3 ms·

I think we could turn the Guardian article's premise around (as this article hints to) and say "it's dangerous to think people shouldn't be allowed to think abo

I think we could turn the Guardian article's premise around (as this article hints to) and say "it's dangerous to think people shouldn't be allowed to think about or experience wrong things." It's obvious slippery slope arguments that lead to censorship and nanny states if not worse. The correct answer is not to believe that everyone is a Netflix show away from being a conspiracy theorist, but to instead present the evidence against and counter arguments. To add to that, if people do not trust the experts, it is not because wonky shows have created distrust, it is because the experts and authorities are not behaving honestly. People aren't as stupid as the Guardian author and authorities seem to think or want them to be. People enough lies and spin they start to wonder "what else are they lying about if this is the not-even-trying-to-hide-it stuff." Hold authorities and experts to account, rather than patronise the population and then try to censor their displeasure.

escapedmoose 4y ago
> it is because the experts and authorities are not behaving honestly. My instinct is to agree with you, but I can’t actually think of any examples where this tends to be the case. Which experts/authorities need to be held to account?
- mythrwy 4y ago
  "Holding to account" doesn't necessarily imply wrongdoing or having been mistaken. It simply means someone is watching and there is expected responsibility for proclamations and actions. Similar to a student or employee or a citizen or anyone else. So all of them at all times.
- luuuzeta 4y ago
  >Which experts/authorities need to be held to account? As of more recently, I think Dr. Fauci should be held accountable for lying to the American public in the last two years, from the effectiveness of masks to the effectiveness of the CV vaccines to the effectiveness of mandates to crowning himself as the herald of science (e.g., paraphrasing "if you disagree with me, you disagree with science").
  - ss108 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - headsoup 4y ago
      If you think Fauci is honest and trustworthy you're part of the problem in trying to 'other' those calling out the lies. The culture of "the people on my side are good/right but not yours" is a big part of today's problem, rather than "why isn't either party held to account?" Don't look into Fauci's research partners if you'd rather keep his image in tact for you. Both (in the US) parties have massive ties to and influence of the industries they regulate and govern and both get away with mass corruption wholesale, while people suck up ideas like Trump is an outsider hero and Pelosi is a champion for women. It's easy these days to find evidence of the corruption and lies because people don't rely on the print media to find it and filter it for them. Of course this does not mean it's all lies and people don't filter the false things either, but it should put an awful lot of pressure on those in power to stop the corruption and manipulation, yet we're seeing a doubling down and blaming the public for finding it. The wild conspiracy theories would disappear immediately if some authorities came out and said "yes, actually these X things are true, we apologies and will do Y in future. But these Z things are not true."
      - ss108 4y ago
        I think looking at the character of the people criticizing Fauci--who never provide any specifics or substance--as well as the character of the people who such people admire is a pretty good heuristic for determining whether I should give any credence to what they are saying. I will always be happy to err on the side of "othering" people who believe in "alternative facts" and who assume that those in power simply lie and are corrupt. I was much more sympathetic with that mindset pre-2016, but seeing Trump and all that shit exposed to me how vacuous, empty, and baseless it all was--as well as how dangerous. My reaction to Trump was to really hunker down support for the center, the establishment, etc. But when I criticize attitudes and dispositions as "sophomoric" etc., it comes from a place of disgust because I remember my own mindset and how stupid and wrong it was.

escapedmoose 4y ago

> it is because the experts and authorities are not behaving honestly. My instinct is to agree with you, but I can’t actually think of any examples where this tends to be the case. Which experts/authorities need to be held to account?

mythrwy 4y ago
"Holding to account" doesn't necessarily imply wrongdoing or having been mistaken. It simply means someone is watching and there is expected responsibility for proclamations and actions. Similar to a student or employee or a citizen or anyone else. So all of them at all times.
luuuzeta 4y ago
>Which experts/authorities need to be held to account? As of more recently, I think Dr. Fauci should be held accountable for lying to the American public in the last two years, from the effectiveness of masks to the effectiveness of the CV vaccines to the effectiveness of mandates to crowning himself as the herald of science (e.g., paraphrasing "if you disagree with me, you disagree with science").
- ss108 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - headsoup 4y ago
    If you think Fauci is honest and trustworthy you're part of the problem in trying to 'other' those calling out the lies. The culture of "the people on my side are good/right but not yours" is a big part of today's problem, rather than "why isn't either party held to account?" Don't look into Fauci's research partners if you'd rather keep his image in tact for you. Both (in the US) parties have massive ties to and influence of the industries they regulate and govern and both get away with mass corruption wholesale, while people suck up ideas like Trump is an outsider hero and Pelosi is a champion for women. It's easy these days to find evidence of the corruption and lies because people don't rely on the print media to find it and filter it for them. Of course this does not mean it's all lies and people don't filter the false things either, but it should put an awful lot of pressure on those in power to stop the corruption and manipulation, yet we're seeing a doubling down and blaming the public for finding it. The wild conspiracy theories would disappear immediately if some authorities came out and said "yes, actually these X things are true, we apologies and will do Y in future. But these Z things are not true."
    - ss108 4y ago
      I think looking at the character of the people criticizing Fauci--who never provide any specifics or substance--as well as the character of the people who such people admire is a pretty good heuristic for determining whether I should give any credence to what they are saying. I will always be happy to err on the side of "othering" people who believe in "alternative facts" and who assume that those in power simply lie and are corrupt. I was much more sympathetic with that mindset pre-2016, but seeing Trump and all that shit exposed to me how vacuous, empty, and baseless it all was--as well as how dangerous. My reaction to Trump was to really hunker down support for the center, the establishment, etc. But when I criticize attitudes and dispositions as "sophomoric" etc., it comes from a place of disgust because I remember my own mindset and how stupid and wrong it was.