Hacker News Reader

Comment by vdupras | Hacker News Reader

Don't we need to have a pretty low opinion of the average american cognitive skill to feel the need to protect them from foreign propaganda for fear it would take a hold on them?

If the general public is that stupid and that this kind of protection is really needed, then it also means that democracy is no longer a viable form of government because the public is also too stupid to vote.

View on HN

> Don't we need to have a pretty low opinion of the average american cognitive skill to feel the need to protect them from foreign propaganda for fear it would take a hold on them?

No. Influential foreign propaganda is inconspicuous. There’s nothing to be mindful of other than “who benefits if this is widely believed?” and it’s not a low opinion to think most people aren’t mindful of that.

> Don't we need to have a pretty low opinion of the average american cognitive skill to feel the need to protect them from foreign propaganda for fear it would take a hold on them

that's naive. Literally leaving CNN on in your living room 3 days a week will eventually change you opinions. Our minds absorb things we hear repetitively, even if we now they might be half truths or lies.

That still sounds like a pretty low opinion, even if it's more general than only applying to Americans. You're essentially saying that the outcome of an election is determined primarily by who owns the most effective propaganda machines, which is a pretty heavy (valid) critique of the concept of democracy.

Propaganda works. PR works. The global ad industry is worth trillions, not because it doesn't work.

I'm not saying that it doesn't work and I'm not saying that I hold the general public in high esteem. What I say is that holding the general public in low esteem while at the same time holding democratic values sacred is, as Spock would say, illogical.

This leads to why the US didn't setup a pure democracy. The job of certain long term branches like the senate, supreme court & certain unelected positions is to be able to think long term & say "eat your veggies" without the worry of losing there job because someone else is offering nice European chocolates.

Democratic values are good but not without flaws.

If you acknowledge that all humans have a lot of cognitive biases and information processing weaknesses, acknowledging that these are easily exploitable is not holding people in low esteem. It is taking a realistic stance on how open all of us are to being influenced in ways that we will not notice and barely understand.

Well said. And you don't abandon a system of representative government based on flaws that will always exist.

> What I say is that holding the general public in low esteem while at the same time holding democratic values sacred is, as Spock would say, illogical.

I fully agree. The last year has shaken my confidence in democracy more than any other time in my lifetime. Not because of threats of war or revolution, but because what is the point of elections if the majority is chronically misinformed? Why have a yes/no election if no one knows what the question is?

It's still the best worst system, and i'm still going to vote in 2 years and again in 4, but my faith is low.

> last year has shaken my confidence in democracy

Read the federalist papers. Our obsession with elections has destabilised the balance built into our republic.

Meaning what, elections aren't a necessary part of democracy?

> elections aren't a necessary part of democracy?

Read the Federalist Papers. Elections are an essential part of democracy. But it's possible to overdo it, and elections alone a democracy does not make. (Much less a functioning republic.)

I supposed I dont understand your point. 4 years is too often to vote for a President?

Foreign propaganda is much easier to spot. It is the domestic propaganda that was legalized in the 2012 Smith-Mundt Modernization act that concerns me.

> If the general public is that stupid and that this kind of protection is really needed, then it also means that democracy is no longer a viable form of government because the public is also too stupid to vote.

They are, it is, and it never was, for that exact reason.

> If the general public is that stupid

What is your evidence that propaganda efficacy scales inversely with intelligence?

It's self-evident. Propaganda is defused through rhetorical skills. You know, knowing about the general forms of sophism, all that stuff. Rhetorical skills correlate with intelligence.

> It's self-evident. Propaganda is defused through rhetorical skills

It's far from self evident. There is all kinds of nonsense that is catnip for overthinkers. The reason I paused at that assertion is that a lot of propaganda (and in general, military misdirection) is aimed at deceiving leadership.

An interesting parallel, they've studied cult recruitment and intelligent people are not less likely to join one. In fact, often times, the better they are at reasoning, the better they are at convincing themselves something bad is in fact ok.

Fifty four percent of Americans now read below the sixth grade level.

Do not underestimate your enemy.

> Don't we need to have a pretty low opinion of the average american cognitive skill

Well, half the country voted for a convicted felon who _illegally tried to overturn the results of an election_, so yeah, it's pretty low.

> democracy is no longer a viable form of government because the public is also too stupid to vote.

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others" -- Churchill

It's flawed, but still miles better than what China has. At least there are still some safeguards on Trump, unlike Xi.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com