Michael Huemer - The Irrationality of Politics

[KillerGremlin]

[Professor S]

I think our current state of politics has a lot to do with what Marshall McLuhan talked about nearly 50 years ago: Tribalism. Modern media flattens the world and in doing so reduces the individual and deprives the individual of their own identity; Who am I if I am one amongst billions speaking over one another? In order to overcome this reduction on personal identity, people search out a new identity in the masses. They find small groups of like-minded people and then isolate themselves in the group, afraid to move from it because to do so would leave them alone again in a sea of interconnected billions. This is true of modern politics, "progressives" and "tea parties", but also truein any setting where people are unnaturally thrown to together in large numbers ("cliques" in schools, for example).

I highly recommend viwing the entire Centennial series. The man was a prophet. He predicted the Internet, and more namely Facebook, in the mid 50's.

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by Professor S

In order to overcome this reduction on personal identity, people search out a new identity in the masses. They find small groups of like-minded people and then isolate themselves in the group, afraid to move from it because to do so would leave them alone again in a sea of interconnected billions. This is true of modern politics, "progressives" and "tea parties", but also truein any setting where people are unnaturally thrown to together in large numbers ("cliques" in schools, for example).

I would agree with this. I'll check out that video series. The problem is that there is no good way to convince people to question their beliefs....I think this is a difficult thing to fix, if not completely impossible.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

I would agree with this. I'll check out that video series. The problem is that there is no good way to convince people to question their beliefs....I think this is a difficult thing to fix, if not completely impossible.

McLuhan's predictions are dire. He believes that the media we consume changes us in ways we don't realize until after the effects irrevocable. In the end he believes that the loss of individual identity and growth of tribalism will inevitably end is violence as we lash out at one another and utterly lose the ability to view the world from a perspective outside of the tribe.

Think of it this way: When there is a dearth of media outlets you are basically forced to consume the ideas and messages that everyone else consumes. Now we have an infinite number of media outlets and more content than we could ever consume in multiple lifetimes (according to one paper I read: to we create in 48 hours as much content as was created from the beginning of time - 2003). This allows us to find content we identify with and interact with those that we like and agree with... and there is so much content in this limited bubble we never have to leave it... yet we are constantly aware of what those who we don't agree with are doing and lash out because they speak a language we do not understand. Their ideas threaten our identity because their ideas challenge the tribe.

"We shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us."

More on topic: "Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be."

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Professor S

McLuhan's predictions are dire. He believes that the media we consume changes us in ways we don't realize until after the effects irrevocable. In the end he believes that the loss of individual identity and growth of tribalism will inevitably end is violence as we lash out at one another and utterly lose the ability to view the world from a perspective outside of the tribe.

Is this expanded upon in text anywhere, or is it in those videos? That's quite the mind bender (in a good way).

Don't you feel like we've grown more toward individualism than tribalism, though? I suppose they're quite relative terms.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Bond

Is this expanded upon in text anywhere, or is it in those videos? That's quite the mind bender (in a good way).

Don't you feel like we've grown more toward individualism than tribalism, though? I suppose they're quite relative terms.

It was in a video somewhere. It was later in his life, and I did add some translation... he can be... quixotic.

THIS is AWESOMELY brain scrambling. You must view in 240p, purposefully I'm sure.




On tribalism and violence:


As for individualism? I think we have seen the growth in the tribe of individualists.

[Bond]

I'll have to watch those this weekend.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Bond

I'll have to watch those this weekend.

Any thoughts?

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Any thoughts?

I really liked his analogies (i.e. everything physical that we make is a reflection of a part of ourselves). I do wonder though if a lot of what he says is too vague to be considered predictive. I feel like we could make broad generalizations as to the future and probably be at least somewhat accurate.

Anyway, I disagree with the idea of the rise of tribalism. I think we've seen a dramatic downturn of "tribal" communities (religious groups, clubs, etc), and the rise of divided individuals that are only connected via mediums such as the internet.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Bond

I really liked his analogies (i.e. everything physical that we make is a reflection of a part of ourselves). I do wonder though if a lot of what he says is too vague to be considered predictive. I feel like we could make broad generalizations as to the future and probably be at least somewhat accurate.

Well, that's the case of any prophet. Here is an example: He viewed the light bulb as the perfect medium. It is devoid of any content, but creates an environment for people to engage and create content. Also, the limits of the light dictate the scope of the content created and those individuals in it's light change their behavior to fit the space created. In that, we are shaped more by the medium than by the content that is carried by it, and in the long run the content is irrelevant, and only the behavior remains.

Far fetched? Watch this:

Anyway, I disagree with the idea of the rise of tribalism. I think we've seen a dramatic downturn of "tribal" communities (religious groups, clubs, etc), and the rise of divided individuals that are only connected via mediums such as the internet.

1) I think you have a dated view of tribes. Clubs, religion, etc. were born of old media. 9/11 truthers, tea parties, and Birthers are born of new media.

2)I think our current state of public discourse would disagree with you. We live in a world with unlimited access to more information than we could ever dream of, yet everyone seems more divided and intolerant than ever. Limited media meant that everyone consumed/shared the same information. 1 or 2 town papers, 2-3 radio stations and TV stations. Literature is a analytical activity, not a visceral one. Now we are inundated with so much information and options, no one has to consume anything that doesn't confirm their bias. Example: FoxNews and MSNBC. Even the news is carefully crafted to fit with my point of view. In the end, the other point of view isn't incorrect, they are a bad person.

Also, the sheer speed of modern media has created an utter intolerance of any thoughtful discourse. Today the political news only reports one-liners and the latest gaffe or awkward phrase, disappearing within 48 hours. There is no time for influence beyond outrage and emotional response in either direction. Reason is quickly dying, and with it, tolerance.

Keep in mind, I don't think this is a failure of the medium. It is a failure of humanity's response to it. I recommend reading some of his works, as they are far more in depth than these "mind expanding" videos.

[Bond]

I forgot to watch.

Bookmarking now.