4 ms·

Only the profoundly ignorant are supporting these wannabe autocrats. We can look to our failures in public education over the past century for explanation, but

Only the profoundly ignorant are supporting these wannabe autocrats. We can look to our failures in public education over the past century for explanation, but what to do about it now? Americans want the right to vote and participate in democracy, but are generally unwilling to take the responsibility to be informed. You can't forcibly educate adults, of course, so I don't know what the solution is.

draw_down 6y ago
Ah yes, the deplorables have ruined everything.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
losteric 6y ago
More effective public discourse between private citizens, particularly when in disagreement... instead of the taboo and fear of confronting opposing views, seek it out and approach all with an open Socratic mindset. If every moderate deradicalized one person per month, the problem would be manageable by the next midterms. Restore regulations on “news” mass media, and regulate their political advertising. Including social media. Reform campaign financing. Apply the fixes recommended by SCOTUS in Citizens United. State-level voting reform, including universal and automatic mail-in ballots, and ranked choice voting.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Perhaps throw in a reform of security agencies that have been misused to interfere in domestic elections. You won't get rid of them ever again otherwise.
rbecker 6y ago
> Only the profoundly ignorant are supporting these wannabe autocrats. Passing and extending the Patriot Act was bipartisan.
nobody9999 6y ago
>Americans want the right to vote and participate in democracy, but are generally unwilling to take the responsibility to be informed. I'm not so sure about that. Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. What's most troubling about that statistic is that more eligible voters did not vote than voted for any of the presidential candidates. Without ascribing motives or intentions, it's not clear that your statement is supported by the facts. I don't know what the motives/intentions of those non-voters might be. Given that I always vote in every election, because I see it as my duty and responsibility as a citizen, and because that's how we choose the path our government (and, more broadly our society) will take. Especially in local and state elections, where my vote (given the smaller size of electorates in such elections) is more consequential. In any case, while voter suppression and disenfranchisement are all too common in the US, such activity doesn't explain why nearly half of eligible voters abdicated their responsibility and gave away their opportunity to create the government they want to have. [0] https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/post-election-2016/voter-turnout https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/post-election-2016/voter-tu...
- vonmoltke 6y ago
  > Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. You have that backwards. 42% did not vote; 58% did. Still way too low, though.
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    >> Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. >You have that backwards. 42% did not vote; 58% did. >Still way too low, though. Yes, you're absolutely correct, and I got it backwards. I need to proofread better. Thanks for calling me out on this.
abootstrapper 6y ago
Ugh. Those adults watch a few conspiracy YouTube videos and Fox News and consider themselves educated and informed.
- mistermann 6y ago
  Other adults watch the news, read the paper, read forum posts by other adults who have also consumed similar information, and also think they are informed. There is reality, and then there is each individual's perception of reality. Each person believes with near-absolute certainty that their personal model (based on a tiny slice of actual events, the majority of which are first run through third parties for ~interpretation and adjustment) of reality is accurate, and often enjoy chuckling at other people's models, but the unfortunate fact is that no person has an accurate model - and perhaps more importantly: hardly anyone seems to realize this (in depth, and on a continuous basis).
  - abootstrapper 6y ago
    I understand what you’re saying, but I will not be gaslit. Some sources are better in quality than others, considering multiple sources is better, critically considering the information in those sources and discussing it is the best. It is entirely possible to still get at the truth. The propaganda is the USA is bordering absurdity in its believability. The president says exactly what he means, and his words are interpreted by others like a horoscope to mean whatever they want. This is the reality of the situation. Unless you’re traveling at the speed of light or some bullshit.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - mistermann 6y ago
      > I understand what you’re saying... I suspect you actually don't, due to the underlying complexity and ineffable, counterintuitive nature of the subject matter. > but I will not be gaslit. Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes, including low self-esteem. There is gaslighting, and then there is psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy - and then there is each individual's knowledge (actual and perceived) in each field, all of which is implemented by the human mind, which is not well understood at all, but understood well enough that it is known to be very imperceptibly deceiving. > Some sources are better in quality than others, considering multiple sources is better, critically considering the information in those sources and discussing it is the best. I completely agree, and nothing I said suggested the contrary. Although, you may have the intuition that it implicitly communicated it, just as you seem to have the intuition that I am gaslighting you. > It is entirely possible to still get at the truth. Sometimes it is, sometimes it is not - it depends. And sometimes, that which is considered to be true, is not actually true. > The propaganda is the USA is bordering absurdity in its believability. 100% agree - to me, it passed surreal levels years ago. Even more surreal is the percentage of intelligent people who seem to believe that they have a firm lock on "the truth" about a system this complex, despite often having extensive background knowledge in the complexity that lies within far simpler systems. > The president says exactly what he means, and his words are interpreted by others like a horoscope to mean whatever they want. Serious question: how is it that you came to know the beliefs of other people? Trace the lineage of that belief in your own mind, and see what you come up with. This is not conspiracy theory or trolling, it is the result of scientific investigations performed over decades by specialists in various overlapping fields, who are doing their best to understand the mysteries of the human mind. And scientists aren't the only source of substantiation - not that long ago philosophy and literature were very seriously by a lot of serious people, and may have a thing or two worth learning. https://thundergodblog.com/2015/07/26/a-brief-history-of-the-philosophy-of-mind/ https://thundergodblog.com/2015/07/26/a-brief-history-of-the... https://www.azquotes.com/author/6592-Frank_Herbert https://www.azquotes.com/author/6592-Frank_Herbert It's hard to resist picking a side and getting down into object level mudslinging in the information war currently playing out in the media (mainstream and social), I'm very often guilty of it myself. But I propose that there is another alternative available: that of a disinterested (as possible) 3rd person observer who engages his/her mind with the abstract perspective of the battle, observing with playful curiosity the rhetorical strategies, strange supernatural beliefs, and various other absurd behavior that until recently only the human mind was capable of producing. Not only is this perspective far more interesting, but once you do it for a while some interesting new thoughts might come to mind, like "Just what exactly is going on on this planet? These humans have the ability to have a realtime video conversation with someone half way around the world, or deliver a package there by the next day, yet at the same time millions of their offspring die every year due to a lack of the basic essentials required to sustain their lives, and all they seem to do is post short "tweets" to each other lamenting that "nothing can be done". What mysterious force underlies this madness?"

draw_down 6y ago

Ah yes, the deplorables have ruined everything.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

losteric 6y ago

More effective public discourse between private citizens, particularly when in disagreement... instead of the taboo and fear of confronting opposing views, seek it out and approach all with an open Socratic mindset. If every moderate deradicalized one person per month, the problem would be manageable by the next midterms. Restore regulations on “news” mass media, and regulate their political advertising. Including social media. Reform campaign financing. Apply the fixes recommended by SCOTUS in Citizens United. State-level voting reform, including universal and automatic mail-in ballots, and ranked choice voting.

raxxorrax 6y ago
Perhaps throw in a reform of security agencies that have been misused to interfere in domestic elections. You won't get rid of them ever again otherwise.

rbecker 6y ago

> Only the profoundly ignorant are supporting these wannabe autocrats. Passing and extending the Patriot Act was bipartisan.

nobody9999 6y ago

>Americans want the right to vote and participate in democracy, but are generally unwilling to take the responsibility to be informed. I'm not so sure about that. Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. What's most troubling about that statistic is that more eligible voters did not vote than voted for any of the presidential candidates. Without ascribing motives or intentions, it's not clear that your statement is supported by the facts. I don't know what the motives/intentions of those non-voters might be. Given that I always vote in every election, because I see it as my duty and responsibility as a citizen, and because that's how we choose the path our government (and, more broadly our society) will take. Especially in local and state elections, where my vote (given the smaller size of electorates in such elections) is more consequential. In any case, while voter suppression and disenfranchisement are all too common in the US, such activity doesn't explain why nearly half of eligible voters abdicated their responsibility and gave away their opportunity to create the government they want to have. [0] https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/post-election-2016/voter-turnout https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/post-election-2016/voter-tu...

vonmoltke 6y ago
> Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. You have that backwards. 42% did not vote; 58% did. Still way too low, though.
- nobody9999 6y ago
  >> Especially given that only ~42% of eligible voters cast votes in the 2016 US elections[0]. >You have that backwards. 42% did not vote; 58% did. >Still way too low, though. Yes, you're absolutely correct, and I got it backwards. I need to proofread better. Thanks for calling me out on this.

abootstrapper 6y ago

Ugh. Those adults watch a few conspiracy YouTube videos and Fox News and consider themselves educated and informed.

mistermann 6y ago
Other adults watch the news, read the paper, read forum posts by other adults who have also consumed similar information, and also think they are informed. There is reality, and then there is each individual's perception of reality. Each person believes with near-absolute certainty that their personal model (based on a tiny slice of actual events, the majority of which are first run through third parties for ~interpretation and adjustment) of reality is accurate, and often enjoy chuckling at other people's models, but the unfortunate fact is that no person has an accurate model - and perhaps more importantly: hardly anyone seems to realize this (in depth, and on a continuous basis).
- abootstrapper 6y ago
  I understand what you’re saying, but I will not be gaslit. Some sources are better in quality than others, considering multiple sources is better, critically considering the information in those sources and discussing it is the best. It is entirely possible to still get at the truth. The propaganda is the USA is bordering absurdity in its believability. The president says exactly what he means, and his words are interpreted by others like a horoscope to mean whatever they want. This is the reality of the situation. Unless you’re traveling at the speed of light or some bullshit.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mistermann 6y ago
    > I understand what you’re saying... I suspect you actually don't, due to the underlying complexity and ineffable, counterintuitive nature of the subject matter. > but I will not be gaslit. Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes, including low self-esteem. There is gaslighting, and then there is psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy - and then there is each individual's knowledge (actual and perceived) in each field, all of which is implemented by the human mind, which is not well understood at all, but understood well enough that it is known to be very imperceptibly deceiving. > Some sources are better in quality than others, considering multiple sources is better, critically considering the information in those sources and discussing it is the best. I completely agree, and nothing I said suggested the contrary. Although, you may have the intuition that it implicitly communicated it, just as you seem to have the intuition that I am gaslighting you. > It is entirely possible to still get at the truth. Sometimes it is, sometimes it is not - it depends. And sometimes, that which is considered to be true, is not actually true. > The propaganda is the USA is bordering absurdity in its believability. 100% agree - to me, it passed surreal levels years ago. Even more surreal is the percentage of intelligent people who seem to believe that they have a firm lock on "the truth" about a system this complex, despite often having extensive background knowledge in the complexity that lies within far simpler systems. > The president says exactly what he means, and his words are interpreted by others like a horoscope to mean whatever they want. Serious question: how is it that you came to know the beliefs of other people? Trace the lineage of that belief in your own mind, and see what you come up with. This is not conspiracy theory or trolling, it is the result of scientific investigations performed over decades by specialists in various overlapping fields, who are doing their best to understand the mysteries of the human mind. And scientists aren't the only source of substantiation - not that long ago philosophy and literature were very seriously by a lot of serious people, and may have a thing or two worth learning. https://thundergodblog.com/2015/07/26/a-brief-history-of-the-philosophy-of-mind/ https://thundergodblog.com/2015/07/26/a-brief-history-of-the... https://www.azquotes.com/author/6592-Frank_Herbert https://www.azquotes.com/author/6592-Frank_Herbert It's hard to resist picking a side and getting down into object level mudslinging in the information war currently playing out in the media (mainstream and social), I'm very often guilty of it myself. But I propose that there is another alternative available: that of a disinterested (as possible) 3rd person observer who engages his/her mind with the abstract perspective of the battle, observing with playful curiosity the rhetorical strategies, strange supernatural beliefs, and various other absurd behavior that until recently only the human mind was capable of producing. Not only is this perspective far more interesting, but once you do it for a while some interesting new thoughts might come to mind, like "Just what exactly is going on on this planet? These humans have the ability to have a realtime video conversation with someone half way around the world, or deliver a package there by the next day, yet at the same time millions of their offspring die every year due to a lack of the basic essentials required to sustain their lives, and all they seem to do is post short "tweets" to each other lamenting that "nothing can be done". What mysterious force underlies this madness?"