Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Wednesday, January 29, 2025

Demagoguery and the illusion of the will of the people

As DJT continues to quickly move the US from a democracy to some form of kleptocratic authoritarian state, three very debatable assertions are being commonly used to justify, deny, distort, self-delude and/or soften the harsh reality and cognitive dissonance of DJT's and MAGA's destructiveness to democracy and its rule of law. I refer to those assertions as (i) the will of the people illusion, (ii) the democratic governance illusion, and (iii) the déjà vu illusion. In my firm opinion, all three assertions are more false than true, and thus illusions. The three assertions are devastatingly wrong. In my opinion, they are obviously more false than true. This post is about what the will of the people means and how it can be manipulated.


The will of the people illusion
Context: For millennia, the phenomenon of talented demagogues, tyrants, liars, crackpots and irrational emotional manipulators to create self-serving false realities and beliefs has been known. The issue was debated over 2,000 years ago by some of the greatest human minds. Almost equally well-known is the fact, not opinion, that deceived people sometimes act in accord with their genuinely held but objectively false reality perceptions or beliefs. A modern day example is empirical data that some people who believe lies that vaccines are bad or ineffective, do not get vaccinated, then get infected, and then either they, or someone else they infect dies.[1] The "will of the people" is not rocket science, it's human condition science.

The illusion: Few people appear to be aware of any possibility or assertion that demagoguery threw the 2024 elections to DJT. A few MSM reports raised the possibility, e.g., here, here and here. I believe that demagoguery and false beliefs threw the election to DJT. Some may be aware of the demagoguery idea, but, humans being human, most of them probably don't believe it. In my firm opinion, the illusion is that the 2024 election reflected the will of the people. It didn't. I reject that as a seriously flawed perception of reality. Yes, people consciously voted as they did. But what was the basis that DJT voters voted on? In my opinion, mostly illusions. 

For example, some poll data evidence indicated that about one-third of Trump supporters viewed democracy was the most crucial factor in their voting choice, but 80% of them feared that electing Harris would lead to radical left authoritarianism.[2] There was a perception that Trump would protect democracy from what they saw as threats from the left. Two big illusions there, one about DJT and one about Harris.

Exactly what is the will of the people? As I see it in politics in a democracy, it is people freely choosing and acting in accord with actual facts, truths and reasonably sound reasoning. What is a vote for DJT cast mostly on the basis of one or more false beliefs? Is acting on a false belief(s) the will of the voter? Or is it the will of the demagogue who implanted the false belief? Also, we can now consider mind control tactics that go farther than merely disinforming people. Demagogues and all other kinds of mind manipulators are learning how to supplant a person's will with the manipulator's will.

My logic/reasoning: Demagoguery and the false beliefs it created sabotaged enough minds to throw the election to DJT. As far as In know, I am the only source arguing that. Because I am probably in a small minority, that does not make me wrong. Evidence or data and logic or sound reasoning can make me wrong.

What I have seen of DJT's governing style so far is mostly radical right, kleptocratic authoritarianism, not mostly democracy. For example, illegally firing inspectors general is clearly both kleptocratic (pro-corruption) and authoritarian (illegal). He breaks laws and leaves it to others to file lawsuits. He governs in accord with the kleptocratic authoritarian manifesto, Project 2025. All of that is anti-democratic authoritarianism. 

My personal estimate is that (1) about 65% of Trump voters' beliefs, facts, and votes could be attributed to demagoguery, lies, and misinformation. Important mental influences such as Trump's identity fusion (people who have fused their identity with Trump and are thus more susceptible to DJT's demagoguery and lies), his perceived authenticity despite lying, and media narratives that reinforce these beliefs, and thus (2), about 35% of Trump voters' beliefs, facts, and votes were mostly grounded in things like facts, truths, more rational reasoning, and self-interest. Obviously, putting numbers on estimates of mental influence is not a precise science. But, if one engages in the exercise in good faith, being as neutral and fair as possible, the estimates arguably have non-trivial value.

I asked this question to Perplexity twice, once yesterday and once today: For Trump voters, estimate the rationality basis of their their important beliefs, facts and votes, e.g., is it about 65% a product of demagoguery, lies and crackpottery, and ~35% a product of truth and sound reasoning?

Yesterday it said 50-60% truth and sound reasoning and 40-50% demagoguery, lies and crackpottery. Today, it said 35% truth and sound reasoning and 65% demagoguery, lies and crackpottery. That shows the inherent noise in estimating mental influence of demagoguery, lies and crackpottery on voters' votes. But because the system is noisy, and there is little data and effort to research this topic, one has to expect uncertainty. As far as I know, there is no polling directed squarely at the issue of dissecting true belief from false in driving voter behavior in the 2024 elections.

However, the point here is not the exact numbers. The point is existence of the reality that significant numbers of DJT voters voted for him mostly on the basis of demagoguery, lies and/or crackpottery. If one accepts that as true, one can rationally argue that there very likely were enough deceived voters to put DJT back in power.  


Q: Do you believe that even though a voter is seriously disinformed and votes on the basis of false facts and beliefs, that the voter nonetheless voted in the voter's personal free will? If so, how do you account for the fact that a person's freedom to think, believe and act has been subverted by dishonest speech or demagoguery by others, usually for their own or their group's self-interest, usually at the expense of the public interest, which includes support for democracy?

Q: How likely do you think that demagoguery, lies, slanders and crackpottery or flawed reasoning was a necessary factor in DJT being reelected? 


Footnotes:
1. Data about belief in lethal lies: Evidence indicating that unvaccinated individuals are more likely to experience severe illness and death from COVID-19 compared to vaccinated individuals is robust. A meta-analysis involving over 21 million COVID-19 patients found that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from the disease compared to vaccinated patients. Surveys have shown an increase in the number of Americans who believe in vaccine misinformation, with 28% mistakenly believing that COVID-19 vaccines have caused thousands of deaths, and 22% thinking it's less risky to get infected than to get vaccinated. Misinformation about vaccine safety and efficacy has been shown to increase vaccine hesitancy, with some studies suggesting that up to 30% of unvaccinated individuals might be influenced by such misinformation.

2. Regarding the alleged authoritarianism of Harris: 
Q: Many Trump voters, about one third, feared that election of Harris would lead to authoritarianism. How much truth in that is there based on Harris' rhetoric, leadership style and any other relevant indicators?

A: Conclusion: Based on her rhetoric, leadership style, and policy positions, there is little evidence to support the claim that Kamala Harris would lead to authoritarianism if elected. Her approach, while progressive on many issues, remains within the democratic framework, emphasizing consensus, legal norms, and gradual reform. The fear among some Trump voters appears to be more a reflection of political rhetoric and polarization rather than a factual assessment of Harris's potential governance style.