6 ms·

> voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda Who is even saying this is not true? The United States government is

by quasse 2y ago

> voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda Who is even saying this is not true? The United States government is more aware than maybe anyone else that influencing human opinion and action is a statistical problem once you have enough scale. Just look at the history of the USIA [1] and its successor the USICA. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Information_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Information_Agen...

MichaelZuo 2y ago
There are hundreds of HN users commenting here as if their opinions have meaning and value. Which would be in question if they could all be under various states of “influence”… At the very least the median credibility would be roughly zero.
- mesh 2y ago
  Just because you share an opinion does not mean that opinion has not been shaped, directed or influenced. "The Overton window is the range of subjects and arguments politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time.[1] It is also known as the window of discourse. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
  - XorNot 2y ago
    Also HN absolutely has an Overton window. It has an entire system to enforce it (the voting and points system).
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Did you reply to the correct comment? You don’t need to convince me that is a possibility.
- puffybunion 2y ago
  You pose this as a mathematical question but stop far short of it's full extent
kelseyfrog 2y ago
And today's Bureau of Global Public Affairs[1]. Which "engages media to shape the global narrative on American foreign policy and values [and] communicates U.S. foreign policy objectives to the American public." Of course, it's difficult to pierce the veil and determine exactly how they go about doing this. Narratives are propaganda. https://www.state.gov/about-us-bureau-of-global-public-affairs/ https://www.state.gov/about-us-bureau-of-global-public-affai...
dp-hackernews 2y ago
Chase Hughes: "Manipulation Playbook: The 20 Indicators of Reality Control" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM
lucianbr 2y ago
I think anyone who says democracy is good and the will of the people should be respected is implicitly saying that is not true. Implicitly saying voters are individual agents and not a mob. Otherwise, if democracy is good and votes should matter and at the same time voters are a mob subject to manipulation... democracy is what? A system of government by whoever can do better propaganda? Why would that be good for anyone except those who do propaganda? So yeah, I think many people are claiming that is not true. One question I would ask if people are just a mob, who is actually pushing the buttons? Owners of media, political leaders, are also humans, no? They have the same weaknesses, at least in principle. If you accept some people are different (those who command and control propaganda) then we must conclude that not all people are vulnerable to it, so maybe it's a spectrum. But still democracy sounds like a bad idea, as a majority are probably on the low end of the spectrum, and the majority rules.
- aydyn 2y ago
  > I think anyone who says democracy is good and the will of the people should be respected is implicitly saying that is not true. Implicitly saying voters are individual agents and not a mob. I think that is a pretty hardline interpretation, but there's another way of thinking about it: democracy has worked pretty well up to now and there hasn't been a better replacement. That doesn't mean it will continue being a good solution as technology and society change.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - pantalaimon 2y ago
    > That doesn't mean it will continue being a good solution as technology and society change. Yea neo-feudalism seems to be all the rage these days. Democracy is not a given, people with power want more power and less checks - historically that’s what things converged to typically.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      Not sure about what's really "typical", nor which name would best describe what direction the USA (let alone anyone else) is even heading in. The ancient Greeks had ideas about the κύκλος (cycles) of government: Plato's cycle went [aristocracy > timocracy oligarchy > democracy > tyranny]; Polybius' cycle was [ochlocracy -> monarchy -> tyranny -> aristocracy -> oligarchy -> democracy -> ochlocracy] — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory
quotemstr 2y ago
[flagged]
- hcurtiss 2y ago
  Exactly. They murder the elites.
- eightysixfour 2y ago
  The word populist has ended up with a confused set of meanings (intentionally). What we have now is a war between different groups of elites, both sides co-opting populist ideals and language, and blaming the people for the other side’s efforts to destroy democracy. Realistically we do not have a single group running in the US with the intention of delivering on the people’s preferences or with an intent to deliver a government that functions more democratically. Both are increasingly authoritarian in the name of populism.
  - quotemstr 2y ago
    > The word populist has ended up with a confused set of meanings (intentionally). What we have now is a war between different groups of elites Of course. The masses never exercise political power directly. As you point out, it's disaffected factions of the elite that claim and wield the moral authority of the masses to defeat other elites. It's been this way since the Optimates and Populares persecuted each other in a centuries-long spiral of escalating stupidity culminating in political upheavel. Nevertheless, disaffected elites can't swing the club of popular opinion against other elites with any effect unless there is some non-zero dot-product alignment between their governance and popular opinion. In exchange for at least partially enacting popular policy, upstart elites get a tool for deposing other elites. The people win in the end. Fantastic book: https://www.amazon.com/Political-Order-Decay-Industrial-Globalization/dp/0374227357 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Order-Decay-Industrial-Glob... (Yes, Fukuyama was wrong about the end of history. He's atoned for it and more.)
- ModernMech 2y ago
  "What do you think happens when people realize that "democracy" is a sham in the sense that their preferences don't translate into the rules they follow in daily life?" Growing up, it's always been said that no one is above the law, even the president. People would point to Nixon as an example, that even he was forced into submission by his party and SCOTUS. Well now SCOTUS has determined POTUS is actually above the law, and I don't think it's a coincidence that not long after, someone like Luigi manifests out of the population. The contract has always been, we have a rule of law, and all people are subject to it no matter their station. That's over. Maybe it always has been but SCOTUS put it in writing. JFK said it before, but if certain people make it so that they cannot be held accountable by the law, people will find other ways to bring accountability. People of history perceived to be invincible at the height of their power, tend to meet untimely ends at the hands of their people.

by quasse 2y ago

MichaelZuo 2y ago

There are hundreds of HN users commenting here as if their opinions have meaning and value. Which would be in question if they could all be under various states of “influence”… At the very least the median credibility would be roughly zero.

mesh 2y ago
Just because you share an opinion does not mean that opinion has not been shaped, directed or influenced. "The Overton window is the range of subjects and arguments politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time.[1] It is also known as the window of discourse. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
- XorNot 2y ago
  Also HN absolutely has an Overton window. It has an entire system to enforce it (the voting and points system).
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  Did you reply to the correct comment? You don’t need to convince me that is a possibility.
puffybunion 2y ago
You pose this as a mathematical question but stop far short of it's full extent

kelseyfrog 2y ago

And today's Bureau of Global Public Affairs[1]. Which "engages media to shape the global narrative on American foreign policy and values [and] communicates U.S. foreign policy objectives to the American public." Of course, it's difficult to pierce the veil and determine exactly how they go about doing this. Narratives are propaganda. https://www.state.gov/about-us-bureau-of-global-public-affairs/ https://www.state.gov/about-us-bureau-of-global-public-affai...

dp-hackernews 2y ago

Chase Hughes: "Manipulation Playbook: The 20 Indicators of Reality Control" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM

lucianbr 2y ago

I think anyone who says democracy is good and the will of the people should be respected is implicitly saying that is not true. Implicitly saying voters are individual agents and not a mob. Otherwise, if democracy is good and votes should matter and at the same time voters are a mob subject to manipulation... democracy is what? A system of government by whoever can do better propaganda? Why would that be good for anyone except those who do propaganda? So yeah, I think many people are claiming that is not true. One question I would ask if people are just a mob, who is actually pushing the buttons? Owners of media, political leaders, are also humans, no? They have the same weaknesses, at least in principle. If you accept some people are different (those who command and control propaganda) then we must conclude that not all people are vulnerable to it, so maybe it's a spectrum. But still democracy sounds like a bad idea, as a majority are probably on the low end of the spectrum, and the majority rules.

aydyn 2y ago
> I think anyone who says democracy is good and the will of the people should be respected is implicitly saying that is not true. Implicitly saying voters are individual agents and not a mob. I think that is a pretty hardline interpretation, but there's another way of thinking about it: democracy has worked pretty well up to now and there hasn't been a better replacement. That doesn't mean it will continue being a good solution as technology and society change.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- pantalaimon 2y ago
  > That doesn't mean it will continue being a good solution as technology and society change. Yea neo-feudalism seems to be all the rage these days. Democracy is not a given, people with power want more power and less checks - historically that’s what things converged to typically.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Not sure about what's really "typical", nor which name would best describe what direction the USA (let alone anyone else) is even heading in. The ancient Greeks had ideas about the κύκλος (cycles) of government: Plato's cycle went [aristocracy > timocracy oligarchy > democracy > tyranny]; Polybius' cycle was [ochlocracy -> monarchy -> tyranny -> aristocracy -> oligarchy -> democracy -> ochlocracy] — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory

quotemstr 2y ago

[flagged]

hcurtiss 2y ago
Exactly. They murder the elites.
eightysixfour 2y ago
The word populist has ended up with a confused set of meanings (intentionally). What we have now is a war between different groups of elites, both sides co-opting populist ideals and language, and blaming the people for the other side’s efforts to destroy democracy. Realistically we do not have a single group running in the US with the intention of delivering on the people’s preferences or with an intent to deliver a government that functions more democratically. Both are increasingly authoritarian in the name of populism.
- quotemstr 2y ago
  > The word populist has ended up with a confused set of meanings (intentionally). What we have now is a war between different groups of elites Of course. The masses never exercise political power directly. As you point out, it's disaffected factions of the elite that claim and wield the moral authority of the masses to defeat other elites. It's been this way since the Optimates and Populares persecuted each other in a centuries-long spiral of escalating stupidity culminating in political upheavel. Nevertheless, disaffected elites can't swing the club of popular opinion against other elites with any effect unless there is some non-zero dot-product alignment between their governance and popular opinion. In exchange for at least partially enacting popular policy, upstart elites get a tool for deposing other elites. The people win in the end. Fantastic book: https://www.amazon.com/Political-Order-Decay-Industrial-Globalization/dp/0374227357 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Order-Decay-Industrial-Glob... (Yes, Fukuyama was wrong about the end of history. He's atoned for it and more.)
ModernMech 2y ago
"What do you think happens when people realize that "democracy" is a sham in the sense that their preferences don't translate into the rules they follow in daily life?" Growing up, it's always been said that no one is above the law, even the president. People would point to Nixon as an example, that even he was forced into submission by his party and SCOTUS. Well now SCOTUS has determined POTUS is actually above the law, and I don't think it's a coincidence that not long after, someone like Luigi manifests out of the population. The contract has always been, we have a rule of law, and all people are subject to it no matter their station. That's over. Maybe it always has been but SCOTUS put it in writing. JFK said it before, but if certain people make it so that they cannot be held accountable by the law, people will find other ways to bring accountability. People of history perceived to be invincible at the height of their power, tend to meet untimely ends at the hands of their people.