3 ms·

give up the "side" and the labels like "conservatives" and "red states". those are cognitive traps. you'll never be able to reconcile all the beliefs of a "sid

give up the "side" and the labels like "conservatives" and "red states". those are cognitive traps. you'll never be able to reconcile all the beliefs of a "side" with your own, or another side with your "opponents", so are relegated to either paralysis by cognitive dissonance or selective rationality. most people are generally decent and most people have some odd beliefs and proclivities. that's just life. it's not reducible to some "sides", much less two sides, no matter what the dominant mediopolitical narratives want you to believe. two sides are chosen by tribal groups like political parties because it simplifies the quest for power. 2 is the lowest common denominator of power, and it's chosen exactly to simplify choices, and neatly bypass the inherent frictions of nuance and humanity. it's done for power, not to realistically represent the world or to cleanly align with your beliefs. instead, each side exerts pressure on you to conform to it (that is, coalescing its own power). in exchange, you get little random hits of dopamine, which is oddly as lopsided as it is surprisingly effective.

marcus_holmes 5y ago
It's not the political parties. They're as much victims of this as the rest of us [0]. It's social media, optimising for "engagement". The most engaging content is not the normal, run-of-the-mill commentary from normal people with normal opinions. It's the far-out nut-job stuff that makes you mad. So that's what get prioritised in your feed. I signed off of Twitter and was able to completely ignore it while being publicly abused on it. I've recently uninstalled Facebook and my rage at the culture wars has subsided noticeably. Now it's just Imgur and HN that spark this. I'm working on getting off here too (unsuccessfully). The vast majority of people (I think, I have no proof) are not zealots for the cause (any cause). But the self-censorship effect of our society-wide Purity Spiral[1] means that we never hear from them. We hear the worst, most deranged, opinions out there first because human psychology isn't suited to this kind of situation. I think the answer is to stop optimising for engagement, because we can't hack human psychology. [0] I can't find it now, but there is a blog post out there explaining how politicians are getting hurt by the increasing extremism. The need to be more extreme than your rivals in your gerrymandered district where any sign of "weakness" or ambiguity can be taken advantage of on social media isn't good for politicians either. [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Purity%20Spiral https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Purity%20Spi...
- clairity 5y ago
  i’m sorry, no, political parties are not victims insofar as they were unaware of those dynamics. political parties aim to amass power and if that requires becoming more extreme, so be it, in the logic of the party in-group, no matter how they lament outwardly. social media does distort towards the extremes but that’s marginal, only flattening the distribution of opinions, not fundamentally changing the distribution’s shape. the real problem is the mediopolitical machine amplifying certain of those opinions and ignoring others in service of its own pursuit of power.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

marcus_holmes 5y ago

It's not the political parties. They're as much victims of this as the rest of us [0]. It's social media, optimising for "engagement". The most engaging content is not the normal, run-of-the-mill commentary from normal people with normal opinions. It's the far-out nut-job stuff that makes you mad. So that's what get prioritised in your feed. I signed off of Twitter and was able to completely ignore it while being publicly abused on it. I've recently uninstalled Facebook and my rage at the culture wars has subsided noticeably. Now it's just Imgur and HN that spark this. I'm working on getting off here too (unsuccessfully). The vast majority of people (I think, I have no proof) are not zealots for the cause (any cause). But the self-censorship effect of our society-wide Purity Spiral[1] means that we never hear from them. We hear the worst, most deranged, opinions out there first because human psychology isn't suited to this kind of situation. I think the answer is to stop optimising for engagement, because we can't hack human psychology. [0] I can't find it now, but there is a blog post out there explaining how politicians are getting hurt by the increasing extremism. The need to be more extreme than your rivals in your gerrymandered district where any sign of "weakness" or ambiguity can be taken advantage of on social media isn't good for politicians either. [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Purity%20Spiral https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Purity%20Spi...

clairity 5y ago
i’m sorry, no, political parties are not victims insofar as they were unaware of those dynamics. political parties aim to amass power and if that requires becoming more extreme, so be it, in the logic of the party in-group, no matter how they lament outwardly. social media does distort towards the extremes but that’s marginal, only flattening the distribution of opinions, not fundamentally changing the distribution’s shape. the real problem is the mediopolitical machine amplifying certain of those opinions and ignoring others in service of its own pursuit of power.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]