I don’t like to invoke the authority of the ancient Greeks,
but Aristotle really did point out something quite useful in his treatise on
rhetoric. He wrote that:
“There are… three means of effecting persuasion. The man
who is to be in command of them must, it is clear, be able (1) to reason
logically, (2) to understand human character and goodness in their various forms,
and (3) to understand the emotions-that is, to name them and describe them, to
know their causes and the way in which they are excited.”
Rhetoric consists of logos, ethos,
and pathos—logic, emotion, and character.
Let's apply these concepts to my perspective on the current
state of politics in the United States.
1.
The Republicans long ago lost credibility in my
eyes. The Iraq War of 2003 eliminated
any doubt in my mind.
2.
The establishment Democrats have lost
credibility in my eyes due to two more recent stances:
a.
The anti-Bernie hysteria that began in
2016, and is reminiscent of previous Republican anti-Clinton hysteria. Please see this recent article by Branko Marcetic which compares the
two.
b.
The Russiagate investigation which, in my
eyes, has shown most Democrats unable or unwilling to recognize the truth. Rather, there has been a mass movement to
blame the election of Donald Trump on the Russians. Fox News now has more credibility in my eyes, on this issue. Instead of accepting that Mueller's report
was based on faulty intelligence, the Dems have doubled down on the
faulty/fraudulent intelligence. Insinuendo: Why the Mueller Report Doth Repeat So Much provides a clear look at what has been
going on in this regard. Conveniently
for my analogy, Mueller was also FBI Director in 2003 pushing the bogus "intelligence" that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass
destruction. ("Baghdad has the capability and, we presume, the will to use
biological, chemical, or radiological weapons against US domestic targets in
the event of a US invasion.")
Saddam Hussein has morphed into Vladimir Putin.
Thus, the Democrats have adopted the tactics of their
nemeses, the Republicans. Opposition figures to the left are thoughtlessly
demonized. Russia is blamed for our
problems.
In my circles of friends and relatives, nobody agrees with
me on this. The best response I get is
when people listen a bit and agree with certain things, while not passing
judgment on others. Other times, people
talk past me, not responding to points.
Usually the conversation abruptly ends as the other person doesn't
respond anymore. I at least try to end
conversations on a good note, with some explanation for my non-response.
The fact is that people often cannot handle the truth. This is neither good nor bad, but a fact of
human nature. The condition is known as epistemic learned helplessness.
This means that we tend not to go along with weird theories, even if the
person propounding a theory seems to have logical arguments. Most often, we do not have enough knowledge
ourselves, in the specific domain under discussion, to argue with the proponent
of the weird theory. But we know that
the theory is not backed by the experts we trust, that we do not have enough
time to become experts ourselves, and weird theories are often used to fool or
cheat us into doing something we shouldn't.
So this brings us full circle -- back to the sphere of
trust. Humans operate from a mental model of how the world works. Integral to this model is the set of people
we trust, and this is not easy to change regardless of the facts we learn. We are continually trying to fit new facts
into our mental models, either questioning the facts or expanding our model to
incorporate them. The models have been
devloped over the course of a lifetime and are responsible for our mental
stability as well as our place in society.
The sphere of trust is not casually modified.
So those of us who are Democrats tend to stay Democrats, and
the same with Republicans. But when a
party splits, as both Democrats and Republicans threaten to do at the current
time, then societal change is possible.
For example, I will probably be tempted to vote for a third party
candidate should the Democrats continue their love affair with Mueller and the
anti-Russian war machine. Third parties
haven't broken through in the United States, but they have been significant
factors in many presidential elections including the last one. (Full disclosure: I live in Michigan and
voted for Jill Stein.) And many
Republicans dislike Trump and his wing of the party and will not vote for him.
I am tempted to send an email to my 100 closest friends and
relatives announcing my disgust with Mueller and Russiagate. But I think that would be risky for me
personally in that it would threaten to harm many relationships. People would tune me out as a weirdo. Others might agree, but would be reluctant to
do so publicly as it might risk some of their relationships. The web of trusts is strong..
So Democrats will continue to erode their credibiity by
refusing to update their mental models to accommodate the lack of
accountability and credibility of our "intelligence" community, as
demonstrated in the Russiagate affair.
There is much more about this affair than meets the eye, yet we are not
allowed to learn about "intelligence", which is secretive by
nature. Intelligence cannot be shared
willy nilly, but rather is shared with the public to support various
agendas. The network of power relations and
the consensus sphere of trust is dominated by large media corporations that
cooperate with the intelligence agencies.
Those, such as myself, who question the credibility of the whole edifice
can best work at the margins and divisions amongst the power players.
Over time, trust in the status quo becomes more superficial,
as more people become like me. The pump
is primed for change. The conditions are
ripe. The table is set. The process may already be in motion. So far Elizabeth Warren seems to be
navigating the shoals pretty well.
Perhaps she represents the right combination of dramatic change and
non-threatening demeanor that people are longing for. Other options, including more Trump, Biden,
Harris, and Sanders, seem likely to explode into conflict.
Elizabeth Warren has the character (credibility - ethos),
passion and ability to connect with people (pathos), and reasonable policies
(logos - intellect) to carry the day and hopefully pull us back from the brink.
No comments:
Post a Comment