The Political Thread

[The Legendary Shark]

Just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it is wrong.

But if you don't understand something, how do you know if it's right or wrong? If someone tells you that 1+1=2 and you accept that without understanding the basic mathematical processes involved, what happens when someone else tells you that 6x9=42?* Most of us have only limited understanding of things simply because there are so many things to understand.

It's okay to listen to authorities on subjects but dangerous to accept what they say without question. It's always as well to at least try to understand the subject at hand, I think.

*Well, you get a best-selling book, obviously, but that's about it.

[Jim_Campbell]

I have, you don't agree with me,that's fine.

You haven't. You've said 'sovereignty'. I asked whether that was it, whether you could point to one tangible benefit that might outweigh all the very real repercussions of Brexit, and you said "Let's just leave it there, I don't want to talk about it."

I can't disagree with you, because you haven't offered one single point of substance with which I can agree or disagree.

[Tjm86]

... You get people like Gove laying the seeds for this way in advance, saying we should just believe in ourselves rather than experts. But this is also a worrying area of politics, because it becomes about rousing the mob with bullshit, and being able to say whatever the hell you like with no comeback.

I think that this is the most disquieting thing about Trump and something that the media have failed to see coming.  For along time there have been complaints about editorial bias and excessive influence of media owners.  Rather than dealing with it properly and trying to come to a balanced position, some news outlets have played up to it thus reinforcing that perception. 

Now we have a president ramping up that distrust.  The claim of 'fake news' is amusing on one level as it comes across as the whining of a petulant child who is not getting there own way.  The question is how is this fitting in to the narrative of biased media and what will this mean in the long term for our trust in the reliability of the information we receive.  This is where it starts to get worrying.  It is easy enough to guide people toward making poor choices if they are doubting what they know.  The information age seems to be rapidly giving way to the 'disinformation age'.  Some folks have wondered what it would have been like under Hitler or Stalin with modern propaganda tools.  It's probably a bit hysterical to think that we might be about to find out but I'm not sure.

[Goaty]

No Europe courts means no human rights and they will cut many benefits.

[Old Tankie]

Let's just say that I don't believe some of the things you say will happen, will happen, and I don't care about some of the others.
Employment is at record levels, interest rates are low, the economy is growing, inflation is below the Bank of England target, where is the disaster? Oh I know we haven't left yet.

[The Legendary Shark]

... You get people like Gove laying the seeds for this way in advance, saying we should just believe in ourselves rather than experts. But this is also a worrying area of politics, because it becomes about rousing the mob with bullshit, and being able to say whatever the hell you like with no comeback.

I think that this is the most disquieting thing about Trump and something that the media have failed to see coming.  For along time there have been complaints about editorial bias and excessive influence of media owners.  Rather than dealing with it properly and trying to come to a balanced position, some news outlets have played up to it thus reinforcing that perception. 

Now we have a president ramping up that distrust.  The claim of 'fake news' is amusing on one level as it comes across as the whining of a petulant child who is not getting there own way.  The question is how is this fitting in to the narrative of biased media and what will this mean in the long term for our trust in the reliability of the information we receive.  This is where it starts to get worrying.  It is easy enough to guide people toward making poor choices if they are doubting what they know.  The information age seems to be rapidly giving way to the 'disinformation age'.  Some folks have wondered what it would have been like under Hitler or Stalin with modern propaganda tools.  It's probably a bit hysterical to think that we might be about to find out but I'm not sure.

This is why I think it's important that we all brush up on the many logical fallacies (it's surprising how many there are and also how easy it is to fall into the trap of using them oneself - I know I have been guilty but try my best not to be any more, with varying levels of success) so that we can all judge for ourselves whether what a politician, expert, the legacy media or the alternative media says is anything like substantial, let alone truthful.

[Tjm86]

Perhaps what is most important is that we are able to keep an open mind, consider alternative view points and understand the limitations of the methodology that produces the information that we are given.  Economists and meteorologists are touted as expert when they deal with possibilities and probabilities.  Doctors are touted as infallible when in fact they are just highly skilled, particularly in risk management.  It just seems that we have strayed into total tinfoil hat territory rather than intelligent skepticism territory.  Mind you, watching baby Trump in the White House it is understandable as to why.

[The Legendary Shark]

Absolutely.

Always remember, though, that an open mind is like an open wound; if you don't look after it, it'll get infected.

[Tjm86]

I always thought it was 'A mind is a wonderful thing to waste!'   

In the same vein as "reality is a state of mind brought on by lack of alcohol."

[The Legendary Shark]

Heh.

That Wikipedia list of fallacies is a bit daunting and so here's one that's easier to use, for anyone who's interested.

[IndigoPrime]

Employment is at record levels

Largely bolstered by a huge number of people on zero-hours contracts, freelancers not making nearly enough to survive, and with wages in general having long been decoupled from inflation. So, yes, lots of people have jobs, but many cannot survive with them, and many others have seen stagnant wages for years – and this isn't improving.

While this is occurring, sterling is getting a kicking, adversely affecting anything purchased in dollars, and imports. The net result is people already squeezed have seen increases in fuel, power, and food. (And anyone fairly well off will find luxuries cost more – books; software; technology.)

Moreover, as the UK removes itself from the EU, there is no evidence whatsoever that we will have a net increase in employment opportunities. Instead, removing ourselves from Euratom will likely lead to a great many job losses. And the same goes for many other agencies that we'll no longer be a part of, or that will be removed.

The last of those things is, of course, speculation. But the others are happening right now. I suppose Brexit proponents will still cling to the belief that short-term hardship will result in a big improvement down the road. But given that we'll knacker the best-possible deal with the world's largest market, god knows how.

[Old Tankie]

I seem to have more confidence in the EU leadership than you do. The idea that they won't want a good deal with the UK I just find bizarre. The UK has a massive trade deficit with the rest of the EU, are they really going to risk the jobs of many of their own citizens just to punish the UK? I know the EU, along with others, has ruined Greece but surely they won't want to do it again?

[Professor Bear]

From Rationalwiki:

The backfire effect occurs when, in the face of contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get stronger. The effect has been demonstrated experimentally in psychological tests, where subjects are given data that either reinforces or goes against their existing biases - and in most cases people can be shown to increase their confidence in their prior position regardless of the evidence they were faced with.
In a pessimistic sense, this makes most refutations useless.

[Modern Panther]

Two years of negotiations and a 60 Billion Euro price tag
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876

[Jim_Campbell]

Let's just say that I don't believe some of the things you say will happen, will happen, and I don't care about some of the others.

Specifically, what don't you think will happen, and what do you consider unimportant? We seem to be locked into a course of action that seems like lunacy to me (with the proviso that, personally, a lot of my predicted outcomes will work out fantastically well for me) and if we're stuck with it, I'd like to know.

Also, I asked you for one tangible benefit. Right now, your response seems somewhat evasive. This is your preferred course of action: reassure me, please.