All he is saying is, if you're going to tax corporations and people, then use some of that tax money for better education and truth in media so the public will be better informed to recognize and dismiss propaganda. Democracies can only work if the populous is well informed, the alternative is corporations will tell you how to think for their own benefit, or conspiracy minded people will get you to think how they want you to think for their own benefit.
Chad Atchison democracies only work with a population educated enough to believe they think for themselves but ignorant enough to not realize they don't. A democracy is simply mob rule and a mob well-clothed, and well-fed are no less a mob.
Ok. That costs money. There is a point when people will say: "Enough with all this truth nonsense, i want cheaper healthcare." And even if MAXIMUM TRUTH gets achieved, people will dismiss it in a heartbeat for a version with more good feelz.
Personally, I don't think we can expect any cooperation from big business or government: all we can do is create a movement of integrated local communities, but that should be sufficient as a powerful and irrepressible starting point.
@@gregorybrian that doesn't work. People vote for the people they know are more likely to win, and this reduces choice. What we need is for everyone to share the power of the state, but vastly restricted, so that we can all have the ability to legally defend ourselves.
3% is all that is needed for traction, 3% of the population started the revolutionary war against England. Note, places like Snopes say this is false. But realize that fact checkers are just opinions, as indicated in the court case vs Facebook 'Stossel v. Meta Platforms', where FB admits their fact checkers are just opinion writers
@peoplearedumbnow3886 But why do you think smaller governments would be less corrupt? No matter what country you look at, you usually have more corruption happening at the local levels. Most political assassinations in Russia happen between local governors and investigators/jornalists, for example; As I see it, a national government, if subject to democratic voting, can do a much better job rejecting corruption since most local corrupters, which are the majority of corruptors, would be seen as small fish and much more easly demonized to support one candidate or another while being very hard to defend. Just as a scenario
This is why apps like NextDoor are really important. We need to re-establish communities which can then help to re-establish local news. Not that an app will solve anything but it's an easy start.
NextDoor and such apps were created to profile people and neighborhoods. While a good start, anything technological is recorded indefinitely at your local NSA data centers
I agreed I was normal person until Covid. Now I have a whole new bunch of labels. I also now believe that democracy is nothing but A mirage. Vote for the blue team or the red team but both of the teams are working for somebody else. No matter what team you vote for you seem to be ending up with WEF team
4:07 - 5:10 Look at Facebook, Twitter, RUclips, Google, ect. today. There is an algorithm to deliver what you need to hear/see, and more importantly to stop what you "don't need to hear/see". The worst part of this is it is an algorithm, so its not even an individual or a group necessarily. 1:52 - 3:28 Look at the last couple years specifically, Medicine, Race, Sexuality, War efforts, just to name a few. It doesn't matter what opinion you come to upon any of these individual points, the point is you draw an opinion, influenced to you by an algorithm. Then emotionally grouping with those who draw the same opinion, and rivaling those who differ.
Yep, individual self autonomy, responsibility, and cognitive capacity. Learning how to truly use cognition rather than simply memorising accepted concepts.
Well, one of the problems of truth is that it generally involves some uncomfortable and even painful soul searching. We've become very deconditioned when it comes to changing our own narratives and even beliefs. We've been literally drowning in our affluence. But I still agree with him. We have to step out of fantasy land and start recognising the things we are resistant to, because the longer we leave it, the worse it gets.
Think about those ads that Steve Bannon made that targeted one person. It appears to be a waste of money but not if you win the levers of power. Also, those Trump voters now are be constantly follow up targeted and locked in to having to support him to justify their previous switch from blue to red.
These comments amaze me. Americans can even manage to make a video about authoritarian regimes all about themselves! This is not about republicans or democrats, people. Wanna take notes and reflect on your political dilemmas? Fine. But not everything is about you 🤦🏻♂️
It shouldn't be surprising. Americans make up a significant proportion of RUclips's viewers and the information being presented is highly relevant to their society. Hence, they want to discuss. Not a problem. I'd imagine Britons and Germans are doing the same to a lesser degree, and should be encouraged to do so.
Lol, using sweeping generalizations like "Americans." It's funny how Euorpeans will take advantage of any opportunity to make petty jabs at America and have the self-unawareness to imply they're concieted.
If I don't like local news is because they are drama queens, they put emphasis on worthless stuff, I would like them to be factual and would try to appeal to our intelligence rather then our emotions.
Bravo! this is exactly what's going on. I fell victim to this emotional name calling, pick a side, bullshit before the election. I had to stop watching the news and get off social media for the most part( obviously I'm on youtube ). The anger started to fade about 6 months in. I was tricked and manipulated as were most Americans. I am much more skeptical about what I hear. I hope I have learned from this experience.
Many are going through the same experience, me included. Lets hope sanity and healthy skepticism (to all claims and viewpoints) will prevail, and we ditch the cynicism and blind ideological obedience assaulting us from every angle.
The bigger problem is that this is rather formative, in the sense that people are not just in a simple position of judging the rights and wrongs of arguments. Rather there is an overall ideological and media culture that goes on to 'nefariously format how to think' in the middle to long term. Thereafter the damage is done as such a manipulation becomes an internalized mental reflex from 'bad education' and reinforced by immediate and remote significant others. It is critically by cultivating a cultural and media environment valuing and creatively upholding a credible intellectual public debate that such a 'bad education' can be overcome. But then there are powerfully invested business, media and social stakes that work on the basis of a failing intellectually credible public debate, so that policy issues can then default to their positions and interests. Thus from the bigger perspective, it is an issue of grasping who benefits from failing and disrupted political engagement with public issues. The fact is more than just one party such influence runs across the parties, and it is thus very naive to think that such an issue can be resolved within the framework of the two party political system. Consider for instance the Trump tax cuts, even Trump was willing to raise the tax rate from the initial proposal. The question can be asked why will the opposition prefer to absolutely do nothing (not even bring up a bargaining chip like support or partial support in return for a higher threshold or say infrastructure project) in the name of a certain ineffective political purism. When such defaulting decisions add up in the final analysis the supposed confrontational politics turns out to be 'in effect a lure for fooling the mass of the people that they wield power' whereas across the years the real politics is being done by default for vested interests.
True. Eliminating that FCC rule was the start of fake news in America. However, it will always be necessary to be vigilant against authoritarianism. The Left and Right both have authoritarian members. Often people who scream the loudest about justice want to force their version of "justice" on others by violence. An obvious example is vegans dreaming of the death sentence for meat eaters.
If you remain vigilant about the negatives, the network remains a powerful tool. It's certainly not automatic for people to become conditioned to emotional response.
Schools should be teaching students how to identify and reject propaganda....every year so that they can keep pace combating new tactics. Unwitting slaves to Godwin's law and the bandwagon effect...and way too many logical fallacies out there. I wonder if there is a way to combat the bots that reinforce our biases and push to absurd extremes? Maybe like a spam filter to provide a diversity of perspectives.
John Bucker You basically said how to combat the propaganda bots in your first statement, and that is through education, educating people how to recognize and reject propaganda.
@@oldishandwoke-ish1181 Starting at 7:05, Mr. Snyder begins describing his vision of a government implemented tax to generate funds that would support approved media sources that report approved facts. He didn't specify how those funds would be managed, but clearly a ministry of truth could handle it.
@@misterlyle. Tax big companies to support local news is what I heard. You are obviously a Murdoch devotee who hears "Pol Pot" any time taxing the rich is mentioned....
What to do when the movie studios, the news establishment and the government are all walking in the same direction and treating the dissenting voices as witches? I think that is where we expect the big system to head toward a collapse, meanwhile we can build resilient smaller local things that will survive the crash and help rebuild.
Professor, yes you can classify governance as authoritarian v democracy. You can also classify nations by majority of population who feel their government is making their lives better or worst. In many big democracies, independent survey shows the majority believe their life will not be better in the next 5 years, where as in many authoritarian regimes, the majority of population believes that their lives will be better in the next 5y, just as it had been in the previous 5. You can call them declining v rising states or by any other names of you want.
That's laughable. The authoritarian regime survey is not anonymous. When your government is holding a gun to your head, of course you're going to say they believe it will be better. We all know what happens to the opponents of Putin, and the CCP. Death.
This was much better then I thought it would be. Just one word I want to edit in what you said. You said that THE GOVERNMENT needs to be supporting more local news and creating more local content. When the government creates the news you are moving towards an authoritarian regime. The more powerful the government is, the more likely it will be to turn authoritarian. Autocrats love to grab power. I think it is better to have many competing autocrats like business leaders. They can only be so horrible before an employee will leave and find a better job.They could also become their own autocrat if they work hard enough.
He is correct on local news. It should be calibrated to the correct degree of "local." When I first moved to Phoenix, there were several young men shot and killed in south and west Phoenix every day. Mostly young black and Hispanic young men shooting each other. After the paper shifted to a more specific local section, I could easily have believed that all of Phoenix was just like the Princess resort. It isn't.
Another thing that new is that ANYONE can say ANYTHING and get millions of people to listen. Be an influencer. Be a RUclips star. You don't have to do anything worthwhile, Just be who you are.
and thats whats destroying the internet and weaponized against us. Misinformation and conspiracy theories and plain false biased information being fed to us and our children. Before you needed to work years in journalism to be able to broadcast your story to hundreds of thousands of people, that was the gate keeper. Now anyone with a loud mouth can speak and spread all types of fake news. So dangerous for society as a whole. This is why alexjones has millions of followers
@@reggieangus5325 Nowadays people follow champagne socialists like HasanAbi or other socialist influencers on twitch who don't produce anything of worth and only complain about "muh capitalism" while getting rich on a capitalist platform. The hypocrisy is far more annoying than anything RusselBrand or AlexJones can come up with.
The major roadblock I see to this constructive potential is the reality of SOCIOPATHS who pursue power for its own sake & abuse it readily. These sociopath things gain power & money by disrupting constructive efforts.
It sounds like the thesis is an independent media is broken, and we need governmental spending and intervention to right the ship. Would that be a correct assessment of your position?
I disagree with the notion that the internet promotes old world-views over new ones. I see far more diversity of opinion on the internet than within the mainstream media. Also the internet is the one promoting the concept of independent research while the MSM is the one saying things like "it's illegal to read wikileaks". It is because the internet has the most diversity of view-point that old ideologies are kept alive. However that doesn't stop the internet from promoting new perspectives along side them. Next, this person appears to be very concerned about the voices of experts getting drowned out in the midst of independent thought. To this i would reiterate the point that the internet is the one incentivizing independent research. Before, only the experts pre-approved by the media and large corporations were given a platform. This didn't bode well during the Satanic Panic in the 80's nor was it good for the public during MCcarthyism in the 50's because the "experts" being brought on were not really experts but rather, they were sensationalists. Finally, while i agree that the internet is designed to put people into echo chambers, so is every other type of media. TV companies track ratings and modify their approach to give viewers more of what they want. The only difference is that TV has been corporatized. It no longer consists of independent commentators that act in the interest of the public. In short, the internet, like all other mediums for information will put you in an echo chamber. However, the internet is also the only one of these mediums that allow person to person communication and feedback. This helps the audience to reflect on whether or not the information is credible or consistent with the general narrative surrounding it.
Great talk, but there's a big problem with what he said about addressing the problem by making news a public service. That's exactly what the BBC was meant to be in the UK (and why anyone who watches ANY tv channel is required to buy a licence which contributes to its funding, as a tax for a public service) but over the decades it's gotten seriously biased despite the efforts of many individuals within it to remain apolitical. The problem is that since a certain type of education is massively overrepresented in the people the BBC wants to hire, the view of the whole organisation gets slanted towards what that education teaches, and the people who've had it don't think they're taking a "political" position, just a sophisticated one. Then you end up with an organisation that (a) does not have the personal connection to real people that he talked about, (b) is resented by a substantial number of people who are forced to pay for something they don't watch and don't trust, (c) has more trouble acknowledging and addressing its own biases than a more openly political station would, and thus struggles to pull off the self-reflection that they would need to "reforest" their viewership, and (d) has little motive to do so anyway because they are not in danger of losing money unless people are willing to cancel their licences altogether (which only became a genuine threat very recently when the internet made it easier to live with no TV). The BBC had a good run, and enjoyed several decades when it was (deservedly) more trusted than many other news channels, but that just allowed it to coast on its reputation for so long that it now doesn't know how to reform itself into a genuinely neutral and trustworthy channel.
What is the basis of the claim that we internalize the cost of pollution? If that were true, we would not have a human-induced climate instability problem. (We would not have a rate of emission of fossil carbon that exceeds what most people think is acceptable. We don't even bother to find out what most people think an acceptable limit on the rate of emission of fossil carbon would be.)
It's not an option to control the internet because, that power to control information will be desired by the corrupt. People should be able to make up their minds by themselves without someone telling them what a fact is. I hope you have a good day.
You can NOT make up your mind about a fact. Reality exists whether you want it to or not. Covid is not a hoax. You can die from it whether you believe in it or not. You are entitled to your own opinions, but a fact is a fact, whether you like it or not. Attempting to ignore or deny facts will only get you killed.
@@robinlillian9471 I didn't say wether or not I believed covid was a hoax or not. I absolutely believe it to be real however, the severity of the sickness is way overblown. Yes it's dangerous; Yes people have died from it; yes we should take basic precautions to curtail it's spread; but shutting down everything; persecuting people who want to protest against the orders whilst complying with them; and calling any dissenting opinions an attempted murder of the elderly is as wrong as calling it an outright hoax. If you want me to say more on what I meant please let me know. Have a good day regardless.
Of course it will be a god damn author that will so eloquently describe what I felt and thought for a couple of years now, but couldn't put the finger on. I just can't connect the words. I think I need to learn how to write... I hope there is time for that.
A lot of what Snyders says here is not wrong but simply trivial. An new Authoritarianism is not only a matter of the form of governance but also a matter of societal structures.
In retrospect to the internet I think social media needs more social responsibility like Facebook it's more background vetting, spam, fake news and red flagging for anti social language/content. We need Norton 360 but a lot much more like it.🎯
How to build an authoritarian regime - Censorship because lies need it for survival, use 'fact checkers' to control public perception, use the Authoritarian Tip Toe technique
That's kinda a flawed logic tbh. Your basically telling people to 'only' listen to a singular source, which said source can or may not be entirely true. For a person to stay factual, one must gather information from multiple sources, then compare said sources with each-other to find aligning statments and weed out non-aligning ones, so that in the end a person can inevitably find the truth.
I don't love the externality comparison. Typically with externalities, there are two agents in an economic transaction, but other agents who did not participate are directly affected. Polluting a river directly subjects non-participant (non consenting) agents to that negative burden. People make a personal choice to consume media, they just have no idea if it is 'quality' or 'true' information. A more relevant economic analogy would seem to be food labeling or booze labeling. Were not gonna stop you from drinking piss booze, but you should know what you're consuming, and a society should do their best to provide that information. Likewise with information, society should try to grade sources by reliability, quality, bias, etc. The trick is doing that without falling into "Ministry of Truth" type black mirror situations.
I hope his thoughts are better organized in the book than in this vid. He comes across as credible because of his calm demeanor and purposeful pauses, but any salient arguments he might have get lost in a sea of intellectualizing, free association, and historical asides.
“If we like democracy, freedom, the rule of law...” some brilliant insights with possible solutions. He talked about the introduction of a new medium like the inet or printed book being a time of sorting out inherent problems associated with the technology. Just last weekend I happen to read about James 1st publishing a treatise on witchcraft, and wondered if that influenced the trials at Salem, and of course how a certain candidate demonized a certain female candidate in 2016. That demonization deflected his blatant moral deficiencies and scapegoated someone else to the point that his victim was said to run a sex ring in a pizza parlor, a story fantastical beyond alien conspiracies, yet people believed it and acted upon it. It’s an amazing time we live in, innovative technology that should be helpful instead being harnessed to encourage backsliding intellectually to propaganda vulnerability levels that must have existed in 1500 among some segments of the population. Is it just me or does anyone else find it strange that not even 100 years after nazi propaganda and McCarthyism, the concept of ‘what is factual’ is actually a required topic of popular discussion?
David Giles And the insane & horrible human being who was McCarthy’s lawyer was also Trump’s main mentor. I don’t think that’s just a coincidence either.
Capitalism IS 1984. Has been all along. 1984 is a perfect depiction of the USA, brainwashing everyone into thinking the Communists were the bad guys to justify Commiting genocide against them, as well as arresting, torturing and killing anyone suspected of being a Communist, down to making everyone afraid and hostile towards Communism to this day. McCarthyism and the Red Scare has completely distorted and altered history. Ask the majority of people who lived under Socialism and they will tell you what they think. Hell. Under Capitalism, we have devices spying on us 24/7. The very devices we used to communicate are Big Brother Capitalism watching us. Controlling what we think. To keep itself in power. Truly frightening. Communists ARE the ones rebelling against and exposing the system. Not trying to implant an authoritarian regime, but on the contrary, to dismantle one. We americans and brazilians already live in 1984. It IS our reality. We need to dismantle the system, folks. The system is not your friend.
I don't think that externalities, public goods, or unfair competitive advantages are really helpful ways to think about this. For the externality, it sounds like me knowing the facts should make me more likely to vote in ways that benefit others, but is it true? It could just make me better able to vote in ways that advance some narrow sectional interest or fringe ideology that I like. Investigative reporting is excludable, so not really a public good. What you call an unfair competitive advantage is really just a cost advantage. The right way to think about this is information asymmetry. Its not that there are not real journalists producing real news. Its that they can't credibly promise that their news is the real news and the fake news is the fake news. So the question here is: What can we do to allow consumers to distinguish real journalism from fake news? What can we do that will allow journalists to show their audience that they are credible sources of information?
He seems to skip that having state financially sponsored news, might put people in the same reality. But it's then state approved reality to receive funding... And does anyone currently trust the state?
If we're going to trust the state ever again, it's going to be a completely different kind of state. Either we do "The Great Reject" or suffer "The Great Reset".
People in a democracy get the politicians they deserve.. So much nonsense in the comments putting democracy down, I bet all of the comments come from inside democracies so the irony is fabulous 😂
“Investigative journalism should be a public good and funded by the state”. So once the state is funding investigative journalism how much investigative journalism will be directed at corruption in the state? Do you even understand incentives.
Socialism/Communism? Isn't that like conflating Republican/Nazi or Capitalism/Fascism? Expanding healthcare, education and wages is not the same as Uncle Sam owning all private property and controlling all means of production. The roads you drive on everyday, the streetlights, the flood control, the police station, fire department, school and hospital you pass by? American socialism at work for you. Paid for by all of your neighbors. You're welcome!
Democracy requires a well-educated public ... sadly, we don't have that. People scatter into social media bubbles where alternative-facts rule. Fixing our problems now require populist solutions, focusing on what matters. Fixing our problems later requires investment in education and media literacy.
I am so glad I live in a Republic not a Democracy because these people are crazy this guy is talking about freedom and protecting facts yet then complains about people trying to speak their minds and act free.
Very interest take on local media. Google news had it's part on marginalize certain local media and this are the news we can check and the journalists we can talk to.
That's only part of the picture. We already passed that. Jordan Peterson (and Jung) teaches us that although there are many different ways to see the world, there are some narratives that are able to stick because they have higher truth value. The internet help reveal these truths thus will make a better world.
We should never promote the idea of accusing and being adversarial towards the government that provides so much for the people. It creates civil unrest and political destabilization.
We should never promote obedience towards a government that is unaccountable to its citizenry. It creates authoritarian governments that act with impunity.
+Robert Braun I don't support Trump, but many of you people wouldn't know (or care) what an authoritarian regime was if the iron boot was stomping you down. I'm Italian and had family who fought and died against Mussolini, you people have no clue what authoritarianism (or Fascism) is while you sip your Starbucks lattes on your comfortable leather chairs on your $1000 laptops claiming you're oppressed.
@@VaqueroCoyote Shouldn't we be aware of authoritarian tactics now, before the jack booted thugs are kicking in our doors. Education is proactive, easier now than after the military coup.
Very interesting argument, though one could say that the most significant contribution of the internet was its ability to transfer mountains of raw data in such a short period of time.
Interesting observation. And thousands of people were employed as operators to support it. The first trans-atlantic cable was finished in 1866. It took another 20-some years to establish time zones, both supporting imperialism.
Although the infrastructure has changed in the details the principles are the same. For example when it comes to supply and demand if 'powerful' technologies while the class structures in colonialism was like shifting sand only based on the superficial like to show or not to show more skin past the vitals or not or not in comfortable weather in the shade. When it comes to so called advanced technical expertise the same was true about knitting when knitting needles were too expensive to buy for most people unless you were royalty living in a castle. There were knitting guilds which were composed most of men because women at the time were less able to prevent thefts of the expensive to buy knitting. Until knitting machines were invented which the queen prevented at first from being invested in out of fear that unemployment would rise to high. Most people back then were not bragging about their new invention while trying to make everyone believe they invented it all on their own for some reason too unless they were braggarts wearing flashy emperors new clothes back then too. The problem is that there are too many people who are defining reality based on their own biases. Biases like believing that once someone ever shows any signs of an unexplained fever always a fever in them to fear as evil in only the one person instead of recognizing the guy next door who is predictable once you get to know him well with his personality disorder instead leading him to be often doing his favorite parlour tricks while saying to all those whom he believes as inferior often, "Don't you know who I am?"
All he is saying is, if you're going to tax corporations and people, then use some of that tax money for better education and truth in media so the public will be better informed to recognize and dismiss propaganda. Democracies can only work if the populous is well informed, the alternative is corporations will tell you how to think for their own benefit, or conspiracy minded people will get you to think how they want you to think for their own benefit.
Chad Atchison democracies only work with a population educated enough to believe they think for themselves but ignorant enough to not realize they don't.
A democracy is simply mob rule and a mob well-clothed, and well-fed are no less a mob.
Ok. That costs money. There is a point when people will say: "Enough with all this truth nonsense, i want cheaper healthcare." And even if MAXIMUM TRUTH gets achieved, people will dismiss it in a heartbeat for a version with more good feelz.
No, there will always be conspiracy theories and alternatives to "reality"
"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." -Winston Churchill
He is wrong
Personally, I don't think we can expect any cooperation from big business or government: all we can do is create a movement of integrated local communities, but that should be sufficient as a powerful and irrepressible starting point.
You can expect cooperation from government by running good candidates who can win and supporting them. Garbage in/Garbage Out.
@@gregorybrian that doesn't work. People vote for the people they know are more likely to win, and this reduces choice. What we need is for everyone to share the power of the state, but vastly restricted, so that we can all have the ability to legally defend ourselves.
@PeopleAreDumbNow Great name!
My biggest gripe with the current population is Goldfish Memory Syndrome.
3% is all that is needed for traction, 3% of the population started the revolutionary war against England. Note, places like Snopes say this is false. But realize that fact checkers are just opinions, as indicated in the court case vs Facebook 'Stossel v. Meta Platforms', where FB admits their fact checkers are just opinion writers
@peoplearedumbnow3886 But why do you think smaller governments would be less corrupt? No matter what country you look at, you usually have more corruption happening at the local levels. Most political assassinations in Russia happen between local governors and investigators/jornalists, for example; As I see it, a national government, if subject to democratic voting, can do a much better job rejecting corruption since most local corrupters, which are the majority of corruptors, would be seen as small fish and much more easly demonized to support one candidate or another while being very hard to defend. Just as a scenario
I bought the book and I failed to create a dictatorship in my local country!! WTF!!! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!!!
Try harder. Put your back into it. Work will set you free.
@W B It was the slogan the Nazis had above the entrance to some of their concentration camps.
You weren't reading 1984
It is good to see dictatorships fail and collapse.
Bidens doing it in mine rn
This is why apps like NextDoor are really important. We need to re-establish communities which can then help to re-establish local news. Not that an app will solve anything but it's an easy start.
And Buy Nothing, give where you live and create the connections in a neighbourhood
NextDoor and such apps were created to profile people and neighborhoods. While a good start, anything technological is recorded indefinitely at your local NSA data centers
Best way to build; "group think" aka "political correctness"....
If we are thinking NextDoor will save us then we are all doomed. This is the most censored APP I have ever seen. LOL!
This is happening in every country as we speak.
By "democracy" championers themselves
I agreed I was normal person until Covid. Now I have a whole new bunch of labels. I also now believe that democracy is nothing but A mirage. Vote for the blue team or the red team but both of the teams are working for somebody else. No matter what team you vote for you seem to be ending up with WEF team
4:07 - 5:10 Look at Facebook, Twitter, RUclips, Google, ect. today. There is an algorithm to deliver what you need to hear/see, and more importantly to stop what you "don't need to hear/see". The worst part of this is it is an algorithm, so its not even an individual or a group necessarily. 1:52 - 3:28 Look at the last couple years specifically, Medicine, Race, Sexuality, War efforts, just to name a few. It doesn't matter what opinion you come to upon any of these individual points, the point is you draw an opinion, influenced to you by an algorithm. Then emotionally grouping with those who draw the same opinion, and rivaling those who differ.
This is one of thee most intellegent videos I've watched in a while. Great presentation!
The only solution is to teach poeple how to discern truth for themselves or they will always be susceptible to lies.
Yep, individual self autonomy, responsibility, and cognitive capacity.
Learning how to truly use cognition rather than simply memorising accepted concepts.
e.e. cummings: The less real something is, the more people want it.
@Jason Bonaparte Not always, but clearly to a significant degree for the present. We do make some progress as we move along.
Well, one of the problems of truth is that it generally involves some uncomfortable and even painful soul searching. We've become very deconditioned when it comes to changing our own narratives and even beliefs. We've been literally drowning in our affluence. But I still agree with him. We have to step out of fantasy land and start recognising the things we are resistant to, because the longer we leave it, the worse it gets.
4:40 - spot on and a lot of people don’t realize this. Target marketing
Think about those ads that Steve Bannon made that targeted one person. It appears to be a waste of money but not if you win the levers of power. Also, those Trump voters now are be constantly follow up targeted and locked in to having to support him to justify their previous switch from blue to red.
True it was a tool for learning new things now we can't even have the thought process too do that.
Targeted individual
This guy always explains things perfectly.
Reas his books. They're amazing.
Please, put the subtitles. The transcription of the description only cover a half of the speaking!
These comments amaze me. Americans can even manage to make a video about authoritarian regimes all about themselves! This is not about republicans or democrats, people. Wanna take notes and reflect on your political dilemmas? Fine. But not everything is about you 🤦🏻♂️
It shouldn't be surprising. Americans make up a significant proportion of RUclips's viewers and the information being presented is highly relevant to their society. Hence, they want to discuss. Not a problem. I'd imagine Britons and Germans are doing the same to a lesser degree, and should be encouraged to do so.
The whole world belongs to America, and I wont let some pinko commie tell me otherwise
Lol, using sweeping generalizations like "Americans." It's funny how Euorpeans will take advantage of any opportunity to make petty jabs at America and have the self-unawareness to imply they're concieted.
PayaM Sh Let's Talk about Sweden then, Yes.
god shut up loser
If I don't like local news is because they are drama queens, they put emphasis on worthless stuff, I would like them to be factual and would try to appeal to our intelligence rather then our emotions.
Bravo! this is exactly what's going on. I fell victim to this emotional name calling, pick a side, bullshit before the election. I had to stop watching the news and get off social media for the most part( obviously I'm on youtube ). The anger started to fade about 6 months in. I was tricked and manipulated as were most Americans. I am much more skeptical about what I hear. I hope I have learned from this experience.
Many are going through the same experience, me included. Lets hope sanity and healthy skepticism (to all claims and viewpoints) will prevail, and we ditch the cynicism and blind ideological obedience assaulting us from every angle.
The bigger problem is that this is rather formative, in the sense that people are not just in a simple position of judging the rights and wrongs of arguments. Rather there is an overall ideological and media culture that goes on to 'nefariously format how to think' in the middle to long term. Thereafter the damage is done as such a manipulation becomes an internalized mental reflex from 'bad education' and reinforced by immediate and remote significant others.
It is critically by cultivating a cultural and media environment valuing and creatively upholding a credible intellectual public debate that such a 'bad education' can be overcome. But then there are powerfully invested business, media and social stakes that work on the basis of a failing intellectually credible public debate, so that policy issues can then default to their positions and interests.
Thus from the bigger perspective, it is an issue of grasping who benefits from failing and disrupted political engagement with public issues. The fact is more than just one party such influence runs across the parties, and it is thus very naive to think that such an issue can be resolved within the framework of the two party political system. Consider for instance the Trump tax cuts, even Trump was willing to raise the tax rate from the initial proposal. The question can be asked why will the opposition prefer to absolutely do nothing (not even bring up a bargaining chip like support or partial support in return for a higher threshold or say infrastructure project) in the name of a certain ineffective political purism. When such defaulting decisions add up in the final analysis the supposed confrontational politics turns out to be 'in effect a lure for fooling the mass of the people that they wield power' whereas across the years the real politics is being done by default for vested interests.
Correct. You can thank Project Mockingbird for infusing (and still today) spreading propaganda. There's a war for the mind and most are casualties.
And then a Epoch Times ad comes up after this.
🗽💨 🏌️♂️
THIS GUY IS GOLD. WE WANT MORE!!!
Nice piece. I think that a big part of this is the FCC reinstating the equal time rule, at least for broadcast and cable.
True. Eliminating that FCC rule was the start of fake news in America. However, it will always be necessary to be vigilant against authoritarianism. The Left and Right both have authoritarian members. Often people who scream the loudest about justice want to force their version of "justice" on others by violence. An obvious example is vegans dreaming of the death sentence for meat eaters.
@@robinlillian9471 I totally agree with you... we should be divided on Authoritarians and Libertarians... not left and right
Seeing this makes me think we are more stuffed than I thought we were...
Wow, one video is all it takes? Weak mind allowing it to be manipulated
@@johnfarlio1830 why this?
@@johnfarlio1830 ok snowflake
I've been shouting this from the rooftops for years as did those before me. We are literally here now.
the broader the sources of news the better, especially news coverage about the US from foreign countries
If you remain vigilant about the negatives, the network remains a powerful tool. It's certainly not automatic for people to become conditioned to emotional response.
Schools should be teaching students how to identify and reject propaganda....every year so that they can keep pace combating new tactics. Unwitting slaves to Godwin's law and the bandwagon effect...and way too many logical fallacies out there. I wonder if there is a way to combat the bots that reinforce our biases and push to absurd extremes? Maybe like a spam filter to provide a diversity of perspectives.
yea, sadly, i agree with you.
John Bucker You basically said how to combat the propaganda bots in your first statement, and that is through education, educating people how to recognize and reject propaganda.
In order to assist your statement above, I'd like to bring up how it is just like something, something, something, Adolf Hitler. Do I win?
Controlling what children perceive as propaganda? I got a bad feeling about this idea.
@@rchuso yes, you win, my character has been sufficiently attacked, thus ending the debate.
I dont get why people think democracies can't be athoritarian
Since covid they are more authoritarian then ever
How non-authoritarian do you feel in your democracy right now?
Managed democracy isn't just a Helldivers meme, it's a real political ideology
@@Aivottaja Not North Korea level authoritarian but it's definitely there. And only getting worse.
Brilliant understanding of human behavior
What an amazing video! I really enjoyed it.
Very useful! Thanks!
Did Mr. Snyder suggest that the solution to avoid having authoritarian government grow around us is to implement state-run news media?
No, I think that's you.
@@oldishandwoke-ish1181 Starting at 7:05, Mr. Snyder begins describing his vision of a government implemented tax to generate funds that would support approved media sources that report approved facts. He didn't specify how those funds would be managed, but clearly a ministry of truth could handle it.
@@misterlyle. Tax big companies to support local news is what I heard. You are obviously a Murdoch devotee who hears "Pol Pot" any time taxing the rich is mentioned....
What to do when the movie studios, the news establishment and the government are all walking in the same direction and treating the dissenting voices as witches?
I think that is where we expect the big system to head toward a collapse, meanwhile we can build resilient smaller local things that will survive the crash and help rebuild.
Professor, yes you can classify governance as authoritarian v democracy. You can also classify nations by majority of population who feel their government is making their lives better or worst. In many big democracies, independent survey shows the majority believe their life will not be better in the next 5 years, where as in many authoritarian regimes, the majority of population believes that their lives will be better in the next 5y, just as it had been in the previous 5. You can call them declining v rising states or by any other names of you want.
That's laughable. The authoritarian regime survey is not anonymous. When your government is holding a gun to your head, of course you're going to say they believe it will be better. We all know what happens to the opponents of Putin, and the CCP. Death.
😍😍 my dude. Keep bringing the public sphere.
This was much better then I thought it would be. Just one word I want to edit in what you said. You said that THE GOVERNMENT needs to be supporting more local news and creating more local content. When the government creates the news you are moving towards an authoritarian regime.
The more powerful the government is, the more likely it will be to turn authoritarian. Autocrats love to grab power.
I think it is better to have many competing autocrats like business leaders. They can only be so horrible before an employee will leave and find a better job.They could also become their own autocrat if they work hard enough.
He is correct on local news. It should be calibrated to the correct degree of "local." When I first moved to Phoenix, there were several young men shot and killed in south and west Phoenix every day. Mostly young black and Hispanic young men shooting each other. After the paper shifted to a more specific local section, I could easily have believed that all of Phoenix was just like the Princess resort. It isn't.
Another thing that new is that ANYONE can say ANYTHING and get millions of people to listen.
Be an influencer.
Be a RUclips star.
You don't have to do anything worthwhile,
Just be who you are.
and thats whats destroying the internet and weaponized against us. Misinformation and conspiracy theories and plain false biased information being fed to us and our children. Before you needed to work years in journalism to be able to broadcast your story to hundreds of thousands of people, that was the gate keeper. Now anyone with a loud mouth can speak and spread all types of fake news. So dangerous for society as a whole. This is why alexjones has millions of followers
@@reggieangus5325 Nowadays people follow champagne socialists like HasanAbi or other socialist influencers on twitch who don't produce anything of worth and only complain about "muh capitalism" while getting rich on a capitalist platform. The hypocrisy is far more annoying than anything RusselBrand or AlexJones can come up with.
Please Do the How to build a Democracy
pretty sure this is like every country in the world now
Yup, sad
The major roadblock I see to this constructive potential is the reality of SOCIOPATHS who pursue power for its own sake & abuse it readily. These sociopath things gain power & money by disrupting constructive efforts.
It sounds like the thesis is an independent media is broken, and we need governmental spending and intervention to right the ship. Would that be a correct assessment of your position?
Thank You Very Much
For Your Indeep Analysis
And Recommendations As Such.
Man, I love this guy!
7:40 this is precisely how OAN viewers are thinking right now.
OAN, just read the other day QOP! Republicans, America needs you. Wake up!💜
I disagree with the notion that the internet promotes old world-views over new ones. I see far more diversity of opinion on the internet than within the mainstream media. Also the internet is the one promoting the concept of independent research while the MSM is the one saying things like "it's illegal to read wikileaks".
It is because the internet has the most diversity of view-point that old ideologies are kept alive. However that doesn't stop the internet from promoting new perspectives along side them. Next, this person appears to be very concerned about the voices of experts getting drowned out in the midst of independent thought.
To this i would reiterate the point that the internet is the one incentivizing independent research. Before, only the experts pre-approved by the media and large corporations were given a platform. This didn't bode well during the Satanic Panic in the 80's nor was it good for the public during MCcarthyism in the 50's because the "experts" being brought on were not really experts but rather, they were sensationalists.
Finally, while i agree that the internet is designed to put people into echo chambers, so is every other type of media. TV companies track ratings and modify their approach to give viewers more of what they want. The only difference is that TV has been corporatized. It no longer consists of independent commentators that act in the interest of the public.
In short, the internet, like all other mediums for information will put you in an echo chamber. However, the internet is also the only one of these mediums that allow person to person communication and feedback. This helps the audience to reflect on whether or not the information is credible or consistent with the general narrative surrounding it.
Best video I’ve ever seen on such topic.
Check out Nicholas Carr's talks if you like this one.
Thank you!
Now I can build a dictatorship
Just wait i finish the school...
Great talk, but there's a big problem with what he said about addressing the problem by making news a public service.
That's exactly what the BBC was meant to be in the UK (and why anyone who watches ANY tv channel is required to buy a licence which contributes to its funding, as a tax for a public service) but over the decades it's gotten seriously biased despite the efforts of many individuals within it to remain apolitical. The problem is that since a certain type of education is massively overrepresented in the people the BBC wants to hire, the view of the whole organisation gets slanted towards what that education teaches, and the people who've had it don't think they're taking a "political" position, just a sophisticated one.
Then you end up with an organisation that (a) does not have the personal connection to real people that he talked about, (b) is resented by a substantial number of people who are forced to pay for something they don't watch and don't trust, (c) has more trouble acknowledging and addressing its own biases than a more openly political station would, and thus struggles to pull off the self-reflection that they would need to "reforest" their viewership, and (d) has little motive to do so anyway because they are not in danger of losing money unless people are willing to cancel their licences altogether (which only became a genuine threat very recently when the internet made it easier to live with no TV).
The BBC had a good run, and enjoyed several decades when it was (deservedly) more trusted than many other news channels, but that just allowed it to coast on its reputation for so long that it now doesn't know how to reform itself into a genuinely neutral and trustworthy channel.
Big Brother just watched
They thought television was going to make the world better and increase educational levels, too.
What is the basis of the claim that we internalize the cost of pollution? If that were true, we would not have a human-induced climate instability problem. (We would not have a rate of emission of fossil carbon that exceeds what most people think is acceptable. We don't even bother to find out what most people think an acceptable limit on the rate of emission of fossil carbon would be.)
It's not an option to control the internet because, that power to control information will be desired by the corrupt. People should be able to make up their minds by themselves without someone telling them what a fact is.
I hope you have a good day.
You can NOT make up your mind about a fact. Reality exists whether you want it to or not. Covid is not a hoax. You can die from it whether you believe in it or not. You are entitled to your own opinions, but a fact is a fact, whether you like it or not. Attempting to ignore or deny facts will only get you killed.
@@robinlillian9471 I didn't say wether or not I believed covid was a hoax or not. I absolutely believe it to be real however, the severity of the sickness is way overblown. Yes it's dangerous; Yes people have died from it; yes we should take basic precautions to curtail it's spread; but shutting down everything; persecuting people who want to protest against the orders whilst complying with them; and calling any dissenting opinions an attempted murder of the elderly is as wrong as calling it an outright hoax.
If you want me to say more on what I meant please let me know. Have a good day regardless.
this aged like fine wine.
Listening to this in 2020, I find that tech made many dumber n tech is censoring all opposing voices.
Of course it will be a god damn author that will so eloquently describe what I felt and thought for a couple of years now, but couldn't put the finger on. I just can't connect the words.
I think I need to learn how to write... I hope there is time for that.
im sorry to say but you cant overthrow a authoritarian regime unless you have support of the military or have foreign military help
A lot of what Snyders says here is not wrong but simply trivial. An new Authoritarianism is not only a matter of the form of governance but also a matter of societal structures.
In retrospect to the internet I think social media needs more social responsibility like Facebook it's more background vetting, spam, fake news and red flagging for anti social language/content. We need Norton 360 but a lot much more like it.🎯
Came in good time for Brazil! #EleNão #NotHim!
How to build an authoritarian regime - Censorship because lies need it for survival, use 'fact checkers' to control public perception, use the Authoritarian Tip Toe technique
Im still sonfused about how the free exchange of ideas limit peoples ability to rationally sift through media sources for relevancy or bias
Forget about the comments, just listen to this man. Everybody tries to pursue its agenda on the comments. Stay factual!
That's kinda a flawed logic tbh. Your basically telling people to 'only' listen to a singular source, which said source can or may not be entirely true.
For a person to stay factual, one must gather information from multiple sources, then compare said sources with each-other to find aligning statments and weed out non-aligning ones, so that in the end a person can inevitably find the truth.
@@guntherdoesaliltrolling5757 You are right.
@Spartan 506 lol?
I don't love the externality comparison. Typically with externalities, there are two agents in an economic transaction, but other agents who did not participate are directly affected. Polluting a river directly subjects non-participant (non consenting) agents to that negative burden. People make a personal choice to consume media, they just have no idea if it is 'quality' or 'true' information. A more relevant economic analogy would seem to be food labeling or booze labeling. Were not gonna stop you from drinking piss booze, but you should know what you're consuming, and a society should do their best to provide that information. Likewise with information, society should try to grade sources by reliability, quality, bias, etc. The trick is doing that without falling into "Ministry of Truth" type black mirror situations.
If you implied state funded media we'd be worse off.
I hope his thoughts are better organized in the book than in this vid. He comes across as credible because of his calm demeanor and purposeful pauses, but any salient arguments he might have get lost in a sea of intellectualizing, free association, and historical asides.
Spot on.
Just imagine if one company owned and controlled all books in the world. That's more our situation today.
One of the greatest examples of authoritarianism is Sweden - Sweden truly is an authoritarian country.
So relevant today as to why Democrats lost. They don’t need to blame themselves.
A republic is better than a democracy. Also, "us versus them" politics make sense when it's the oppressed versus the oppressor class.
I miss subtitles
One of dangerous authoritarian regime is Sri Lanka former president mahinda rajapaksha’s regime it is famous as rajapaksa regime
Thank you.
Ummm 2020/21......
Great ideas we should have heeded a LONG time ago.
“If we like democracy, freedom, the rule of law...” some brilliant insights with possible solutions.
He talked about the introduction of a new medium like the inet or printed book being a time of sorting out inherent problems associated with the technology. Just last weekend I happen to read about James 1st publishing a treatise on witchcraft, and wondered if that influenced the trials at Salem, and of course how a certain candidate demonized a certain female candidate in 2016. That demonization deflected his blatant moral deficiencies and scapegoated someone else to the point that his victim was said to run a sex ring in a pizza parlor, a story fantastical beyond alien conspiracies, yet people believed it and acted upon it. It’s an amazing time we live in, innovative technology that should be helpful instead being harnessed to encourage backsliding intellectually to propaganda vulnerability levels that must have existed in 1500 among some segments of the population. Is it just me or does anyone else find it strange that not even 100 years after nazi propaganda and McCarthyism, the concept of ‘what is factual’ is actually a required topic of popular discussion?
David Giles
And the insane & horrible human being who was McCarthy’s lawyer was also Trump’s main mentor. I don’t think that’s just a coincidence either.
Capitalism IS 1984. Has been all along.
1984 is a perfect depiction of the USA, brainwashing everyone into thinking the Communists were the bad guys to justify Commiting genocide against them, as well as arresting, torturing and killing anyone suspected of being a Communist, down to making everyone afraid and hostile towards Communism to this day.
McCarthyism and the Red Scare has completely distorted and altered history. Ask the majority of people who lived under Socialism and they will tell you what they think.
Hell. Under Capitalism, we have devices spying on us 24/7. The very devices we used to communicate are Big Brother Capitalism watching us. Controlling what we think. To keep itself in power.
Truly frightening.
Communists ARE the ones rebelling against and exposing the system. Not trying to implant an authoritarian regime, but on the contrary, to dismantle one.
We americans and brazilians already live in 1984. It IS our reality. We need to dismantle the system, folks. The system is not your friend.
I don't think that externalities, public goods, or unfair competitive advantages are really helpful ways to think about this. For the externality, it sounds like me knowing the facts should make me more likely to vote in ways that benefit others, but is it true? It could just make me better able to vote in ways that advance some narrow sectional interest or fringe ideology that I like. Investigative reporting is excludable, so not really a public good. What you call an unfair competitive advantage is really just a cost advantage. The right way to think about this is information asymmetry. Its not that there are not real journalists producing real news. Its that they can't credibly promise that their news is the real news and the fake news is the fake news. So the question here is: What can we do to allow consumers to distinguish real journalism from fake news? What can we do that will allow journalists to show their audience that they are credible sources of information?
He seems to skip that having state financially sponsored news, might put people in the same reality. But it's then state approved reality to receive funding... And does anyone currently trust the state?
If we're going to trust the state ever again, it's going to be a completely different kind of state. Either we do "The Great Reject" or suffer "The Great Reset".
How much pollution does the internet cause?🌏And how can we secure our internet from sabotage?
I totally agree with this! Oh... wait
I’m probably gonna be put on a list for being here
But I need the information
Can you get John stossel to make a video
how do you stop one? the simple answer is disobey and don't ever surrender your weapons
Experts in areas feel about their truths too. Had no critique untill 3:22.
People in a democracy get the politicians they deserve..
So much nonsense in the comments putting democracy down, I bet all of the comments come from inside democracies so the irony is fabulous 😂
Excellent
“Investigative journalism should be a public good and funded by the state”.
So once the state is funding investigative journalism how much investigative journalism will be directed at corruption in the state? Do you even understand incentives.
Socialism/Communism? Isn't that like conflating Republican/Nazi or Capitalism/Fascism? Expanding healthcare, education and wages is not the same as Uncle Sam owning all private property and controlling all means of production. The roads you drive on everyday, the streetlights, the flood control, the police station, fire department, school and hospital you pass by? American socialism at work for you. Paid for by all of your neighbors. You're welcome!
Beau Crawford wtf are you on about?
Democracy requires a well-educated public ... sadly, we don't have that.
People scatter into social media bubbles where alternative-facts rule.
Fixing our problems now require populist solutions, focusing on what matters.
Fixing our problems later requires investment in education and media literacy.
@Spartan 506 Do that and corporations rule.
I am so glad I live in a Republic not a Democracy because these people are crazy this guy is talking about freedom and protecting facts yet then complains about people trying to speak their minds and act free.
Very interest take on local media. Google news had it's part on marginalize certain local media and this are the news we can check and the journalists we can talk to.
Than you now I can build my dictatorship (:
That's only part of the picture. We already passed that. Jordan Peterson (and Jung) teaches us that although there are many different ways to see the world, there are some narratives that are able to stick because they have higher truth value. The internet help reveal these truths thus will make a better world.
There is a point i dont get, how do you know what narratives has higher value? How the heads talks, build arguments and so on?
It's always strange to hear purportedly educated people misuse "I" or "me".
Be helpful if the point was stated pyramid style, in the beginning.
Masterpiece!
Best book I ever brought. Klaus Schwab A.k.a. Dr evil
We should never promote the idea of accusing and being adversarial towards the government that provides so much for the people. It creates civil unrest and political destabilization.
We should never promote obedience towards a government that is unaccountable to its citizenry. It creates authoritarian governments that act with impunity.
Struggling to understand authoritarian behavior vs normal behavior? Learn about the two main parenting styles.
Authoritarian behavior will radicalize people and will get them to hate you. That's the main difference.
Bring this guy back to talk about AI
He makes some great points, but the Trumpsters on gonna be triggered.
Actually, he seems to have triggered both sides.
I think hes talking about you specifically
+Robert Braun
I don't support Trump, but many of you people wouldn't know (or care) what an authoritarian regime was if the iron boot was stomping you down. I'm Italian and had family who fought and died against Mussolini, you people have no clue what authoritarianism (or Fascism) is while you sip your Starbucks lattes on your comfortable leather chairs on your $1000 laptops claiming you're oppressed.
Good job keeping the debate about facts over emotions. 👍
@@VaqueroCoyote Shouldn't we be aware of authoritarian tactics now, before the jack booted thugs are kicking in our doors. Education is proactive, easier now than after the military coup.
Telegraph In 19th century beats both books and Internet time to communicate across empires went from months to minutes
Very interesting argument, though one could say that the most significant contribution of the internet was its ability to transfer mountains of raw data in such a short period of time.
Interesting observation. And thousands of people were employed as operators to support it. The first trans-atlantic cable was finished in 1866. It took another 20-some years to establish time zones, both supporting imperialism.
this part where you realise the far left and right are one in the same in the message there trying to send and methods they use
Although the infrastructure has changed in the details the principles are the same. For example when it comes to supply and demand if 'powerful' technologies while the class structures in colonialism was like shifting sand only based on the superficial like to show or not to show more skin past the vitals or not or not in comfortable weather in the shade. When it comes to so called advanced technical expertise the same was true about knitting when knitting needles were too expensive to buy for most people unless you were royalty living in a castle. There were knitting guilds which were composed most of men because women at the time were less able to prevent thefts of the expensive to buy knitting. Until knitting machines were invented which the queen prevented at first from being invested in out of fear that unemployment would rise to high. Most people back then were not bragging about their new invention while trying to make everyone believe they invented it all on their own for some reason too unless they were braggarts wearing flashy emperors new clothes back then too. The problem is that there are too many people who are defining reality based on their own biases. Biases like believing that once someone ever shows any signs of an unexplained fever always a fever in them to fear as evil in only the one person instead of recognizing the guy next door who is predictable once you get to know him well with his personality disorder instead leading him to be often doing his favorite parlour tricks while saying to all those whom he believes as inferior often, "Don't you know who I am?"
Oh God we're doomed aren't we