Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
We were watching Rings of Power and my wife kept being like "How can Celebrimbor be so stupid? How can he not see the war waging around him? This is so fake. Nobody is this dense."
I legitimately cannot even. These themes were distilled into fiction 100 years ago, and that is just the version on my TV today. The danger of populism, the deception of the demagogue... It's all fucking right there... Impossible to ignore. Yet here we are, dealing with the same shit in a different age.
We were watching Rings of Power
My condolences
These themes were distilled into fiction 100 years ago
Just a nitpick: Rings of Power uses Tolkien's characters but its story is almost entirely the work of the show's modern script-writers. They don't have the rights to use anything Tolkien wrote about that period of Middle Earth's history beyond what is mentioned in LOTR and its appendices (which is very little).
Ah, that explains why everything felt pretty off with the whole thing.
How can Celebrimbor be so stupid? How can he not see the war waging around him? This is so fake. Nobody is this dense.
This is one time where the Simpsons answer is actually appropriate: A wizard did it.
Except the wizard is a Maia.
(note: all wizards are Maia but not all of the Maiar are wizards)
The danger of populism
The wacko conspiracies aren't due to populism, it's the opposite.
People understand they have an antagonistic relationship with the government, but they don't have the theory and historical knowledge to understand the systems at play due to centuries of anti-communist propaganda, so they latch onto conspiracies that match their prejudices and don't threaten any of their beliefs.
We saw the same thing with nazi germany.
You've basically defined populism:
Say whatever rhetoric you believe to be currently popular at this very moment, with absolutely no coherent or consistent policies, within the framework of 'all us normal people' vs 'those degenerate elites.'
This is actually precisely in line with appealing to latent rhetoric and amplifying and creating conspiracies.
Trump did/does this, the Nazis did this.
Basically all populists say whatever the fuck they want and then their actual policies are almost always in line with whatever helps out them and their immediate friends/allies the most. But these can also turn on a dime.
Instability and erratic decision making are the hallmarks of basically every populist leader in the modern era.
Mostly only in the US does the term 'populist' have connotations of actually popularly supported policy positions, as mostly only in the US is 'Libertarian' a right wing, pro business ideology instead of a left wing, socialist ideology, and mostly only in the US does communism/socialism mean 'whenever the government spends money on stuff I don't want it to.'
You are correct though that populism works best in a very stupid, uneducated, angry population.
... Which is why the Republicans actual 'masterful political strategy' of the last 30 or 40 years was:
Make everyone stupid and uneducated by destroying public education, and angry via bombastic fear and hate spread via talk radio, tv news, and more lately the internet.
Mostly only in the US does the term ‘populist’ have connotations of actually popularly supported policy positions
That explains it, that's the only way I've seen it used when referring to modern America. NYT opinion columnists like it because it allows them to paint leftwing policy that is popular because it helps everyone and rightwing policy that is popular because most American have unexamined white supremacist beliefs with the same brush.
Yeah... its fairly common parlance meaning in the US is basically as if it is just 'someone who supports policies that polls show over majority support for'... even though its actual meaning when used by academic political scientists or historians is more along the lines of what I described.
Though of course, lately, and mostly in America, now even academics are attempting to rexamine/redefine the concept to be more broad and inclusive.
Its literally stereotypical insulated elitist liberal both-sidesism that only seems possible in America.
Its almost entirely happened because a whole, whole lot of journalists just could not figure out how to summarily describe Trump seriously as a candidate in 2016.
Enough of them threw up their hands and decided, fuck it, he's a populist.
Of course, they made the mistake of thinking that readers/viewers were competent/intelligent enough to realize that this should be understood to mean: potentially dangerous demagogue with wildly inconsistent and often laughably absurd actual policy positions, such as somehow making Mexico pay for a border wall, a huge departure from previous Presidential candidates with... you know, discernable, fairly specific and detailed actual policy platforms, some kind of solid and identifiable ideology that these policies stemmed from, whose merits could be compared and contrasted with others.
Populism: historically almost always results in domestic chaos, autocracy, mismanagement corruption, across all historical examples, empirically.
Unfortunately the average American now seems to have roughly the reading comprehension level of a 5th or 6th grader, so they did what children who don't know what a word or term means when they don't feel like looking it up or researching it: just guess a reasonable meaning based on context and similarity to other words.
Many did not realize the subtext that 'populist' should be a big giant warning flag, and basically read it as 'popular'.
... And then we've had the last 8 years of stupifying insanity where most of the failing mainstream media got gutted and bought out by corporate interests and kept running with this crass, mutated use of 'populist', as it helped explain to morons that 'well you know both sides have their merits and fancy classifying words that describe them'.
Its actually Orwellian.
Words getting misunderstood and then neutered and redefined to the point of just being mostly empty signifiers, shaping the very language of political discourse toward being vague and useless.
While riding home with my son this evening, I found myself apologizing to him. This world today--the people--are a profoundly unbelievable mess. He brought up things he's read in the news and I hardly know what to say. We both understand how insane it all is, but people still believe it... truly...
I get it. The world has always been a mess. This mess today is simply uniquely ours at this time in history.
But...
My gods...
What...
The...
sighs
I'm approaching my sixties now. I've been through a lot of the messes of recent history. The world today (and it is the world, its not just the US although that is the most flagrant example) feels genuinely different. Just the sheer amount of misinformed hate and self-destructive uber capitalism feels like its reaching a crescendo. What comes after that is worrying to think about.
I don't think there's more disinformation as before in terms of % of info being wrong, but a lot of people have gotten really good at calling it out. The best example on-hand is the "cigarettes are good for you actually" and "we will buy tramways put of every city in North America and tear them out, then sell you a car!"
It's always been like this.
Is anyone else starting to wonder whether Orwell was a time traveler trying to warn us?
It couldn't possibly be that Trump and his handlers are using it (edit: 1984) as a road map and his followers are stupid enough not to notice.
Orwell wrote that book based on his personal observations from how the government already worked decades prior. All he did was 1+1=2 and he was visionary because of it. Same with Marx. Or Verne.
There's a reason dystopian fiction has reigned supreme for over a decade now. We're obsessed with our inevitable fate.
Orwell was writing specifically paranoid delusions about the USSR and it's really funny to me how his work actually more accurately describes capitalist countries today.
It's more that Trump read a book:
Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist.
"Did your cousin John give you the Hitler speeches?" I asked Trump.
Trump hesitated. "Who told you that?"
"I don't remember," I said.
"Actually, it was my friend Marty Davis from Paramount who gave me a copy of Mein Kampf, and he's a Jew." ("I did give him a book about Hitler," Marty Davis said. "But it was My New Order, Hitler's speeches, not Mein Kampf. I thought he would find it interesting. I am his friend, but I'm not Jewish.")
Edit: I'll note that this appears to the only time Trump has been observed reading a book.
No time travel, it is just that Orwell and the Repubs are both basing their content partially on observations about Nazi Germany.
I believe the framework Warzel is looking for is something like:
'Mass Delusional Narcissistic Sustained Psychosis at a Societal Level'
With many of the characteristics of Nazism.
Well you see, according to the DSM whatever the latest edition is, a mental condition is ultimately only real and serious and diagnosable if it seriously impacts your or others ability to function in the economy.
Strong religious beliefs? Literally magical thinking and delusional, but nope, generally not a disorder in and of itself.
Brainwashed by a fascist cult leader into conspiratorial delusion generation upon being presented with facts you do not like?
Eh, as long as you don't directly, obviously, repeatedly threaten to harm others, you can probably still go to work, no problem.
Driven to nervous breakdowns by the stress of work, trauma of poverty, knowledge that capitalism is going to kill billions of people in the coming decades and you as a moral being feel helpless, yet somehow responsible?
Oh sure, you probably qualify for something, here's some pills that may help you get back to work.
There is no ethical Psychology or Psychiatry under Capitalism either.
I just tell myself that the ones saying the hurricanes are fake are bots just doing it for lulz
And the ones that repost it and assert that the conspiracy theories are real are also bots.
See someone in a grocery store who is ranting about chemtrails? She's a bot.
Make a post? Bot. Post a comment? Believe it or not, also bot.
We have the best Internet because of bots.
Funny thing about humans is that they only really have their own life’s frame of reference for evaluating their experiences. I wouldn’t necessarily say that the decline of the American empire is unique, I am sure when other empires were experiencing similar levels of decline they had just as much douchebags to contend with. But the threat posed by increasing natural deterioration is a unique factor of our current era. Well that, and the specter of large scale nuclear war. Other than that, the culture wars have always been raging. Honestly, there’s no war but class war. I sound like a broken record now
Climate change was also probably behind the Bronze Age collapse (widespread drought,)- though it probably had nothing to do with humans changing things.