6 ms·

The speed with which society is moving is also a factor. Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power,

The speed with which society is moving is also a factor. Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. I think Graham is slightly missing the point about our period. It's not that heresy is on the up, so much as it's on the move. Outrage is a homeless beast. We're in an Orwellian age where it changes with the seasons, so what is heresy in one place and time is a tepid platitude only next door the following week. Also it is no longer power that metes out punishment, but the fanboi acolytes or loyal minor apparatchik. It would have once been "dangerous" (at least in a fairly pedestrian job) to say that Google is a crappy old search engine, Facebook is a threat to democracy and Microsoft are corrupt criminals. Today it's practically de rigueur to cock a snook at jaded icons. It's practically a credential.

Angostura 5y ago
> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. That’s an interesting, because I suppose at the moment that group would include all through have been historically or currently disadvantaged or discriminated against. Today’s axiom, at least in liberal countries is ‘you can punch up, but not down’ somewhat different in totalitarian regimes.
dibujante 5y ago
They're credited with it but that quotation is actually from neo-Nazi Kevin Alfred Strom and has been repeatedly laundered through social media to seem like respectable intellectual rigor, instead of an attempt to legitimize the kinds of completely insane conspiracy ideology that is present on social media today.
eternalban 5y ago
> Outrage is a homeless beast. Well said and true. > it is no longer power that metes out punishment, but the fanboi acolytes or loyal minor apparatchik. Pretty sure this modality of power has been with us since ancient days. (The beast may be homeless but there is always a beast master.)
kbenson 5y ago
> Also it is no longer power that metes out punishment There are different types of power, and what I think we're seeing is that whip traditionally those different types of power have rested in the same individuals, that's not so true anymore. Financial and political power is still mostly where it's always been. Social power has been democratized far more and far more quickly in recent years, to the point that those same groups that have the financial and political power no longer mostly control it. I think the mercurial appearance of how that power is wielded is also easily explained. Like any revolutionaries that take power, they are often unrestrained in it's use as they are not used to the problems of wielding it. Whether the status quo can ever develop into a more restrained arbiter if social justice remains to be seen. As long as the young are the majority of the social scenes used in the decision process (the social networks of the moment) I doubt it, but the demographics of these networks are shifting year by year and those that have been using them longer are learning the trade and solidifying their bases, and those ones making enough money to also join the other power structures. Perhaps in another decade or two this will just be viewed as another period of large change, like civil rights and woman entering the workplace, and the social narrative will again be controlled like it traditionally has. For most I imagine that thought has parts of both comfort and dread.
- nonrandomstring 5y ago
  > For most I imagine that thought has parts of both comfort and dread. Yes. What we see as mob rule now may mature into something not unlike a real polis. But (see my recent comment on vigilante speeding cameras) technology may give us a civil arms race that just drives a wedge further down the middle.
- ambrozk 5y ago
  I agree with most of what you've written but I don't think it's correct to think of social power having been "democratized." It seems more accurate to view the transformation we've seen as existing mostly at the top of society. Highly networked, social-media savvy college-educated elites have figured out how exert power on structures which were previously by other highly networked, college-educated elites.
randomtwiddler 5y ago
> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. That doesn't work if/when a value claimed by those in power is to turn the other cheek. At least if it is followed, then this wouldn't be accurate.
UncleMeat 5y ago
> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. The actual source of this quote is a literal Nazi who was using this quote to claim that Jewish people run the world. It is also a silly idea. It is considered rude to make fun of autistic people at work, but autistic people clearly aren't running the world through some secret cabal.
- Banana699 5y ago
  >The actual source of this quote is a literal Nazi This is called the Genetic Fallacy, it is completely irrelevant who said anything as long as that thing is true and/or useful. Nobody owns words. Aristotle supported slavery, you don't interrupt every logic lecture with "You know the source of those funny terms is a literal slavery supporter?" do you?. >It is also a silly idea. It is considered rude to make fun of autistic people at work This common retort completely misses the point, voltaire's rule of thumb is just that, it's a heuristic, an extremely good one for detecting and finding hegemonic ideologies, but not an algorithm. A necessary but not sufficient condition. The kind of offense is also different, nobody rages at you and assembles a mob because you made fun of an autistic person, at most you will get a cold stare and get ignored. Voltaire was talking about a different kind entirely of "Not allowed", the familiar hysteria coming from the fanatically religious when you speak ill of their idols, he was probably speaking about the church, but the wisdom is just as relevant to the new religions.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    > This is called the Genetic Fallacy I'm well aware of the Genetic Fallacy. The post I was responding to was falsely attributing the quote to other sources. "Hey, somebody else said that" is relevant information. Discussion of fallacies is also largely worthless in ordinary conversation since we aren't actually making formal deductive arguments. It is completely reasonable for people to reason through other means than pure deductive logic. And further, my post did not stop there. > voltaire's rule of thumb It is not Voltaire's rule of thumb. We just discussed this.
orwin 5y ago
> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. Yeah, so the people in power currently are Ukrainians. Look, i agree with the rest of your analysis, but this Tacitus sounds stupid (I am pretty sure Voltaire didn't write this). It's ignoring that most pamphlets and songs actually targeted people in power, historically (yeah, thinking about it, no way it's Voltaire). And people mostly take the dominated/wronged side.

Angostura 5y ago

> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. That’s an interesting, because I suppose at the moment that group would include all through have been historically or currently disadvantaged or discriminated against. Today’s axiom, at least in liberal countries is ‘you can punch up, but not down’ somewhat different in totalitarian regimes.

dibujante 5y ago

They're credited with it but that quotation is actually from neo-Nazi Kevin Alfred Strom and has been repeatedly laundered through social media to seem like respectable intellectual rigor, instead of an attempt to legitimize the kinds of completely insane conspiracy ideology that is present on social media today.

eternalban 5y ago

> Outrage is a homeless beast. Well said and true. > it is no longer power that metes out punishment, but the fanboi acolytes or loyal minor apparatchik. Pretty sure this modality of power has been with us since ancient days. (The beast may be homeless but there is always a beast master.)

kbenson 5y ago

> Also it is no longer power that metes out punishment There are different types of power, and what I think we're seeing is that whip traditionally those different types of power have rested in the same individuals, that's not so true anymore. Financial and political power is still mostly where it's always been. Social power has been democratized far more and far more quickly in recent years, to the point that those same groups that have the financial and political power no longer mostly control it. I think the mercurial appearance of how that power is wielded is also easily explained. Like any revolutionaries that take power, they are often unrestrained in it's use as they are not used to the problems of wielding it. Whether the status quo can ever develop into a more restrained arbiter if social justice remains to be seen. As long as the young are the majority of the social scenes used in the decision process (the social networks of the moment) I doubt it, but the demographics of these networks are shifting year by year and those that have been using them longer are learning the trade and solidifying their bases, and those ones making enough money to also join the other power structures. Perhaps in another decade or two this will just be viewed as another period of large change, like civil rights and woman entering the workplace, and the social narrative will again be controlled like it traditionally has. For most I imagine that thought has parts of both comfort and dread.

nonrandomstring 5y ago
> For most I imagine that thought has parts of both comfort and dread. Yes. What we see as mob rule now may mature into something not unlike a real polis. But (see my recent comment on vigilante speeding cameras) technology may give us a civil arms race that just drives a wedge further down the middle.
ambrozk 5y ago
I agree with most of what you've written but I don't think it's correct to think of social power having been "democratized." It seems more accurate to view the transformation we've seen as existing mostly at the top of society. Highly networked, social-media savvy college-educated elites have figured out how exert power on structures which were previously by other highly networked, college-educated elites.

randomtwiddler 5y ago

> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. That doesn't work if/when a value claimed by those in power is to turn the other cheek. At least if it is followed, then this wouldn't be accurate.

UncleMeat 5y ago

> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. The actual source of this quote is a literal Nazi who was using this quote to claim that Jewish people run the world. It is also a silly idea. It is considered rude to make fun of autistic people at work, but autistic people clearly aren't running the world through some secret cabal.

Banana699 5y ago
>The actual source of this quote is a literal Nazi This is called the Genetic Fallacy, it is completely irrelevant who said anything as long as that thing is true and/or useful. Nobody owns words. Aristotle supported slavery, you don't interrupt every logic lecture with "You know the source of those funny terms is a literal slavery supporter?" do you?. >It is also a silly idea. It is considered rude to make fun of autistic people at work This common retort completely misses the point, voltaire's rule of thumb is just that, it's a heuristic, an extremely good one for detecting and finding hegemonic ideologies, but not an algorithm. A necessary but not sufficient condition. The kind of offense is also different, nobody rages at you and assembles a mob because you made fun of an autistic person, at most you will get a cold stare and get ignored. Voltaire was talking about a different kind entirely of "Not allowed", the familiar hysteria coming from the fanatically religious when you speak ill of their idols, he was probably speaking about the church, but the wisdom is just as relevant to the new religions.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  > This is called the Genetic Fallacy I'm well aware of the Genetic Fallacy. The post I was responding to was falsely attributing the quote to other sources. "Hey, somebody else said that" is relevant information. Discussion of fallacies is also largely worthless in ordinary conversation since we aren't actually making formal deductive arguments. It is completely reasonable for people to reason through other means than pure deductive logic. And further, my post did not stop there. > voltaire's rule of thumb It is not Voltaire's rule of thumb. We just discussed this.

orwin 5y ago

> Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. Yeah, so the people in power currently are Ukrainians. Look, i agree with the rest of your analysis, but this Tacitus sounds stupid (I am pretty sure Voltaire didn't write this). It's ignoring that most pamphlets and songs actually targeted people in power, historically (yeah, thinking about it, no way it's Voltaire). And people mostly take the dominated/wronged side.