I
recently spoke (via Beam robot) at a conference on “The Future of News Media”
hosted by the Institute For The Future (IFTF), in San Francisco. An erudite
gathering of concerned men and women from around the world discussed problems
of Fake News, declining advertising revenues, state interference,
self-censorship, and the web’s tendency to corral individuals into self-isolated
pocket universes that reinforce their prejudices. In the short time allocated
to me as kickoff speaker, I tried to give (ahem) ‘unusual perspectives’ on each
of these topics.
Make no mistake, the survival of independent and professionally trained news media is vital to our civilization, just as undermining such experts is essential to the agenda of our rising caste of would-be masters.
I always have lots of
unconventional things to say, but one stands out and you will see it repeated
forever, till it’s tried on a large scale. Wagers. Dares!
Bets. Putting money on actual verification or disproof.
It is the only approach that
will work, in an era when romantics have declared that all is subjective. That
incantation works for macho guys… till something tangible is on the table.
Then? Recall that most of these fake-news slathering fellows are also sports fans.
And they know, deep down, that there comes a time when you can no longer talk your way out of comparing
actual facts.
They grasp the idea that a
wager has to be resolved. And it will turn on what can be proved. And now machismo becomes our friend, since it over-rules
subjectivity! If you flee from a bet,
you are shamed. And if you refuse to pay-up, you are un-manned, period.
I broached this at the
conference, as one of many observations and speculations about the future of
news. It only got blinks of confusion from those erudite folks, showing how
alien is their elite, mature, fact-loving world from that of the Confederacy
that gave us this tsunami of fake-news. But give it time. Experiment with it. Because something
has to be done. And this approach will go to the root, the heart of the
problem.
== "Otherness"... redefined by monsters! ==
Ouch! Do we never get to keep nice things? Way back around 1990 I coined a term that later became the title of my 2nd story collection: OTHERNESS. It stood for the trend - in our recent, enlightenment renaissance - to be fascinated with horizons. To look beyond the immediate and near and familiar. And, yes, this manifests in many of us - those with some confidence - in a willingness to expand our boundaries of inclusion, to encompass "others."
Alas, all that has been sabotaged. Instead of rising in confidence - as Americans and all advanced and advancing nations should be doing now, amid very good times - we are letting ourselves be talked into quaking, quivering terror.
That I find upsetting. But want to see me really pissed off? Now my optimistic and brave term - "otherness" - has been stolen! Appropriated not only without credit or provenance, but given diametrically opposite meaning!
It's like the way they took the term "fake news" - which stood for their tactic to rile up an unsapient confederacy - and grabbed it as one more polemical weapon to use - in stunning irony - against real news media.
Alas, even those writing cogently against the madness keep falling for these traps, as with this fellow, who blithely accepts the alt-right definition of "otherness," ceding ground, even while whining about it. We can do so much better.
== Teaching the young – and old farts ==
Stanford professor Sam Wineburg lays out the steps educators need to take to help students discern what is fake news or not. “The tools we’ve invented are
handling us,“ he says, “not the other way around.”
A commenter suggested that the way to counter “alternative-facts may be to use
their own s### against them: “When Trump
says that 3 million illegals voted in the last election, tell them it doesn't
matter because a majority of them voted for Trump! If he asks where you got the
information, just say it was from the same source that he did. Or that it is
common sense. Or that you "heard it on the internet." Or all the
other lame excuses they use.
“When they make up stuff, make up stuff about their stuff. Be
truthful about our stuff, but for their stuff, let you imagination run wild.
Without facts to back up their claims, there is no way they can disprove any
claim you make.”
It is a very, very dumb proposal. We have other ways to win.
It is a very, very dumb proposal. We have other ways to win.
== The fact people ==
Evonomics
is the place for erudite and fact-rich proof that inequality and huge wealth disparities are NOT healthy or faithful to fair-competitive market enterprise
or even capitalism.
An article online about cheating in economics explains how we are rediscovering
the wisdom of Adam Smith and how parasite “rentiers” are not the friends of
capitalism. Monopolists, “finance wizards” and passive lease-collectors create
nothing and certainly do not compete. See both how Smith denounced the vampire
effects on markets… and how it’s played out - to Dracula proportions -
today.
The Real "Takers" in America: Michael Lind’s article in
Evonomics shows the kind of rooseveltean thinking that the oligarchs deeply
fear might take hold. “An Anti-Rentier movement would oppose unproductive,
ill-begotten wealth, not the rich in general. Wealthy individuals who get
richer by investing in start-up companies or funding long-lived, creative
blue-chip firms provide a valuable benefit to society, even as they risk losing
their own money. Such risk-taking investors are the opposites of financial
sector rentiers who seek to bribe policymakers into letting them privatize
their gains while socializing their losses.”
Radical? A bit, sure. But what’s the alternative? Do the rentier-oligarchs actually believe
they can crush us back into inherited-nobility and feudalism? If the coming re-set is not a
moderate-pragmatic, rooseveltean one - as instituted by the Greatest Generation
- then it will be something much more radical. Already, search results for Karl
Marx” have skyrocketed, in recent years.
Finally, someone
else is pointing out that "Obamacare" was always the Republicans' own plan, all along! This young, democratic Congressman lays it out so clearly that
even a Fox-watcher would understand… and perhaps start scratching his head,
asking: "So what was all the screaming about? And why did I ever watch
Fox?"
Oh,
I am gonna keep my eye on this Rep. Brendan Boyle fellah.
== Other things that got (a lot) better
==
The
Bad News: Obama’s Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz is
an example of the brainpower and expertise that we lose. He’s a nuclear
physicist for MIT who has been involved in government energy projects for two
decades. His designated
successor, former Texas governor Rick
Perry, has no comparable educational or business background that would equip
him for the job.
(To be clear, I am miffed that our present situation leaves me delighted to see Perry in the cabinet.
For all his faults and awful limitations, RP seems at least to be an American
of normal IQ and no cultist. Such a low bar.)
The Good News: Read how
Moniz says that our accomplishments in developing efficient, sustainable and non-carbon technologies are irreversible. Despite treasonous obstruction by The
Cult, these techs have now taken off, reaching beyond break-even, drawing every
utility and energy-using entity away from carbon sources. “Smart government
policies have encouraged and reinforced this evolution, but it now has a life
of its own, studies suggest.”
Filthy coal has collapsed as U.S. supplies of much cleaner natural
gas burgeoned, with America attaining effective energy independence under
Obama, for the first time in 40 years. The Energy Department estimates that 61
percent of the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions in the power sector from
2006 to 2014 came from switching from coal-fired plants to gas-fired ones. (A
side effect no one seems to have reported: even with our troops helping
governments in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is no longer a U.S. aircraft carrier
battle group in the Middle East. We just don’t need that region for our own
survival, anymore.)
Gas is a stopgap. “Continuing declines in the costs of
alternative energy sources are making them increasingly competitive. Since
2008, costs have
fallen 41 percent for land-based wind
power and 64 percent for utility-scale solar power. The cost of efficient LED
light bulbs has fallen 94 percent since 2008. The cost of battery storage has
declined 70 percent over that period, making electric vehicles more affordable.
As of last August, there were 490,000 electric vehicles on the road.”
Want another? Chart some national statistics and how they did across the Obama administration. In only
one case was there not a huge improvement… the national debt. But the size of the debt is a huge lagging
indicator. Far more significant is the rate
of change of the rate of change of debt. By that metric, any fiscal
conservative can see on a single chart (that I provide) how they would be
insane ever to trust a republican with a burnt match.
Ah, but PrezDon screamed that all favorable statistics under Obama were lies... but now that the momentum on jobs is continuing... it's all real!
Ah, but PrezDon screamed that all favorable statistics under Obama were lies... but now that the momentum on jobs is continuing... it's all real!
The ultimate answer to government is useless: Evonomics
chose my essay as ideal to cap off a tumultuous year, and to welcome one that
might be much better. That is, if we choose to remember where all our good
stuff came from. It came from a civilization that (once) encouraged negotiation
based on facts. One that benefited from educating millions. One that developed
the fantastic tool known as science.
One of you
wrote in to comment about how intense public reaction stopped Paul Ryan’s
reavers from: 1- neutering the Congressional Ethics Office, 2- rushing Trump’s
confirmations before ethics reports come in, and 3- canceling the ACA before a
new health plan is ready. Sayeth Stefan:
“Calling and emailing your
representative and senators WORKS. You
look up their contact information here.
And if you want to get
involved in organized resistance, you read the Indivisible guide and
join one of their local groups.”
And yet, while I will write letters and even sometimes march... that is not how we'll win. It's yummy and satisfying, but only entrenches civil war. This sumo is what they want. It's necessary, but if we only do sumo, we lose.
Victory will only come via Judo.
And yet, while I will write letters and even sometimes march... that is not how we'll win. It's yummy and satisfying, but only entrenches civil war. This sumo is what they want. It's necessary, but if we only do sumo, we lose.
Victory will only come via Judo.
== The expert on
despotism ==
Populism and Totalitarianism: Roger Berkowitz Sheds light on probably the greatest expert on despotic
regimes, Hannah Arendt. In her chapter on “The Totalitarian
Movement” in The Origins of Totalitarianism, Arendt notes that the
leaders of movements are marked by their “extreme contempt for facts as
such.” The reason for this contempt for facts is that the world is
complicated and uncertain. For the masses of people who are suffering
dislocation, instability, and meaninglessness in their lives, “movements conjure up a lying world of
consistency which is more adequate to the needs of the human mind than reality
itself; in which, through sheer imagination, uprooted masses can feel at home
and are spared the never-ending shocks which real life and real experiences
deal to human beings and their expectations.”
The great danger in all
movements is that they can have no firm goal; as movements, they continually
need to stir up their supporters who drive them forward. If any goal is met, a
new one must be contrived. So movements are motivated less by a firm end than
by a promise to fulfill a deep spiritual need. That is why movements mobilize
masses who are longing for a “completely consistent, comprehensible, and
predictable world.” There is a “desire to escape from reality
because in [the mass of the people’s] essential homelessness they can no longer
bear its accidental, incomprehensible aspects…”


