StopObscurantism

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Finally, I see comment from someone who clearly understands this. Somehow, many people perceive such a threat very non-seriously, as if they think it will never happen, or that someone will come and prevent it from happening.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Do people even understand what that means?

No, they don't. And they don't want to understand. Just look at how indifferent many are about what is happening on the other side of the planet. If offered an exclusive choice between a 50% reduction in gasoline prices and the complete cessation of all authoritarian and totalitarian regimes without prolonged wars and massive devastation, many would choose the first option. Instead of the cessation of authoritarian regimes, you can point to solving any other global issue like climate change - and they would still choose the first option. This utter indifference, mixed with all sorts of absurd destructive beliefs such as conspiracy theories or racial superiority, provides very fertile ground for the establishment of authoritarianism.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 42 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

A second Trump term really is an extinction-level threat to democracy worldwide, not just in United States. Considering that Trump and his supporters promise an isolationist policy, all sorts of predatory authoritarian and totalitarian regimes will suddenly feel like they can do anything - and this will start happening all over the world.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca -4 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

A second Trump term really is an extinction-level threat to democracy worldwide, not just in United States. Considering that Trump and his supporters promise an isolationist policy, all sorts of predatory authoritarian and totalitarian regimes will suddenly feel like they can do anything - and this will start happening all over the world.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Firstly, the actions in the examples you provided were exposed not because someone repeatedly made baseless accusations. The exposure of such actions occurs under the pressure of concrete facts and evidence, not gossip and rumors. Secondly, this is one of reasons why I do not call for completely removing conspiracy content. Let conspiracy theorists publish as much as they want, but they should not be able to make money and gain popularity from it. They should not be able to find new followers by having their posts appear as "recommended" to others. This has already gone too far.

And regarding terminology - it is important to understand that the term 'conspiracy theory', although established, is not entirely accurate. A theory is a proven hypothesis. However, much of what is called conspiracy theories has not been proven and some have even been refuted. And yet, they are still called conspiracy theories, and we clearly understand that this usually refers to something unproven.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If conspiracy theories were true, they wouldn't be called that. They would be specific facts that could serve as the basis for specific accusations. But adherents of conspiracy theories, in principle, are not willing and do not want to use widely accepted methods of proof, verification, fact-checking, etc. Any inconvenient fact is explained as those who consider it a fact being bought or deceived by "them". Such thinking is characteristic of a medieval gloomist, but should in no way be normal among modern people.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Hope is an unattainable luxury in this situation. Eight years ago, I still didn't understand much of what would have clearly determined Trump as a personality prone to dictatorial-fascist tendencies until after 2016. If I had had the time and attention back then to understand where it would lead, it could have been prevented very easily by raising a huge fuss and scandal around political advertising on Facebook. This would have significantly disrupted the plans of hostile states for interfering in elections and ultimately led to different results in the 2016 elections. Unfortunately, at that time, I was a completely different person, focused on other things. That's why I did nothing. I simply hoped that everything would be fine.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

laws against homophobia and conspiracy theories

Oh, could you elaborate on this more? I've also been trying to promote a similar idea lately without violating freedom of speech principles. In brief, the essence is that freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to monetize such content, nor does it mean that platforms should include such content in recommendations and subscriptions alongside other content. I described this more thoroughly in that post and texts referenced from it. Nevertheless, I haven't heard any news about such laws being adopted anywhere or already being adopted.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Wrong. You completely do not understand the psychology of these people. They will interpret any of your concessions as direct approval and even a demand to be even more outrageous. The only minds you can battle are those of the doubters. I can confidently say that many of the doubters are annoyed by excessive and inappropriate, in their opinion, promotion of woke narratives. Even seemingly insignificant events for elections, such as Gamergate 2, could become the straw that breaks the camel's back and sway the sympathies of the doubters towards Trump.

[–] StopObscurantism@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Probably, you won't. After the 2020 elections, the tension did not decrease to the levels that were before the elections. It will be the same this time. But what's worst is that if Trump wins, there won't be any more elections - just like freedom of speech and many other democratic things. The United States will turn into what Russia has become over the last 30 years. And this is only in the best-case scenario. In the worst case, the political system of the Combine in Half-Life 2 will seem to you not an anti-utopian dictatorship but a very comfortable and even progressive form of social organization compared to what the Trumpists are achieving.

When fascists won in Germany, there was a force that could stop them, and eventually stopped them. If they win in the United States, no one will be able to stop them. Considering that they promise an isolationist policy, all sorts of predatory authoritarian and totalitarian regimes will suddenly feel like they can do anything - and this will start happening all over the world.

 

One of the key reasons for the unprecedented polarization of society that we are currently observing lies in the fact that in an attempt to convey their point of view, one party disseminates its ideas to its target audience and tries to discredit its opponents through conspiracy theories and narratives. This is a very dirty tactic, as it affects people with problems with critical thinking and who are highly prone to fanaticism.

Something urgent needs to be done about this, otherwise it can very quickly lead to catastrophic consequences for society up to fascization, which will be extremely difficult to reverse.

I have prepared two versions of a petition with measures that could counteract this threat. The first version concerns only the internet and media - it does not contain any radical measures and does not even require removing conspiracy content. This version is available at the link below. I consider all the measures mentioned in it necessary, but nevertheless, I would like to receive some assessment or critique with the aim of possible corrections: Link

The second one aims to address the problem more comprehensively. It also does not require the removal of conspiracy content, but includes points aimed at preventing the spread of conspiracy beliefs and internal extremism through other channels. It is addressed not only to governing structures and social network administrations and online services, but also to ordinary people who could make some effort to prevent the spread of such ideas in their circle of communication. This is a draft version, and I am still not sure about some points. For example, I am not sure whether the "inflammatory speech" with vivid descriptions of the consequences if fascization does indeed occur should be left in, but on the other hand, I'm not sure whether it should be removed because many people still perceive this threat too lightly. This version, I do not urge to sign; instead, I want to first receive feedback and an assessment of the correctness of such text. This version is available at the link below: Link

In your opinion, what of this is easier and faster to implement, and what is most likely not achievable in the short term?