4 ms·
To argue that Facebook somehow magically tricks humans into voting against their will and overrides democracy is to argue that democracy itself inherently does
by tsunamifury 18d ago
To argue that Facebook somehow magically tricks humans into voting against their will and overrides democracy is to argue that democracy itself inherently does not work.
It’s amazing that so many people don’t understand that.
It seems far harder to accept that people simply voted for trump because historical institutions had failed them so completely.
This would force the other party to recon with the failed parts of their platform. Which they still never have.
- srean 18d agoBoth could be true.
- tsunamifury 18d agoWilling to concede that point. But parties should understand then what they are arguing for
- JMiao 18d agotraditional media was already failing democracy well before social media. irrelevant news is the gateway to fake news. journalism was a prestige career that relied on access to advance, and access means you cannot always speak the truths required to inform voters.
- qarl 18d ago> To argue that Facebook somehow magically tricks humans into voting against their will and overrides democracy is to argue that democracy itself inherently does not work. But we know that propaganda works. That doesn't sit well with your claims.
- smugglerFlynn 18d agoThere is a difference between historical institutions failing people, and monkey A getting to a wrench quicker than monkey B (exactly what that email points to)
- xboxnolifes 18d agoIt doesnt quite imply democracy does not work. It implies that propaganda works. And if propaganda works, then that would mean that having the bulk of the ability to propagandize concentrated in a few hands in a threat to democracy, as it means that few people effectively have a much more powerful vote. Which, if you'll allow me to shortcut the rest of the argument, just brings us to the fundamental threat to democracy is concentrated wealth and concentrated power.
- tsunamifury 18d agoPoor logic. The existence of propaganda working does not require concentrated wealth. It simply has more interest in it currently. For example many players in the civil rights movement were not wealthy and did “good” propaganda which others refuse to call it as such. The prohibition movement was a second example.
- xboxnolifes 18d agoIt doesn't require concentrated wealth, but if wealth is evenly distributed, then presumably the power to apply propaganda is also equally distributed. Propagandizing information effectively become a meta-level form of voting. With concentrated wealth and power, those with all of the resources hold all of these meta-level votes.
- tsunamifury 17d agoProhibition was a common man’s propoganda that led to horrible outcomes and almost upended America. We are all capable of being stupid.
- zorak8me 18d agoNobody is suggesting that Facebook magically tricked people into voting against their will.
- tsunamifury 18d agoMaybe you were alive or aware in 2016-2022 but this is exactly what was suggested. I’m having a hard time imagining you didn’t know this.
- qarl 18d agoI believe you're straw manning the situation.
- pohl 18d agoNarrator: there were no allegations of magic.
- tsunamifury 17d agoYes there were. There were unscientific claims that the data was used to change the mind of voters in a complete magical and impossible way. Which later was proven entirely false. Did you miss the entire event? Or are you so busy trying to be swarmy that you can’t remember it?
- qarl 17d agoFriend - there are always going to be crazy people. You can't cite them as evidence that the craziness was widespread. And you shouldn't call names. HN does not like that one bit.
- tsunamifury 17d agoThat was the entire basis of the hearings. I assume you simply are unaware rather than ill intent here.
- toast0 17d agoIs it surprising or an indictment against democracy that reminding people the election is in N days makes them more likely to vote? If you only remind people who are likely to vote the way you want, that's likely to swing the vote a little bit. Maybe you do a little convincing with your reminder and that helps a little bit more. Some jurisdictions have a blanket ban on political advertisement or media coverage as a way to reduce the effects of campaigning in an attempt to get a less influenced result. But we don't have that in the US and I suspect it would fall afoul of US free speech, and may be hard to enforce, anyway.
- decasteve 17d agoUsing popularity contests to pick rulers is the flaw of democracy. I think Sortition would be better at selecting people to write our laws, at least under current circumstances.