7 ms·

Orwell made a similar point about truth in a fascist regime: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/looking-back-

Orwell made a similar point about truth in a fascist regime: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/looking-back-on-the-spanish-war/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... "I know it is the fashion to say that most of recorded history is lies anyway. I am willing to believe that history is for the most part inaccurate and biased, but what is peculiar to our own age is the abandonment of the idea that history could be truthfully written. In the past, people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously colored what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that “the facts” existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by almost anyone. If you look up the history of the last war in, for instance, the Encyclopedia Britannica, you will find that a respectable amount of the material is drawn from German sources. A British and a German historian would disagree deeply on many things, even on fundamentals, but there would still be a body of, as it were, neutral fact on which neither would seriously challenge the other. It is just this common basis of agreement with its implication that human beings are all one species of animal, that totalitarianism destroys. Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as “the truth” exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as “Science”. There is only “German Science,” “Jewish Science,” etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, “It never happened” — well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five — well two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs — and after our experiences of the last few years that is not such a frivolous statement."

wrs 6y ago
This is exactly why a focus on the one event that happened this week would be a big mistake. That was just the latest most extreme result of a much deeper problem, it was not the problem. Those responsible will of course be using the above technique to turn it into an isolated occurrence that has nothing to do with their own activities. The saving grace may be that the Leader himself didn’t stay on message and continued calling the rioters “patriots” after the “shocking” event took place. That was way off script. But if we don’t figure out the deeper problem, the next Leader may be much more competent.
- wincy 6y ago
  I think the “deeper problem” is thinking that Californians and Iowans share anything in common at all. Or the idea that 300 million people can be effectively governed by a democracy when they have vastly different goals and values. In my ideal world, the states could just peacefully break up into a looser group of nation states, with a shared military against outside threats. We’d invert the tax pyramid where the city and county get the most taxes, and the federal and state governments get the least. If we could have a non violent transition away from the existence of an unimaginably massive federal government. I doubt that’s what will happen. There’s simply too many people employed by the government for it to contract peacefully. I fear for the future, and think that arresting and throwing the book at people at the Capitol is just going to increase the number of scary things happening.
  - cle 6y ago
    What you described is how many founders envisioned the US. Granted some weren’t for benign reasons. And I think that’s an important point...many of the civil rights advancements made in the US might have only been possible because the strong federal government was able to drag many states kicking and screaming away from immoral practices.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    .. and allow the southern states to reinstate slavery? Sorry, the civil war ended the prospect of the states being quasi-nations. As did the cold war. You can't counter a hegemon with anything other than another hegemon. To fragment the US is to accept the rise of China.
    - wincy 6y ago
      It’s not like the United Nations would stop existing. It’s also not as if interstate trade would stop (I mean, unless a state tried to literally enslave its population, that’d stop interstate trade really quick). If South Africa couldn’t manage Apartheid due to pressure from other nations, there is zero chance Louisiana could magically reinstate slavery. This is an absolute straw man.
chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> If the Leader says of such and such an event, “It never happened” — well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five — well two and two are five. Recently there was a dustup in the twitter maths community over whether "2+2=4" was a fact or an artifact of patriarchy, racism, and capitalism.
- falcor84 6y ago
  Links please?
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    Sure: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-carr-explains-why-225/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-ca... https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/2-plus-2-never-equals-5/ https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/2-plus-2-never-equals-5/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a33547137/why-some-people-think-2-plus-2-equals-5/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a33547137/why-... https://arcdigital.media/mathgate-or-the-battle-of-two-plus-two-ed4af5f32933 https://arcdigital.media/mathgate-or-the-battle-of-two-plus-... These are good summaries, they should have links to some of the relevant tweets.
    - falcor84 6y ago
      Thanks, that was interesting for a bit but then went nowhere. To save others the time, as I understand it, their disagreement is about the meaning of the equals sign. I suppose they're right, because we do use different definitions of equality for different needs, both within math and in other fields, and of course without a good definition all sides agree to, people can find themselves talking past one another. For what it's worth, the definition of equality I like best is the one based on symbolic manipulation - two symbols a and b are equal iff substituting a by b in ANY statement does not modify the statement's truth value.
      - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
ReactiveJelly 6y ago
"in each case they believed that “the facts” existed and were more or less discoverable" I recently found a graduation card, which an old classmate gave me: The front is a picture of some abstract art. The inside says, "Yeah... I don't get it either." Underneath the pre-printed punchline, my friend wrote, "But that does not mean that it cannot be gotten!" I could use more friends like him these days. "This prospect frightens me much more than bombs" Me too, and that's why 1984 was too scary for me to finish. Bombs occupy physical space, they can't be nowhere and they can't be in two places at once. They are pretty easy to understand, and they can explode once. Mind-viruses don't kill as quickly, but they aren't subject to any of the limitations of a physical weapon, either. They can't be captured or destroyed, and as far as I know, dogs cannot sniff for them.
- MichaelZuo 6y ago
  The greatest counter to such constructs is logic. For those who can wield it enjoy likewise greater capacities due to the inherent nature of mind viruses.
  - loveistheanswer 6y ago
    Logic is great as long as its not based on flawed assumptions. The capacity for love also seems like a protective immune response to mind viruses that are so commonly rooted in hatred.
    - ReactiveJelly 6y ago
      Love is necessary but not sufficient. Anecdotally, I think there's a ton of people who will say "I love my family but I hate everyone else". Maybe only love can drive out hate, but sometimes love also sits on its ass and does nothing. If you want hard numbers, compare the number of vegans to the number of animal lovers.

wrs 6y ago

This is exactly why a focus on the one event that happened this week would be a big mistake. That was just the latest most extreme result of a much deeper problem, it was not the problem. Those responsible will of course be using the above technique to turn it into an isolated occurrence that has nothing to do with their own activities. The saving grace may be that the Leader himself didn’t stay on message and continued calling the rioters “patriots” after the “shocking” event took place. That was way off script. But if we don’t figure out the deeper problem, the next Leader may be much more competent.

wincy 6y ago
I think the “deeper problem” is thinking that Californians and Iowans share anything in common at all. Or the idea that 300 million people can be effectively governed by a democracy when they have vastly different goals and values. In my ideal world, the states could just peacefully break up into a looser group of nation states, with a shared military against outside threats. We’d invert the tax pyramid where the city and county get the most taxes, and the federal and state governments get the least. If we could have a non violent transition away from the existence of an unimaginably massive federal government. I doubt that’s what will happen. There’s simply too many people employed by the government for it to contract peacefully. I fear for the future, and think that arresting and throwing the book at people at the Capitol is just going to increase the number of scary things happening.
- cle 6y ago
  What you described is how many founders envisioned the US. Granted some weren’t for benign reasons. And I think that’s an important point...many of the civil rights advancements made in the US might have only been possible because the strong federal government was able to drag many states kicking and screaming away from immoral practices.
- pjc50 6y ago
  .. and allow the southern states to reinstate slavery? Sorry, the civil war ended the prospect of the states being quasi-nations. As did the cold war. You can't counter a hegemon with anything other than another hegemon. To fragment the US is to accept the rise of China.
  - wincy 6y ago
    It’s not like the United Nations would stop existing. It’s also not as if interstate trade would stop (I mean, unless a state tried to literally enslave its population, that’d stop interstate trade really quick). If South Africa couldn’t manage Apartheid due to pressure from other nations, there is zero chance Louisiana could magically reinstate slavery. This is an absolute straw man.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago

> If the Leader says of such and such an event, “It never happened” — well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five — well two and two are five. Recently there was a dustup in the twitter maths community over whether "2+2=4" was a fact or an artifact of patriarchy, racism, and capitalism.

falcor84 6y ago
Links please?
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  Sure: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-carr-explains-why-225/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-ca... https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/2-plus-2-never-equals-5/ https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/2-plus-2-never-equals-5/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a33547137/why-some-people-think-2-plus-2-equals-5/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a33547137/why-... https://arcdigital.media/mathgate-or-the-battle-of-two-plus-two-ed4af5f32933 https://arcdigital.media/mathgate-or-the-battle-of-two-plus-... These are good summaries, they should have links to some of the relevant tweets.
  - falcor84 6y ago
    Thanks, that was interesting for a bit but then went nowhere. To save others the time, as I understand it, their disagreement is about the meaning of the equals sign. I suppose they're right, because we do use different definitions of equality for different needs, both within math and in other fields, and of course without a good definition all sides agree to, people can find themselves talking past one another. For what it's worth, the definition of equality I like best is the one based on symbolic manipulation - two symbols a and b are equal iff substituting a by b in ANY statement does not modify the statement's truth value.
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago

ReactiveJelly 6y ago

"in each case they believed that “the facts” existed and were more or less discoverable" I recently found a graduation card, which an old classmate gave me: The front is a picture of some abstract art. The inside says, "Yeah... I don't get it either." Underneath the pre-printed punchline, my friend wrote, "But that does not mean that it cannot be gotten!" I could use more friends like him these days. "This prospect frightens me much more than bombs" Me too, and that's why 1984 was too scary for me to finish. Bombs occupy physical space, they can't be nowhere and they can't be in two places at once. They are pretty easy to understand, and they can explode once. Mind-viruses don't kill as quickly, but they aren't subject to any of the limitations of a physical weapon, either. They can't be captured or destroyed, and as far as I know, dogs cannot sniff for them.

MichaelZuo 6y ago
The greatest counter to such constructs is logic. For those who can wield it enjoy likewise greater capacities due to the inherent nature of mind viruses.
- loveistheanswer 6y ago
  Logic is great as long as its not based on flawed assumptions. The capacity for love also seems like a protective immune response to mind viruses that are so commonly rooted in hatred.
  - ReactiveJelly 6y ago
    Love is necessary but not sufficient. Anecdotally, I think there's a ton of people who will say "I love my family but I hate everyone else". Maybe only love can drive out hate, but sometimes love also sits on its ass and does nothing. If you want hard numbers, compare the number of vegans to the number of animal lovers.