6 ms·

Well yes, because all political reporting is basically TMZ for boring, ugly people. It molds politics into some fantasy world of rap battles and gang fights rat

Well yes, because all political reporting is basically TMZ for boring, ugly people. It molds politics into some fantasy world of rap battles and gang fights rather than a productive discussion about making good policy. And if your first impulse is to think well yeah because the other side blah blah, you're part of the problem too.

lifeisstillgood 5y ago
>>> political reporting is basically TMZ for boring, ugly people. Can I get that on a TShirt please ? (And yes, was it Nietscheze who says politicians are just sales people for their manifestos?)
- im_down_w_otp 5y ago
  Are they even that anymore? That seems like it would be an improvement. Now it seems like they're just cast members doing product placement for someone else's manifesto.
  - azinman2 5y ago
    Not even a manifesto. If you look at people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, their rise is basic upon mutual dislike, and nothing more. Just a willingness to “own” the other side. There is no manifesto (unless you consider god, guns and glory a manifesto), just hatred. And it’s extremely engaging for their respective base. I don’t blame the politicians per se, in some ways it’s democracy at work if that’s what the people want. We need to change what people fundamentally want to not be based upon us vs them mentality.
    - smaddox 5y ago
      Or perhaps we need to change our democracy to stop enforcing a duopoly. I firmly believe that widely implementing STAR Voting (https://www.starvoting.us/ https://www.starvoting.us/) would fix a large swath of problems in politics and public policy.
      - azinman2 5y ago
        Ranked voting also can have unexpected surprises as well. Every system has flaws, and if we open things up even more, I believe we’ll just get a collection of even more radicalized parties who only care about a single issue. At least with two parties there’s inner tension they need to modulate.
        smaddox 5y ago
        RCV can have unexpected surprises, but STAR voting resolves all such issues with RCV.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        As far as I know, STAR voting is a form of RCV. However, the Fairvote organization has advertised RCV with instant runoff voting as the counting method as being RCV.
        voting749227383 5y ago
        Technically speaking, STAR voting is a form of cardinal voting, while ranked-choice encompasses the various ordinal methods. The distinction here is that in STAR voting, I could rank two candidates equally to show that I have no preference between them. Also, I don't have to rank the candidates in order: I could give my first-place a score of 5, my second place a score of 2, and my third place a score of 0. If I scored my second place candidate as 3, this ballot could result in a different outcome.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Thanks for the correction! The whole voting system and counting methods is a deeper dive than what I first imagined.
        nickff 5y ago
        There is no 'best' voting system, only different trade-offs.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theore...
    - lifeisstillgood 5y ago
      But - isn't it a manifesto of sorts. I mean it's nice to see a fully costed budget broken down into multiple categories, but let's be fair, that's just to get past the gatekeepers of yore (NYT, The Times, BBC). Turning up without the numbers adding up was just an easy way to get pasted by the interviewer. Now there is no interviewer - so the manifesto is what it always really was - an attempt to connect to the voter on a level of identity, common understanding and culture. It's why it is flat out amazing any single human being can get 70 million votes in the US (or even more amazing 300m in India) How many hats does such a person have to wear? How many promises does someone need to connect. I mean Brad Pitt is gorgeous and just has to say five scripted lines and he could not get 300 million women to vote for him. The idea that democracy has scale this far with just a personality cult as its main adjudicator is incredible The number of living humans who can make that many people think"yeah"'is tiny ! One day we will go beyond our initial ape reactions
  - sjienn 5y ago
    Well there are problems where not only no one agrees on the paths ahead, but there is no guarantee any of the paths you take will lead anywhere useful. These kinds of problems there is always going to be manipulation. Especially if the stakes are high. As long as the chimps aren't assassinating each other its all par for the course. I am just glad there are people willing to play such a game when things are ambiguous. Cause I usually just run for the hills when things get political :)
- LeifCarrotson 5y ago
  Why is it that the political salespeople are boring and ugly? Politics would be even more difficult to approach objectively if the politicians were photogenic, charismatic, attractive, and well-spoken. Television ads have this figured out, viewers subconsciously want to be the smiling cool guy drinking Advertised Beer (tm) and partying with the wealthy and youthful crowd shown in the ad, but no one wants to hang out in the scenes portrayed on CSPAN. I'm glad to not need to deal with that level of reality distortion yet, but I don't know why that's the case.
  - krapp 5y ago
    Looks helped for JFK and Obama, and might help for AOC in the future. On the other hand, millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump because his being ugly, irascible, and vulgar made him seem more relatable and sincere... likely as a reaction to a negative impression given by Obama's relative youth and well-spokenness.
- yesenadam 5y ago
  > yes, was it Nietscheze who says politicians are just sales people for their manifestos? I strongled doubted it was Nietzsche, so I googled the phrase "politicians are just sales people for their manifestos" (in quotes), and there was one result—your comment. It's yours!
wyager 5y ago
Dimwit: politics is like a gang fight Midwit: politics is actually about making good decisions for society Topwit: politics is like a gang fight
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
toomanyducks 5y ago
Maybe some of this is due to how little variation there is: I've yet to see a politician who isn't neoliberal (though Trump was more than a bit fascist at times). Even 2019-20 Andrew Yang still built his ideas (mainly UBI) off of neoliberalism, and imo, appealed to a ton of more traditional neoliberal values: that UBI is about providing equally and flatly for everyone, not specifically and directly helping the disenfranchised and indirectly aiding worker control of the means of production (how I'd view its effects). And then he abandoned the UBI campaign this year, becoming even more centrist. Then, if we shift our focus further left, we see Bernie Sanders, who is just not all that socialist because he's really working within the neoliberal framework that his years of politics conditioned him to work in. Further left than that, well, there are no anarchists or communists in politics. I could make the case that this is here (and bad) bc neoliberalism will slide towards fascism if we give equal weight to everyone's ideas, but that does feel like I'm sinking further into divisions, and it presupposes that my positive opinions about the far left are actually supported by facts, regardless of any ground truth. But really, it wouldn't be an issue if we had more variety in ideology: discussion would be more varied and more thorough, we'd all question our own ideology's assumptions just a bit more, and overall it would be easier to engage in someone else's ideas if you knew they weren't coming from the same baseline as you. Neoliberalism is not a neutral or balanced ideology: let's have more communists, socialists, anarchists, libertarians, hell, maybe a few fascists or stalinists could do some good.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  There's no such thing as neoliberalism. "Neoliberalism" is a fake bogeyman that Latin American populists came up with when they needed something to blame for the failure of their policy choices.
  - toomanyducks 5y ago
    That is not something I've ever heard before - could you explain further, provide some links maybe?
    - 1270018080 5y ago
Consultant32452 5y ago
In my opinion long form podcasts are fixing this. The gotcha nonsense on Twitter isn't going away, but at the same time long form discussions about complex topics are growing in popularity. So there is at worst a duality where things are getting worse on one hand and better on the other.
munificent 5y ago
It would be fascinating to do a study where you take politics news articles and replace all names with A, B, C, etc. and likewise any mention of Party. So just policy and blank identifiers. Then see how people respond to the news. Are they more likely to agree with or disagree with policies when they don't know who they're coming from? I suppose in practice there are enough shibboleths in each political camp that readers will still be able to tell which side is their tribe, but it would be interesting to see.
Barrin92 5y ago
>It molds politics into some fantasy world of rap battles and gang fights Politics is a world of rap battles and gang fights. It's war by other means. That's the fundamental essence of anything political. The boring, ugly people are the wonks who actually think politics is about 'good policy consensus' and have been spending a little too much time on Laputa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laputa#Inhabitants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laputa#Inhabitants
- krapp 5y ago
  Basically, politics: https://youtu.be/NUC2EQvdzmY https://youtu.be/NUC2EQvdzmY
nerfhammer 5y ago
us good, them bad

lifeisstillgood 5y ago

>>> political reporting is basically TMZ for boring, ugly people. Can I get that on a TShirt please ? (And yes, was it Nietscheze who says politicians are just sales people for their manifestos?)

im_down_w_otp 5y ago
Are they even that anymore? That seems like it would be an improvement. Now it seems like they're just cast members doing product placement for someone else's manifesto.
- azinman2 5y ago
  Not even a manifesto. If you look at people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, their rise is basic upon mutual dislike, and nothing more. Just a willingness to “own” the other side. There is no manifesto (unless you consider god, guns and glory a manifesto), just hatred. And it’s extremely engaging for their respective base. I don’t blame the politicians per se, in some ways it’s democracy at work if that’s what the people want. We need to change what people fundamentally want to not be based upon us vs them mentality.
  - smaddox 5y ago
    Or perhaps we need to change our democracy to stop enforcing a duopoly. I firmly believe that widely implementing STAR Voting (https://www.starvoting.us/ https://www.starvoting.us/) would fix a large swath of problems in politics and public policy.
    - azinman2 5y ago
      Ranked voting also can have unexpected surprises as well. Every system has flaws, and if we open things up even more, I believe we’ll just get a collection of even more radicalized parties who only care about a single issue. At least with two parties there’s inner tension they need to modulate.
      - smaddox 5y ago
        RCV can have unexpected surprises, but STAR voting resolves all such issues with RCV.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        As far as I know, STAR voting is a form of RCV. However, the Fairvote organization has advertised RCV with instant runoff voting as the counting method as being RCV.
        voting749227383 5y ago
        Technically speaking, STAR voting is a form of cardinal voting, while ranked-choice encompasses the various ordinal methods. The distinction here is that in STAR voting, I could rank two candidates equally to show that I have no preference between them. Also, I don't have to rank the candidates in order: I could give my first-place a score of 5, my second place a score of 2, and my third place a score of 0. If I scored my second place candidate as 3, this ballot could result in a different outcome.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Thanks for the correction! The whole voting system and counting methods is a deeper dive than what I first imagined.
        nickff 5y ago
        There is no 'best' voting system, only different trade-offs.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theore...
  - lifeisstillgood 5y ago
    But - isn't it a manifesto of sorts. I mean it's nice to see a fully costed budget broken down into multiple categories, but let's be fair, that's just to get past the gatekeepers of yore (NYT, The Times, BBC). Turning up without the numbers adding up was just an easy way to get pasted by the interviewer. Now there is no interviewer - so the manifesto is what it always really was - an attempt to connect to the voter on a level of identity, common understanding and culture. It's why it is flat out amazing any single human being can get 70 million votes in the US (or even more amazing 300m in India) How many hats does such a person have to wear? How many promises does someone need to connect. I mean Brad Pitt is gorgeous and just has to say five scripted lines and he could not get 300 million women to vote for him. The idea that democracy has scale this far with just a personality cult as its main adjudicator is incredible The number of living humans who can make that many people think"yeah"'is tiny ! One day we will go beyond our initial ape reactions
- sjienn 5y ago
  Well there are problems where not only no one agrees on the paths ahead, but there is no guarantee any of the paths you take will lead anywhere useful. These kinds of problems there is always going to be manipulation. Especially if the stakes are high. As long as the chimps aren't assassinating each other its all par for the course. I am just glad there are people willing to play such a game when things are ambiguous. Cause I usually just run for the hills when things get political :)
LeifCarrotson 5y ago
Why is it that the political salespeople are boring and ugly? Politics would be even more difficult to approach objectively if the politicians were photogenic, charismatic, attractive, and well-spoken. Television ads have this figured out, viewers subconsciously want to be the smiling cool guy drinking Advertised Beer (tm) and partying with the wealthy and youthful crowd shown in the ad, but no one wants to hang out in the scenes portrayed on CSPAN. I'm glad to not need to deal with that level of reality distortion yet, but I don't know why that's the case.
- krapp 5y ago
  Looks helped for JFK and Obama, and might help for AOC in the future. On the other hand, millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump because his being ugly, irascible, and vulgar made him seem more relatable and sincere... likely as a reaction to a negative impression given by Obama's relative youth and well-spokenness.
yesenadam 5y ago
> yes, was it Nietscheze who says politicians are just sales people for their manifestos? I strongled doubted it was Nietzsche, so I googled the phrase "politicians are just sales people for their manifestos" (in quotes), and there was one result—your comment. It's yours!

wyager 5y ago

Dimwit: politics is like a gang fight Midwit: politics is actually about making good decisions for society Topwit: politics is like a gang fight

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

toomanyducks 5y ago

Maybe some of this is due to how little variation there is: I've yet to see a politician who isn't neoliberal (though Trump was more than a bit fascist at times). Even 2019-20 Andrew Yang still built his ideas (mainly UBI) off of neoliberalism, and imo, appealed to a ton of more traditional neoliberal values: that UBI is about providing equally and flatly for everyone, not specifically and directly helping the disenfranchised and indirectly aiding worker control of the means of production (how I'd view its effects). And then he abandoned the UBI campaign this year, becoming even more centrist. Then, if we shift our focus further left, we see Bernie Sanders, who is just not all that socialist because he's really working within the neoliberal framework that his years of politics conditioned him to work in. Further left than that, well, there are no anarchists or communists in politics. I could make the case that this is here (and bad) bc neoliberalism will slide towards fascism if we give equal weight to everyone's ideas, but that does feel like I'm sinking further into divisions, and it presupposes that my positive opinions about the far left are actually supported by facts, regardless of any ground truth. But really, it wouldn't be an issue if we had more variety in ideology: discussion would be more varied and more thorough, we'd all question our own ideology's assumptions just a bit more, and overall it would be easier to engage in someone else's ideas if you knew they weren't coming from the same baseline as you. Neoliberalism is not a neutral or balanced ideology: let's have more communists, socialists, anarchists, libertarians, hell, maybe a few fascists or stalinists could do some good.

zozbot234 5y ago
There's no such thing as neoliberalism. "Neoliberalism" is a fake bogeyman that Latin American populists came up with when they needed something to blame for the failure of their policy choices.
- toomanyducks 5y ago
  That is not something I've ever heard before - could you explain further, provide some links maybe?
  - 1270018080 5y ago

Consultant32452 5y ago

In my opinion long form podcasts are fixing this. The gotcha nonsense on Twitter isn't going away, but at the same time long form discussions about complex topics are growing in popularity. So there is at worst a duality where things are getting worse on one hand and better on the other.

munificent 5y ago

It would be fascinating to do a study where you take politics news articles and replace all names with A, B, C, etc. and likewise any mention of Party. So just policy and blank identifiers. Then see how people respond to the news. Are they more likely to agree with or disagree with policies when they don't know who they're coming from? I suppose in practice there are enough shibboleths in each political camp that readers will still be able to tell which side is their tribe, but it would be interesting to see.

Barrin92 5y ago

>It molds politics into some fantasy world of rap battles and gang fights Politics is a world of rap battles and gang fights. It's war by other means. That's the fundamental essence of anything political. The boring, ugly people are the wonks who actually think politics is about 'good policy consensus' and have been spending a little too much time on Laputa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laputa#Inhabitants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laputa#Inhabitants

krapp 5y ago
Basically, politics: https://youtu.be/NUC2EQvdzmY https://youtu.be/NUC2EQvdzmY

nerfhammer 5y ago

us good, them bad