Political Theatre category archive
Trudy Ruben is concerned about the bubbleliciousness. Here’s a bit of her article:
We are not (yet) in a “1984” era, to cite the famous George Orwell novel about a totalitarian society whose members are taught that “freedom is slavery” and “ignorance is strength.” The press is still free to report the facts, but an important segment of the media, especially on TV, radio and the internet, have chosen to use that freedom to promote an endless stream of falsehoods about public health and political issues.
Follow the link for the rest.
Along the same lines, Tony Norman argues that truth has no place in today’s Republican Party. (Again, much more at the link.)
At Psychology Today Blogs, Sophia Moskalenko identifies four factors which she believes encourage the spread of “fake news” (also known in some circles as “lies”). Here’s her list; follow the link for a detailed discussion of each one.
Writing at Psychology Today Blogs, Glenn Geher discusses what happens when politics collides with objective face, that is, with science. A snippet (emphasis added):
On the other hand, political behavior is all about how certain narratives and decisions are endorsed because they ultimately advance the goals of some select individual or groups of individuals. The second that politics enters the world of science, we have a problem on our hands.
The person in question has defended himself by claiming that he was trying to educate his constituents. I tend to agree with Emma Vigeland’s point that “some questions are so illegitimate” that they don’t deserve to be asked, let along answered.
We are a society of stupid.
At Psychology Today Blogs, Bobby Hoffman offers some techniques for avoiding falling into the sewer of falsehoods that masquerades as news, particularly on “social” media and propaganda websites. In the course of his exposition, he makes this point, which we see played out many times a day:
In other words, implausible theories are those where any opposition to the idea is refuted by the originator, regardless of the rebuttal type. For example, some people contend that moon landings never occurred, but no evidence supports this position, while abundant evidence refutes the idea that moon missions were fabricated.
The refutation problem is typically addressed in two ways by those who harbor irrefutable beliefs. Too much evidence means a conspiracy theory is being advanced. Too little evidence means there is a cover-up. The conspiracy supporter can never be wrong!
I commend his article to your attention.
E. J. Montini writes of local Arizona officials who called out Arizona Governor Ducey for grandstanding at the southwestern border. A snippet (emphasis added):
Sheriff David Hathaway of Santa Cruz County and Sheriff Chris Nanos of Pima County told the governor thanks, but no thanks.
Hathaway said, “We both responded saying, ‘We don’t have a migrant crisis on the border. We do not need to militarize our counties and have troops come to the border.’”
Follow the link for the rest.
(Missplet wrod fixked.)