10 ms·

Dismissing facts as lies is just... something to say. Bolsonaro and his followers know this is true but they simply don't care. Which is a reasonable political

by wwdhx 7y ago

Dismissing facts as lies is just... something to say. Bolsonaro and his followers know this is true but they simply don't care. Which is a reasonable political stance I reckon.

hobs 7y ago
Dismissing facts as lies is just lying. It should not be brushed off as an acceptable position.
- thefounder 7y ago
  Lately it seems to be very rewarding in politics. This will only get worse
  - grenoire 7y ago
    Lying being rewarding is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
    - thefounder 7y ago
      Well the difference is that people used to condemn the author when it got caught lying which doesn't seem to be the case anymore. People no longer pay politically when they lie. It all transformed into a world-wide propaganda machine where people think in war/dictatorship terms(we against them).
      - davesmith1983 7y ago
        Most people accept that politicians lie. Saying that a politician lies is like saying "The Pope is Catholic" or "Water is wet". What people care about is whether the politicians will instigate policies that are beneficial to them. Bolsonaro ran with one of his main issues being law and order. In Brazil the crime rates are quite shocking (IIRC the murder rate is huge like 100s a day). It doesn't matter if he lies about the Rainforest if people see if cleaning up the streets.
        thefounder 7y ago
        Lying is now blatant, endemic and unapologetic. It's really more propaganda than just lying. Let's hope the sane people will tax these politicians otherwise we risk new Nazi systems.
- mda 7y ago
  Yeah, this is the norm now, scientific truths are lies and conspiracy theories are the ultimate truth. All populist politicians are doing this and their followers love it.
  - davesmith1983 7y ago
    Well a lot of this is due to how this has been presented to by the media beforehand. e.g. There is a scare story at least once a week that is plastered over newspapers/news sites such as "Having a bacon sandwich could lead to bum cancer!!!!", when the headline is clearly salacious. The actual research probably had a sensible conclusion of "Those who have had consistently more red meat, have an increased chance of cancer". If you hear see the same story hundreds of times, you are likely to ignore it or even despise it. The same happens with the populist politicians. Take someone that isn't as controversial as Bolsonaro such as Nigel Farage in my home country. A fair description of his political stance is a Patriotic Thatcherite that is anti-mass-immigration. When he was first becoming well known (back in the mid-2000s) he was constantly branded a racist and a fascist (there was no evidence of this) in an attempt to conflate his position with the likes of actual fascists of old like Oswald Mosley. Now Whether or not you agree with his politics isn't important. In these attempts to constantly smear him he has become one of the most effective UK politicians in recent memory. To many he can simply do no wrong because they will dismiss any criticism of immediately, disregarding its validity.
    - sorokod 7y ago
      There is a sizable intersection between the set of populists and the set of racists. Often the naming of people close or in this intersection is a judgment call.
    - toyg 7y ago
      This would be the same Farage that made sure his anti-immigration message in the 2016 Brexit campaign had "the only prominent white person in the photograph obscured by a box of text": https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farag... Also, how can you brand somebody as "patriotic" when his party is a US-based corporation with links to the Russian government and tax havens? Sad to see this rubbish on HN. Farage plays to the same racist tendencies as Trump and Bolsonaro do, with constant dog-whistling. He's absolutely controversial and hardly effective: he still has no MP in the UK Parliament after 15 years of trying, and has accomplished absolutely nothing over two mandates in the EU Parliament beyond annoying even his own allies. It's not the "smearing" that build his success, but a situation of sustained economic weakness of the white working classes that fosters a climate of anger against migrants (who are seen as cheaper competition). That BNP fella was similarly successful for a while. Also, Farage's support is built on social networks, where his messages are spread without a debate, let alone "smears".
- hanniabu 7y ago
  I mean can you blame them when all you need to do to make a problem go away is say FAKE NEWS and people eat it up? It's much easier then presenting evidence yourself, especially when your motives go against facts, because then you need to find a way to create fake facts like the oil companies do with denying global warming.
  - benj111 7y ago
    "I mean can you blame them" Yes. I know that everyone's jaded by various neo-fascist leaders, but this stuff does need to be called out, else it gets normalised.
    - hanniabu 7y ago
      It no doubt needs to be called out, but whatI'm saying is that it's already become normalized and works so they will continue to keep doing it.
  - dvtrn 7y ago
    I once watched, jaw somewhat agape as an attorney on twitter (or someone whose bio said she was an attorney) sparred with other netizens over a claim she had made about an event someone (a third-party) said was taking place in her community relating to a local business. Respondents began to reply asking for additional information, how the claim could be verified, many simply asked for a source-others expressed concern for accuracy of information because they were potentially affected. Maybe one out of every few were “trollish” by popular definition. I read many of them. Very few seemed to be politically charged or even aggressive towards this attorney, they simply asked for more information. Her responses were aggressive and antagonistic, calling respondents “trolls” and “enablers”. Even people asking in a considerate and mild mannered way because they were trying to inform themselves on the affair. No facts ever came out. From the attorney or the local entity she claimed to have information on. She encouraged others to take the lack of information as proof that her friend’s claims were truth. Many did. It was something to behold. An attorney was sharing what was effectively hearsay on twitter about a local business and actively combatting people asking for more information. Strange times indeed.
onion2k 7y ago
It's much more likely that rather than it being a political stance he profits from deforestation directly through investments in logging companies or indirectly through being paid off, or both. Saying its reasonable means you would have to think a politician using their position for personal gain is reasonable. That would be quite an extreme opinion to hold.
benj111 7y ago
"Which is a reasonable political stance I reckon" Run that by me again. How is denying something you know to be true a reasonable stance. How is taking (or actively not taking) a course of action you know will harm the people you've been elected to serve, a reasonable stance. This is pretty basic stuff for a democratically elected official.
- pas 7y ago
  Because it works. :(

by wwdhx 7y ago

Dismissing facts as lies is just... something to say. Bolsonaro and his followers know this is true but they simply don't care. Which is a reasonable political stance I reckon.

hobs 7y ago

Dismissing facts as lies is just lying. It should not be brushed off as an acceptable position.

thefounder 7y ago
Lately it seems to be very rewarding in politics. This will only get worse
- grenoire 7y ago
  Lying being rewarding is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
  - thefounder 7y ago
    Well the difference is that people used to condemn the author when it got caught lying which doesn't seem to be the case anymore. People no longer pay politically when they lie. It all transformed into a world-wide propaganda machine where people think in war/dictatorship terms(we against them).
    - davesmith1983 7y ago
      Most people accept that politicians lie. Saying that a politician lies is like saying "The Pope is Catholic" or "Water is wet". What people care about is whether the politicians will instigate policies that are beneficial to them. Bolsonaro ran with one of his main issues being law and order. In Brazil the crime rates are quite shocking (IIRC the murder rate is huge like 100s a day). It doesn't matter if he lies about the Rainforest if people see if cleaning up the streets.
      - thefounder 7y ago
        Lying is now blatant, endemic and unapologetic. It's really more propaganda than just lying. Let's hope the sane people will tax these politicians otherwise we risk new Nazi systems.
mda 7y ago
Yeah, this is the norm now, scientific truths are lies and conspiracy theories are the ultimate truth. All populist politicians are doing this and their followers love it.
- davesmith1983 7y ago
  Well a lot of this is due to how this has been presented to by the media beforehand. e.g. There is a scare story at least once a week that is plastered over newspapers/news sites such as "Having a bacon sandwich could lead to bum cancer!!!!", when the headline is clearly salacious. The actual research probably had a sensible conclusion of "Those who have had consistently more red meat, have an increased chance of cancer". If you hear see the same story hundreds of times, you are likely to ignore it or even despise it. The same happens with the populist politicians. Take someone that isn't as controversial as Bolsonaro such as Nigel Farage in my home country. A fair description of his political stance is a Patriotic Thatcherite that is anti-mass-immigration. When he was first becoming well known (back in the mid-2000s) he was constantly branded a racist and a fascist (there was no evidence of this) in an attempt to conflate his position with the likes of actual fascists of old like Oswald Mosley. Now Whether or not you agree with his politics isn't important. In these attempts to constantly smear him he has become one of the most effective UK politicians in recent memory. To many he can simply do no wrong because they will dismiss any criticism of immediately, disregarding its validity.
  - sorokod 7y ago
    There is a sizable intersection between the set of populists and the set of racists. Often the naming of people close or in this intersection is a judgment call.
  - toyg 7y ago
    This would be the same Farage that made sure his anti-immigration message in the 2016 Brexit campaign had "the only prominent white person in the photograph obscured by a box of text": https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farag... Also, how can you brand somebody as "patriotic" when his party is a US-based corporation with links to the Russian government and tax havens? Sad to see this rubbish on HN. Farage plays to the same racist tendencies as Trump and Bolsonaro do, with constant dog-whistling. He's absolutely controversial and hardly effective: he still has no MP in the UK Parliament after 15 years of trying, and has accomplished absolutely nothing over two mandates in the EU Parliament beyond annoying even his own allies. It's not the "smearing" that build his success, but a situation of sustained economic weakness of the white working classes that fosters a climate of anger against migrants (who are seen as cheaper competition). That BNP fella was similarly successful for a while. Also, Farage's support is built on social networks, where his messages are spread without a debate, let alone "smears".
hanniabu 7y ago
I mean can you blame them when all you need to do to make a problem go away is say FAKE NEWS and people eat it up? It's much easier then presenting evidence yourself, especially when your motives go against facts, because then you need to find a way to create fake facts like the oil companies do with denying global warming.
- benj111 7y ago
  "I mean can you blame them" Yes. I know that everyone's jaded by various neo-fascist leaders, but this stuff does need to be called out, else it gets normalised.
  - hanniabu 7y ago
    It no doubt needs to be called out, but whatI'm saying is that it's already become normalized and works so they will continue to keep doing it.
- dvtrn 7y ago
  I once watched, jaw somewhat agape as an attorney on twitter (or someone whose bio said she was an attorney) sparred with other netizens over a claim she had made about an event someone (a third-party) said was taking place in her community relating to a local business. Respondents began to reply asking for additional information, how the claim could be verified, many simply asked for a source-others expressed concern for accuracy of information because they were potentially affected. Maybe one out of every few were “trollish” by popular definition. I read many of them. Very few seemed to be politically charged or even aggressive towards this attorney, they simply asked for more information. Her responses were aggressive and antagonistic, calling respondents “trolls” and “enablers”. Even people asking in a considerate and mild mannered way because they were trying to inform themselves on the affair. No facts ever came out. From the attorney or the local entity she claimed to have information on. She encouraged others to take the lack of information as proof that her friend’s claims were truth. Many did. It was something to behold. An attorney was sharing what was effectively hearsay on twitter about a local business and actively combatting people asking for more information. Strange times indeed.

onion2k 7y ago

It's much more likely that rather than it being a political stance he profits from deforestation directly through investments in logging companies or indirectly through being paid off, or both. Saying its reasonable means you would have to think a politician using their position for personal gain is reasonable. That would be quite an extreme opinion to hold.

benj111 7y ago

"Which is a reasonable political stance I reckon" Run that by me again. How is denying something you know to be true a reasonable stance. How is taking (or actively not taking) a course of action you know will harm the people you've been elected to serve, a reasonable stance. This is pretty basic stuff for a democratically elected official.

pas 7y ago
Because it works. :(