He says thhat conspiracy is inherently anti+democratic, so here is the antidote, strengthening democracy.
Another great point is in his last paragraph, that conspiracy theories are mostly bottom up events. You have a whole demographic doing conspiracy theorizing instead of talking about what it looks in practice.
There just was a president whose whole game was running a circus, everything was about the guy and his idea of The Enemy. Nothing of substance and nothing but misdirection.
Another problem is that day to day journalism isn’t epistemological, it’s just reporting, so you just get a flat view of what is happening.
That is a gross simplification isn’t it? While democracy isn’t perfect, it depends a lot how it is implemented. Just like you have badly implemented programs and right ones.
No, I think history and present times makes it clear that this is an inherent property of democracy.
In democracy without any limitations (like the US constitution), a little over 50% of constituents can do whatever they want to any minority comprising less than 50% of the population.
There are plenty of modifications that have been tried, but none of them solve this fundamental problem...
...because when push comes to shove the modifications are ignored. E.g. the US constitution is routinely ignored without consequence for those in power.
I don't think any political system humans have invented exists in reality. Our political systems are a veneer over the reality of consensual interaction sprinkled with generous amounts of violence, manipulation, and control tactics that have always been used to maintain power. I would argue that since these control tactics are inherent to human behavior, a focus on prioritizing anyone's ability to defend themselves is the best solution.
Well, I guess if he says they are anti-democratic, the question is solved and settled, and the solution is just easy-peasy!
Have you considered that this president could have been himself the target of misdirection?
The problem of day-to-day journalism is certainly not epistemology, the problem is that they rely on eyeballs, advertisers, and tribes, and thus tend to tailor their reporting, that might be the reason why everything that happened around that last president seemed like a circus.
He was the president, he cannot be the target of misdirection. The last president needed the media in a symbiotic relationship. Something to rile against. In form he spoke badly about MSM, but in practice he needed them just as much to stay relevant and have something to rebel against.
Yes, media need the clicks, but that’s portraying it wrongly imo.
Another great point is in his last paragraph, that conspiracy theories are mostly bottom up events. You have a whole demographic doing conspiracy theorizing instead of talking about what it looks in practice.
There just was a president whose whole game was running a circus, everything was about the guy and his idea of The Enemy. Nothing of substance and nothing but misdirection.
Another problem is that day to day journalism isn’t epistemological, it’s just reporting, so you just get a flat view of what is happening.