hand wringing about social media is overblown. Flat earthers for example I believe are in two camps: the genuine loonies that have always been with us in small numbers and the large number of people who just want to pretend to have whacky beliefs for the entertainment value of holding them (think people who believe in crystal healing and such). As dissatisfying as it is, freaking out about people who hold beliefs for entertainment is counter productive. We also have to remember that discourse waxes and wanes in tone. Throughout the 1800s for example it wasn't uncommon for massive brawls to take place between what were essentially political gangs. Think of the brawls we see today between antifa and right wing groups. Also the 70s saw literally thousands of bombings in NYC by far left groups. Its probable that due to political realignment and inevitable shifts in technology we're going to see this going forward. The most important thing we can all do is keep faith in our fundamental freedoms, like freedom of speech.
- sykhic 8y ago
  It seems to me that the problem now versus 30 years ago is one of scale. It's much easier sequester oneself from sources of information we don't like for political reasons. It's easier in terms of time and money to get masses of people to believe easily disprovable claims. The adage in politics has been, "All politics is local." Is that true anymore? Will it be true in 10 years? With demographic and economic changes and the power/scale of social media the U.S. is facing, I think the intermediate future does not look good for political discourse.
  - jewelthief91 8y ago
    I'm thinking that a lot of this perceived difference is that taking a political stance is much more natural on social media than previously in real life. Before you would have to care enough to find some place to set your soap box or buy a printing press. The crazies definitely were there but there were also a large segment of the population that would have gladly espoused whacky beliefs but didn't have the motivation and/or resources to do so. Now, proclaiming that the earth is flat takes about 10 minutes of account setup online. I'm just not convinced that it really matters as much as people think it does.
mr_spothawk 8y ago
> Common political discourse has devolved into a back and forth of insults, hyperbolic accusations, and sometimes just plain insanity. if i may: this example, and my own experience, is consistent with the newspapers from the american civil war, which i read lots of many years ago while my parents dragged me through the american South Eastern states and the myriad covil war national parks an monuments. further: > flat earth just dont. let them vote. and relax. and remember you arent in charge. if you want Texans (for instance) to vote differently, well then... move to Tecas, y'all!
burlesona 8y ago
This problem can cut both ways. Ie. if one dismisses the other person as the political equivalent of a "flat earther," they're not questioning their own assumptions or seeking to understand why the other person could feel something so strongly. Having lived in both deeply red and deeply blue states in the US, I think most people aren't as crazy or as far apart as they think they are. But many of the people who have lived their whole life in one camp have been trained to think that the other side is literally crazy, and that's a convenient excuse to be afraid of them and not bother seeking to understand them.
- sykhic 8y ago
  Some ideas are so idiotic - like flat Earth belief - that one should not waste their time engaging with said ideas. There are people who deny that Sandy Hook happened. I see no need to understand such fools.
- mistermann 8y ago
  > Having lived in both deeply red and deeply blue states in the US, I think most people aren't as crazy or as far apart as they think they are A good article along those lines: https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-the-narratives-b91ea06ddf63 https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-t... " Intractable conflicts feed upon themselves. The more we try to stop the conflict, the worse it gets. These feuds “seem to have a power of their own that is inexplicable and total, driving people and groups to act in ways that go against their best interests and sow the seeds of their ruin,” Coleman writes. “We often think we understand these conflicts and can choose how to react to them, that we have options. We are usually mistaken, however.” " " Once we get drawn in, the conflict takes control. Complexity collapses, and the us-versus-them narrative sucks the oxygen from the room. “Over time, people grow increasingly certain of the obvious rightness of their views and increasingly baffled by what seems like unreasonable, malicious, extreme or crazy beliefs and actions of others,” according to training literature from Resetting the Table, an organization that helps people talk across profound differences in the Middle East and the U.S. " If you're looking for it, you'll see this behavior everywhere online, including HN, and it's getting worse.
sbov 8y ago
> How do you have a discussion with someone who believes the political equivalent of a flat Earth? How can you decide if someone is the political equivalent of a flat Earther unless you actually attempt to have a discussion with them? All I really see online is people trying to collect the most virtual points (retweets and likes) within their own echo chamber rather than actually discuss things with people.
- sykhic 8y ago
  The same way that I know the flat Earth position is insane.
- mikeash 8y ago
  I don't need to have a discussion with the person sharing a photo of Nancy Pelosi "quoting" her as saying that a border will violate the rights of millions of illegal immigrants in order to know that this person's politics aren't connected to reality.
collective-intl 8y ago
The first step would be to not treat the other side like they are insane. I find that in politics, it's both sides that are often unreasonable.

clarkevans 8y ago

Is there something that can be done about our polarized discourse without trampling over our civil rights? I think this is necessary dialogue.

maxxxxx 8y ago
First stop blaming the Russians and then tell your parties to work for the country and for themselves. I think best would be if people stopped calling themselves "Republicans" or "Democrats" and stopped identifying with a party.
- mikec3010 8y ago
  I wish there were a way to dispel the tricks the media and politicians use to divide us such as religion and abortion. There are countless other issues that affect us, but many voters only care about 1 or 2 issues. The "polarizing issues" are then just proxies that won't have a material effect on most people anyway. But people are so susceptible to emotion, and I doubt there's a way around this.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > First stop blaming the Russians No, not going to stop blaming the guilty, including the Russians. > and then tell your parties to work for the country and for themselves. I've found that politicians in both major parties have the second part down pretty pat, so I’m more concerned with the first. > I think best would be if people stopped calling themselves "Republicans" or "Democrats" and stopped identifying with a party. I think it would best if people learned that—whether it's a country or a party—identifying with a group doesn't mean uncritical acceptance of everything done by the group, it's leaders, etc. OTOH, I see no reason for people not to identify with the major party that best represents them, given the nature of our political system, even if they are both trying to reform that party and the underlying system.
  - crazynick4 8y ago
    It would be more accurate to say 'the Russian government and affiliated parties' (or just 'Russian government', if you're into the whole brevity thing). Most Russians don't care what happens with American politics. We don't blame 'the Arabs' for 9/11, right?

mattigames 8y ago

It is probably a job for the next generation rather than this one; this generation wasn't ready for this boom of communication we are living in; all these social platforms where created for the economical benefit of their creators (FB, twitter) and not any sort of societal benefit; so yeah I think that the solution must start from early school years where children should be taught to doubt all sources of information -internet and peers alike-, investigate better, know that extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, they should also learn to discuss important topics with people with completely opposite views and to stay calm while doing so. A world where a black kid can discuss with a nazi kid about racism and neither of them lose their heads over it (just as an extreme unlikely example to state my point).

ralston 8y ago
> "this generation wasn't ready for this boom of communication we are living in" I definitely think we will look back on my generation (Generation Y) as the guinea pigs for this whole "connected social world" thing. So far it's been too much, too fast, and we have done an abysmal job handling it.
jewelthief91 8y ago
Ideally the "nazi" kid will be guided towards the light but I get what you're saying.

skywhopper 8y ago

This is true, but it's amplified by the ugliness that you yourself don't realize is being pushed by malicious actors. Hateful, untruthful memes, conspiracy theories, Reddit comments, Twitter posts, and more are being constantly generated by entire buildings full of people who barely know what role they are playing in providing fodder for Infowars, Fox News, and the rabid extremists looking for hateful storylines to retweet, share, and like. All of that filters down to regular innocent people and distorts what seems like normal, what seems fringe, and destroys trust in everything a person sees or reads online. Sure, a lot of this is just people at their worst, and Americans being themselves, but your reluctance to admit that it's partially fueled by organized forces that don't have any particular mission beyond sowing discord and chaos is part of the problem here.

jewelthief91 8y ago
I find it far fetched that all of this is down to a massive conspiracy. Certainly there are actors that do this but they seem to just be amplifying by some small amount preexisting trends.
collective-intl 8y ago
This is dubious. Conspiracies are overrated.