5 ms·

Thanks to conspiracy theorists we can't even have good things. An innocent idea (design cities to have most daily necessities in a reasonable radius) becomes a

by bafe 3y ago

Thanks to conspiracy theorists we can't even have good things. An innocent idea (design cities to have most daily necessities in a reasonable radius) becomes a conspiracy to trap us all

PaulHoule 3y ago
I was in a class on geoengineering that had it's last in person session as the coronavirus was closing in on our campus and I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. What I found remarkable back then was that governments were taking very strong measures against the coronavirus and not getting a lot of resistance from the population unlike the situation with global warming where an elaborate system had been built up over 40 years to prevent action. Conspiracy theories and populist resistance took a little while to develop and certain people are in an inflamed state where something like 15 minute cities or efforts to replace gas stoves will now see an intense counterattack within two weeks or less, making our situation for global governance a lot worse than it was in 2020. It makes the issues that Habermas talks about in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) more salient than ever and making it quite critical that governments make legitimacy an important goal, maybe even creating a "department of legitimacy" which could quite directly pay dividends.
- bafe 3y ago
  It is hard for me to say what drives the loss of (perceived) legitimacy in experts and authorities. As you rightly said, given the global problems we are facing we urgently need more of it. It is just depressing sometimes
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    ... I've never been as proud as getting a downvote before, even the times when I was shitposting deliberately.
- prometheus76 3y ago
  You could also call it the "Ministry of Truth". What could go wrong?
- macinjosh 3y ago
  "department of legitimacy" sounds like the most dystopian BS I have ever heard of. I always thought legitimacy in democracy came through the support of the people which is gained through serving them and their interests. This new form of "democracy" where the elites have all the answers and knows what is best for everyone is the newest form of authoritarianism, IMO. There is no Legitimation Crisis. That phenomenon is a result of society healing itself from the scourge of all authoritarians.
  - HideousKojima 3y ago
    After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Which stated that the people Had squandered the confidence of the government And could only win it back By redoubled work [quotas]. Would it not in that case Be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
    - greenyoda 3y ago
      Reference: > "Die Lösung" ("The Solution") is a famous satirical German poem by Bertolt Brecht about the East German uprising of 1953. Written in mid-1953, it is critical of the government and was not published at the time. It was first published in 1959 in the West German newspaper Die Welt."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    You read that Habermas book? On one hand you could make the case that popular votes can't change the laws of physics and the limitations of biology and pretending otherwise is a matter of looking into your children's eyes and thinking about them looking into their children's eyes and, given the ever-increasing stakes, some generation soon is going to die unburied. However, there are many good reasons why the "just trust the experts" answer is not tenable not least the self-serving behavior of experts that is proven, the uncertainty in expert judgement that is inevitable, and the sense that you can get much better conformance from people for a decision that they felt they had input into. Habermas makes it clear there is no easy way to square that circle.
- HideousKojima 3y ago
  Oh no, how dare conspiracy theorists see an attempt to ban gas stoves as... an attempt to ban gas stoves?
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    How dare Fox entertainment pundits make people think gas stoves are going to be confiscated out of their homes imminently, when the discussion is about considering preventing installation in new builds due to health hazards. Go play with some lead paint and stick it to the libs.
    - HideousKojima 3y ago
      "This is a hidden hazard. Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” Richard Trumka, Jr., CSPC commissioner Quote is from Bloomberg, not Fox: https://archive.ph/pMVey https://archive.ph/pMVey
      - unethical_ban 3y ago
        Yes. We agree. Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. I support banning or restricting or discouraging the use of indoor appliances that cause documented health issues to any user. I don't support lead paint or leaded gasoline or smoking near gas pumps. The tyranny.
        HideousKojima 3y ago
        >Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. Citation needed. I don't see that in any of the print articles I can find on Fox, was it on one of their TV segments? Edit: I did find this - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-your-gas-stove https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-yo... And sensationalist headline aside, it's very factual about actual policies (either proposed or being implemented) that will make gas stoves more expensive to purchase and operate. Nowhere does the article claim that the government is planning on busting into houses to take away existing stoves. Edit 2: I have to wonder, if a Republican politician was proposing a ban on the sale of new hybrids, and a leftwing outlet wrote an article with the title "The GOP is coming for your Prius" would you take as much offense at it? The headlines about gas stoves that I've seen don't seem much different than, say, a lot of the headlines I saw from the left about abortion after Row v. Wade was overturned.
- lp0_on_fire 3y ago
  IMO Global Governance failed in 2020 not because of populist resistance and conspiracy theories but because the people in charge didn't practice what they preached. It didn't help that some governments took the opportunity to "not let a crisis go to waste" and push through unpopular or controversial policy. > I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. This is an interesting analogy. You talk about conspiracy theories and populist resistance (which were and are rampant) but let's not pretend that the "fire fighters" weren't at times sitting inside the very building that's ostensibly on fire drinking fine wine tea and eating fois gras. There were countless examples of the ruling class making exceptions to lockdowns / covid policy for their friends and political causes-du-jour while being outright draconian in restrictions to activities and groups that did not fall in line. The most obvious example in the US being the riots in 2020 surrounding BLM and the George Floyd killing vs people not being allowed to go to church services. Certainly, the zeitgeist from the media and ruling class would lead you to believe one was righteous and good while the other was "literally killing people". Alternatively, if you don't want a "culture war" example: small businesses were forced to shut their doors while big box retailers were allowed to remain open under the guise of being "essential businesses". How many of the small hardware stores survived COVID vs Lowes and Home Depot, both of which made record profits? Or, a more personal example: A very close relative of mine passed during COVID yet we were not allowed to have a funeral for her. We followed all the prescribed precautions - vaccine, masking, social distancing, testing...all of it. When a high-ranking politician (John Lewis) passed, not only was his family allowed a funeral, they managed to have three former Presidents of the United States in attendance!
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    I like this reply (irrespective of the culture wars aspect) and it does underscore the difficulties. If you got into that Habermas book and its sequels (had to dig them out of deep archive from my Uni library they are so dense) you'd realize the problem is deep. A "department of legitimacy" would have to give out a lot of tough love and crack down on delegitimizing behavior, that's for sure. As case studies I would point out: (1) a sector of Republicans who pursue one kind of legitimacy, "sticking to their guns" and posturing with extreme positions (e.g. they feel like they have at least do something to buy the perception of legitimacy of somebody) and (2) Democrats who take legitimacy for granted (I'm Hillary Clinton, of course I am legitimate). In Hillary's case there was that experience of being on the receiving end of Richard Mellon Scaife's (oddly an unnamed villain in https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibilities-Change/dp/0465085881 https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibi...) war against her husband which convinced her that any illegitimacy perceptions were part of a "vast right wing conspiracy" thus nobody could have convinced her that she could have changed her behavior and won in 2016.
- LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
  Hrmm. Habermas and Germany. That's funny, because right now there are proposals there which would criminalize to publicly/online question or doubt the 'legitimacy' of anything what their shepherds do. A widening of the already wide applicability of 'hate-spech' laws. *BAAAA!*

by bafe 3y ago

Thanks to conspiracy theorists we can't even have good things. An innocent idea (design cities to have most daily necessities in a reasonable radius) becomes a conspiracy to trap us all

PaulHoule 3y ago

I was in a class on geoengineering that had it's last in person session as the coronavirus was closing in on our campus and I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. What I found remarkable back then was that governments were taking very strong measures against the coronavirus and not getting a lot of resistance from the population unlike the situation with global warming where an elaborate system had been built up over 40 years to prevent action. Conspiracy theories and populist resistance took a little while to develop and certain people are in an inflamed state where something like 15 minute cities or efforts to replace gas stoves will now see an intense counterattack within two weeks or less, making our situation for global governance a lot worse than it was in 2020. It makes the issues that Habermas talks about in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation_Crisis_(book) more salient than ever and making it quite critical that governments make legitimacy an important goal, maybe even creating a "department of legitimacy" which could quite directly pay dividends.

bafe 3y ago
It is hard for me to say what drives the loss of (perceived) legitimacy in experts and authorities. As you rightly said, given the global problems we are facing we urgently need more of it. It is just depressing sometimes
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  ... I've never been as proud as getting a downvote before, even the times when I was shitposting deliberately.
prometheus76 3y ago
You could also call it the "Ministry of Truth". What could go wrong?
macinjosh 3y ago
"department of legitimacy" sounds like the most dystopian BS I have ever heard of. I always thought legitimacy in democracy came through the support of the people which is gained through serving them and their interests. This new form of "democracy" where the elites have all the answers and knows what is best for everyone is the newest form of authoritarianism, IMO. There is no Legitimation Crisis. That phenomenon is a result of society healing itself from the scourge of all authoritarians.
- HideousKojima 3y ago
  After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Which stated that the people Had squandered the confidence of the government And could only win it back By redoubled work [quotas]. Would it not in that case Be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
  - greenyoda 3y ago
    Reference: > "Die Lösung" ("The Solution") is a famous satirical German poem by Bertolt Brecht about the East German uprising of 1953. Written in mid-1953, it is critical of the government and was not published at the time. It was first published in 1959 in the West German newspaper Die Welt."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_L%C3%B6sung
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  You read that Habermas book? On one hand you could make the case that popular votes can't change the laws of physics and the limitations of biology and pretending otherwise is a matter of looking into your children's eyes and thinking about them looking into their children's eyes and, given the ever-increasing stakes, some generation soon is going to die unburied. However, there are many good reasons why the "just trust the experts" answer is not tenable not least the self-serving behavior of experts that is proven, the uncertainty in expert judgement that is inevitable, and the sense that you can get much better conformance from people for a decision that they felt they had input into. Habermas makes it clear there is no easy way to square that circle.
HideousKojima 3y ago
Oh no, how dare conspiracy theorists see an attempt to ban gas stoves as... an attempt to ban gas stoves?
- unethical_ban 3y ago
  How dare Fox entertainment pundits make people think gas stoves are going to be confiscated out of their homes imminently, when the discussion is about considering preventing installation in new builds due to health hazards. Go play with some lead paint and stick it to the libs.
  - HideousKojima 3y ago
    "This is a hidden hazard. Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” Richard Trumka, Jr., CSPC commissioner Quote is from Bloomberg, not Fox: https://archive.ph/pMVey https://archive.ph/pMVey
    - unethical_ban 3y ago
      Yes. We agree. Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. I support banning or restricting or discouraging the use of indoor appliances that cause documented health issues to any user. I don't support lead paint or leaded gasoline or smoking near gas pumps. The tyranny.
      - HideousKojima 3y ago
        >Fox was telling people "the government is coming for YOUR oven" as if people would have to get rid of their existing ovens. Citation needed. I don't see that in any of the print articles I can find on Fox, was it on one of their TV segments? Edit: I did find this - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-your-gas-stove https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/5-ways-biden-still-coming-yo... And sensationalist headline aside, it's very factual about actual policies (either proposed or being implemented) that will make gas stoves more expensive to purchase and operate. Nowhere does the article claim that the government is planning on busting into houses to take away existing stoves. Edit 2: I have to wonder, if a Republican politician was proposing a ban on the sale of new hybrids, and a leftwing outlet wrote an article with the title "The GOP is coming for your Prius" would you take as much offense at it? The headlines about gas stoves that I've seen don't seem much different than, say, a lot of the headlines I saw from the left about abortion after Row v. Wade was overturned.
lp0_on_fire 3y ago
IMO Global Governance failed in 2020 not because of populist resistance and conspiracy theories but because the people in charge didn't practice what they preached. It didn't help that some governments took the opportunity to "not let a crisis go to waste" and push through unpopular or controversial policy. > I was saying that the coronavirus was a fire drill for global governance and would be a test of our ability to react to bigger problems like climate change. This is an interesting analogy. You talk about conspiracy theories and populist resistance (which were and are rampant) but let's not pretend that the "fire fighters" weren't at times sitting inside the very building that's ostensibly on fire drinking fine wine tea and eating fois gras. There were countless examples of the ruling class making exceptions to lockdowns / covid policy for their friends and political causes-du-jour while being outright draconian in restrictions to activities and groups that did not fall in line. The most obvious example in the US being the riots in 2020 surrounding BLM and the George Floyd killing vs people not being allowed to go to church services. Certainly, the zeitgeist from the media and ruling class would lead you to believe one was righteous and good while the other was "literally killing people". Alternatively, if you don't want a "culture war" example: small businesses were forced to shut their doors while big box retailers were allowed to remain open under the guise of being "essential businesses". How many of the small hardware stores survived COVID vs Lowes and Home Depot, both of which made record profits? Or, a more personal example: A very close relative of mine passed during COVID yet we were not allowed to have a funeral for her. We followed all the prescribed precautions - vaccine, masking, social distancing, testing...all of it. When a high-ranking politician (John Lewis) passed, not only was his family allowed a funeral, they managed to have three former Presidents of the United States in attendance!
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  I like this reply (irrespective of the culture wars aspect) and it does underscore the difficulties. If you got into that Habermas book and its sequels (had to dig them out of deep archive from my Uni library they are so dense) you'd realize the problem is deep. A "department of legitimacy" would have to give out a lot of tough love and crack down on delegitimizing behavior, that's for sure. As case studies I would point out: (1) a sector of Republicans who pursue one kind of legitimacy, "sticking to their guns" and posturing with extreme positions (e.g. they feel like they have at least do something to buy the perception of legitimacy of somebody) and (2) Democrats who take legitimacy for granted (I'm Hillary Clinton, of course I am legitimate). In Hillary's case there was that experience of being on the receiving end of Richard Mellon Scaife's (oddly an unnamed villain in https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibilities-Change/dp/0465085881 https://www.amazon.com/Zero-Sum-Society-Distribution-Possibi...) war against her husband which convinced her that any illegitimacy perceptions were part of a "vast right wing conspiracy" thus nobody could have convinced her that she could have changed her behavior and won in 2016.
LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
Hrmm. Habermas and Germany. That's funny, because right now there are proposals there which would criminalize to publicly/online question or doubt the 'legitimacy' of anything what their shepherds do. A widening of the already wide applicability of 'hate-spech' laws. *BAAAA!*