Skip to main content
Post a Comment

A Response to Why More Democrats Are Now Embracing Conspiracy Theories

I wrote a few responses to an article, Why More Democrats Are Now Embracing Conspiracy Theories in the The New York Times, first here and then here.

The text of the first:
If nothing else, conspiracy theories allude to things, while not absolutely true, are certainly possible, or hint at things that, while not an outright takeover, are concerns.
  • Trump only needs an excuse, a terrorist incident, a violent leftist response, to initiate quasi-fascist control, a reduction in rights, harsh military responses to protests, increased surveillance, etc.
  • His coziness with Russia, if not quite indicating a puppet-in-chief, indicates a lack of wariness that might be necessary when Russia does decide to invade another Eastern European country, or say, deploy military that threatens Europe.
  • The fact that his advisors are all financial people, military hawks, with a [secretary] of state from Exxon, point to a possible war. A conspiracy theory would be that they are there to create a war, affecting the price of oil, forcing defense expenditure increases, with profiteers at the ready to make money. In truth, I can still see how the tendencies of those in power could lead to war, and while not quite intentional, could occur regardless.
  • Considering Trump's dark triad (narcissism, psychopathy, machiavellian) tendencies, and the what history has taught us about prior demigogs, we need to be wary.
The text of the second:
Although I am certainly aware of the concerns, of individuals seeing controlled plans where a more subtle analysis is required, of unconnected actors and actions are at play, I do believe you are engaging in a false equivalence.

Obama was a not secret Muslim Nazi about to take away Republicans' guns, and was, in fact, quite the opposite. Obama could not reasonably be likened to a Hitler or a Pinochet. On the other hand, Trump does seem like the kind of individual prone to authoritarianism and is compromised, with his obvious allusions and connections to Russia.
  • Is he Putin's puppet. Likely no, but is he someone that might be prepared to respond well to Russian aggression?
  • Will in implement martial law? No, he will slowly destroy as many protections against state overreach as he, and the Republicans can.
  • Will he force women to conform to an outdated role, e.g., wear burkas, or the modern equivalent, lipstick and dresses? No, but will women's rights and freedoms be eroded, will their quality life be diminished. I'd bet yes.
  • The Koch brothers and ALEC are perfect examples of a nefarious groups manipulating our lives and our legislature.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews
Post a Comment
Read more

A Journey — if You Dare — Into the Minds of Silicon Valley Programmers

My responses in a NY Times comment section for the book, Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World by Clive Thompson : #1 - Link Although I've been a software developer for 15 years, and for longer alternating between a project manager, team lead, or analyst, mostly in finance, and now with a cancer center, I found it funny that you blame the people doing the coding for not seeing the harm it could cause. First, most scientific advancement has dark elements, and it is usually not the science but how it is used and sold by business people that is the problem. This leads to the second problem, in that it is not coding that is in itself problematic, but specifically how technology is harnessed to sell. It is normal and desirable to track users, to log actions, to collect telemetry, so as to monitor systems, respond to errors, and to develop new features, but that normal engineering practice has been used to surveil users for the purpose of selling. Blaming
Post a Comment
Read more

Don't learn to code. Learn to think.

A response to  Don't learn to code. Learn to think. : Below is is my usual response when I see an article stating that everyone should learn to code:  Rather than programming, it is more important to impart the thinking of computer science (CS) than a specific implementation. Programming can be an end point for some students, but it is likely that programming itself will be increasingly automated, so that one needs more the general concepts common in CS. Even then, programming itself is to some degree a grunt task that one progresses beyond:  The following are typical components of a CS degree: algorithms & flowcharting systems thinking logical systems and set theory object-orientation & patterns probability, statistics, mathematics All of the above can be useful in an increasingly automated and data-driven world.
1 comment
Read more