At ~6:53-8:10, Robert Reich discusses the ongoing rise of kleptocratic oligarchy in America. At ~11:10-11:50 Reich argues that the oligarchs are fighting against democracy, both in the US and abroad.
If I recall right, I've raised warnings about the American and global rise of anti-democratic kleptocracy and/or plutocracy (oligarchy) probably about 600 times in blog posts or in my Disqus comments here. I've also warned hundreds of times about the rise of anti-democratic, kleptocratic dictatorship and kleptocratic Christian theocracy in American politics. In all cases, the main goals of the various kinds of authoritarianism in play are accumulating more wealth and power for the elites. That is also a point I made hundreds of times here. In essence, Reich makes all the same arguments himself.
Arguably, Reich sounds somewhat like me. Same concerns, remarkably similar language. Reich almost certainly came to his beliefs and opinions independently from me. If so, then his reality and my reality were arrived at via different pathways, based on different experiences. In science, arriving at the same understanding by different kinds of research is called consilience. I wonder is Reich and I are an example of consilience in politics.[1]
Q: In your opinion, if Reich does sound somewhat like me, does that help, hurt or do nothing to my credibility in warning about the rise of kleptocratic, radical right American authoritarian wealth & power politics?
Thanks to milo for mentioning this video.
Footnote:
1. Q: Is there a known phenomenon of consilience in politics, meaning different people independently of each other arrive at the same or quite similar perceptions of political reality and political belief?
A: Yes, there is a known phenomenon in politics that aligns with the concept of consilience, where different individuals or groups independently arrive at similar perceptions of political reality and political beliefs. This convergence of political beliefs can be observed through several lenses:
4. There is evidence suggesting that cognitive reflection (analytical thinking) can lead to more skepticism towards political statements, but it can also amplify partisan biases. This interaction can result in a convergence of beliefs among those with similar levels of cognitive reflection and political alignment. (hence the need for anti-biasing -- pragmatic rationalism = an anti-biasing, anti-ideology meta-ideology)
6. The rise of broadcast media and interest-group advertising has changed how political information is disseminated, potentially leading to a convergence of political beliefs among viewers or readers who are exposed to similar narratives.
