Politics
Out of context: Reply #31012
- Started
- Last post
- 33,768 Responses
- yuekit0
Rosenberg, who earned degrees at Yale, Oxford and Harvard, may be the social scientist for our time if events play out as he suggests they will. His theory is that over the next few decades, the number of large Western-style democracies around the globe will continue to shrink, and those that remain will become shells of themselves. Taking democracy’s place, Rosenberg says, will be right-wing populist governments that offer voters simple answers to complicated questions.
And therein lies the core of his argument: Democracy is hard work and requires a lot from those who participate in it. It requires people to respect those with different views from theirs and people who don’t look like them. It asks citizens to be able to sift through large amounts of information and process the good from the bad, the true from the false. It requires thoughtfulness, discipline and logic.
Unfortunately, evolution did not favor the exercise of these qualities in the context of a modern mass democracy. Citing reams of psychological research, findings that by now have become more or less familiar, Rosenberg makes his case that human beings don’t think straight. Biases of various kinds skew our brains at the most fundamental level. For example, racism is easily triggered unconsciously in whites by a picture of a black man wearing a hoodie. We discount evidence when it doesn’t square up with our goals while we embrace information that confirms our biases. Sometimes hearing we’re wrong makes us double down. And so on and so forth.
...
The irony is that more democracy—ushered in by social media and the Internet, where information flows more freely than ever before—is what has unmoored our politics, and is leading us towards authoritarianism. Rosenberg argues that the elites have traditionally prevented society from becoming a totally unfettered democracy; their “oligarchic ‘democratic’ authority” or “democratic control” has until now kept the authoritarian impulses of the populace in check.
Compared with the harsh demands made by democracy, which requires a tolerance for compromise and diversity, right-wing populism is like cotton candy. Whereas democracy requires us to accept the fact that we have to share our country with people who think and look differently than we do, right-wing populism offers a quick sugar high. Forget political correctness. You can feel exactly the way you really want about people who belong to other tribes.
- i think you might see things differently if you dont look through the lense of the idea of "democracy" that you look at it as collectivist vs individual********
- i mean the whole pretense of right wing populism is completely possible as left wing populism gaming on nationalism collectivism.********
- what exactly does he define as the differenc e in nature of right wing populism vs democracy?********
- and remember as socrates said democracy is nothign but mob rule. Not a very enlightened thing in of itself.********
- does left wing populism differ in your sugar high analogy? for the authors education merits he could have leanred far more cheaper in a public library********
- but checkin source i couldnt get to the root with pay walls. could be rosenberg is being misintrepreted. or being politicized... more liely latter with********
- obvious part bias.and i find it hard for any intellectual to apply such meanings to democracy. ie Compared with the harsh demands made by democracy, which requi********
- res a tolerance for compromise and diversity... uh no it doesnt and completely wihtout base. IE TRUMP if you will********
- when the best citation is this https://www.research…********
- i really judge editorial quality control.i obviously see a ton of bias.. i guess im just not sure how you do not********
- Meh, a book by the same name came out years ago, sensationalism. Yawn.robotron3k
- @deathboy He's saying democracy practiced correctly requires those things (compromise etc), but in reality most people don't care about that.yuekit
- And so once you remove the filter of the media, they just vote for someone like Trump who tells them they are right about everything and doesn't care aboutyuekit
- classical liberal values that the country was founded on, or rule of law.yuekit
- lol at deathboy shitting on this mans education credentials, implying that his public library studies are superior. Derp.monospaced
- And sure it could apply to left-wing populist as well like a Hugo Chavez etc. Just that right wing happens to be the much bigger trend right now.yuekit
- The media always frames it as if people were "forced" to vote for Trump due to economic circumstances etc... but what if the opposite is true and Trump isyuekit
- just the default kind of candidate that a lot of people will vote for without the media manipulating them into voting for Mitt Romney or whoever.yuekit
- @yuekit you say remove filter ppl vote trump but you might as well say obama as well. I agree totally with you ukit. just not on the partisan lines********
- your average voter has no idea of any values, any philosophy and motivated solely on self interest sold. I actually think the left wing is the trend now********
- i think right normally sells fear and promise of abstract security from physical harm. Terrorism isnt a big sell these days. however domestic terrorism and********
- economic fear and stability is the sell. why there is like 20 people running on platforms all about giving free shit. id actually say the left is all the sell********
- And ukit i agree i think... trump won without media manipulation. but i don't think it was trumps values, but his competitors. fuck the status quo. lets take********
- a chance on change. I'm not sure I have ever met a person who said i believe in trumps word. I find people who like him realize the politcal lie********
- you say dumb shit and dont follow through and run the obama hope train what does happen works in your favor. i do think especially outside********
- major cities and indoctinating college towns common sense and age is still too strong for this election of these MMT democrats promising endless debt********
- still a little too much common sense. eventually we will get a Xi. but not in the next election.********
- There is stuff in the article that is good, but i do see a bias in conclusions that are easily proved false. I also see persuasion or social engineering********
- the use of democracy. any intellectual knows the limits of democracy. Never does it mention rule of law in a democratic state. Also i find the last 2 paragraphs********
- to be at odds with each other "in the post" the first seems to display the problems of democracy while the next applauds it but blames faults in right wing********
- populism... again behind pay wall and cant for certain tell what is what or cited, just based on what i can read.********
- i think you might see things differently if you dont look through the lense of the idea of "democracy" that you look at it as collectivist vs individual