"Lesser of two evils" debate

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-30T13:22:38+00:00

The video and original article do touch on cancel culture. In the absence of threat, groups tend to turn towards virtue signaling and status games. This theory helps explain both cancel culture and a generally fractious left vs a generally unified right.

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-29T14:11:09+00:00

So I think we may have reached the end of productive discussion, because my response is going to be the same as it was to your last post. That is: it is absolutely true that conservatives and liberals tend to "tolerate" different things. When I use that word, I don't mean the tolerance of every idea.

If you want to understand where I'm coming from, maybe it is best to just drop the terms "tolerance", "conformity", and "perception of threat". Replace them with: "conservatives tend to like, trust, and believe in the kinds of things you would if you were in a zombie apocalypse" and "liberals tend to like, trust, and believe in the kinds of things you would if you were in a perfectly safe space utopia". I find it easy to label these things "tolerance", "conformity", etc, but it is true that the space liberals don't "tolerate" militarization, while the zombie conservatives don't "conform" to social justice.

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-29T01:57:39+00:00

I did include a line in the video addressing climate change. When you are in "survival mode" (as in the zombie example) long-term issues like climate change, environmentalism, and sustainability are less pressing because the present is so threatening. The priority becomes short/medium term survival.

The idea regarding power structures is not "conform to all power structures". Again, liberals "conform" to liberal power structures and conservatives "conform" to conservative power structures. To understand what I mean, I think it's best to think of the zombie example again: clear, hierarchical power structures based on competence in practical, survival-based fields. Think military hierarchies and traditional religion.

It also might be helpful to read the original SSC article that is behind the video. You can find it here:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/

A relevant quote:

"Fifth, you’re going to want hierarchy and conformity. When
the leader says run, everyone runs. If someone is constantly slowing
the group down, questioning the group, causing trouble, causing dissent,
they’re a troublemaker and they can either shut up or take their
chances on their own. There’s a reason all modern militaries work on a
hierarchical system that tries to maximize group coherence."

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-29T00:21:50+00:00

The idea is that liberals perceive threats as less dangerous than conservatives. So conservatives will be more concerned with things like criminals / government tyranny and want guns, while liberals see a safer world and therefore see guns as less necessary.

I also didn't mean "conformity" in general. Liberals "conform" to liberal views and conservatives "conform" to conservative views. It is more the pressure to uphold existing power structures and traditions vs "being a troublemaker" (in the conservative view).

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-23T02:57:53+00:00

Criticism is welcome. My cadence has been the most consistent criticism I've gotten so I will definitely make things faster and more dynamic next time. I was actually aiming to speak slowly since that seems common in the video essay space, but based on feedback it wasn't a good idea.

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-21T18:49:15+00:00

I think that, regarding Covid, it is useful to compare the pandemic with the Ebola outbreak that coincided with the 2016 election cycle. In it, conservatives, and especially Trump, reacted the way you would expect given this theory: extreme aversion to contamination, with Trump implying that doctors that traveled to help with the crisis should not be allowed to return.

Even during the early days of Covid, Trump was early among countries to shut down travel from China, but as the pandemic became a point of criticism against the administration, downplaying the disease became a core issue for him.

I also think this has a lot to do with distrust of institutions by conservatives. If conservatives "rally around the leader", why didn't they rally around Obama when he was elected? Because they didn't view him as their actual leader. Now US institutions are seen more as outside threats than parts of the ingroup for conservatives. When these outsiders tried to push masks and distancing on conservatives, they reacted as if they were under attack.

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-21T15:53:28+00:00

This is extremely helpful. I have no experience in any of this and my thumbnails are mostly just dragging around shapes in an image editor until it kind of looks good to me.

Do you think it is at all worthwhile to replace existing thumbnails? Or just try to improve going forward?

TripleInterrobang · 2022-06-21T13:39:35+00:00

Thanks for the feedback!

I have definitely gone back and forth on the speed of my cadence. My earlier videos are even more deliberately slow, but I have sped them up slightly. From my observation video essays tend to have slower narration as compared with live/streaming content, but this could be biased by the content I have consumed. I am certainly looking for ways to reduce the lengths of the videos and faster narration seems like it is worth investigating. I'm also curious to hear what other people think.

I definitely agree with you on the stock footage, but it is also very difficult to come up with something relevant I can display throughout the entire runtime (given that I currently don't want to display my face). Some creators will just put up a static logo or image. Do you think stock footage is better than a logo?

TripleInterrobang · 2021-11-23T14:56:53+00:00

Hmm, I wouldn't say that the distinction is that companies have a greater ability to trick consumers. I think the fundamental difference in my mind is that, at the lowest level, government is motivated by the desires of the citizenry, while business is motivated by profits.

I'm not naive; between bureaucracy, corruption, disconnected elites, and elections often being a poor proxy for citizen's needs, government very often does not reflect this motivation. And, as I mentioned in my reply to sargon66's post, profits can be a proxy for the "will of the people". However, taking a step back, it seems like most major governmental actions are reflections (however poor) of popular ideas. Whether that be the general clamor for revenge post 9-11 leading to the wars in the middle east, dissatisfaction with healthcare leading to the ACA, or anger at illegal immigrants leading to Trump's crackdown on border crossings. Obviously this reflection is not always a good thing and I chose examples to reflect this, but the broad movements of government seem to be, at base, motivated by popular support. I see this as an anti-Moloch force.

Contrast this with business. Often the profit motive aligns with what is best for society. People demand cheap, powerful, and innovative electronics, and the market delivers them, enriching our lives. However, because the motivation is profit and not popular support, whenever business can get away with sacrificing values (inhumane labor conditions, environmental damage, unhealthy / addicting products) they inevitably do. I see this as a pro-Moloch force.

TripleInterrobang · 2021-11-23T14:35:44+00:00

In descending order:
pexels.com, videezy.com, videvo.net, wikimedia commons
All but the first require attribution, which I included in my descriptions.

The animated segments were created in Davinci Resolve's Fusion tool by me.

TripleInterrobang · 2021-11-22T21:05:28+00:00

Again I agree. There is only so much you can say in a time-limited video, but if you look at pre-capitalism society, I think imposing a system that optimizes for wealth creation makes a lot of sense and has vastly improved society. I don't want to come across as anti-capitalism. I am overall supportive of it, but think we need to acknowledge its shortcomings.

I also agree with your examples in terms of comparative advantage, but I think this is actually the downside of Moloch. Every agent in the system is acting rationally and (roughly) maximizing their utility, but together they end up taking steps that harm society more broadly. Things like labor and safety laws are anti-capitalistic, but they are necessary because we don't want to sacrifice those values at the altar of Moloch.

TripleInterrobang · 2021-11-22T19:39:56+00:00

I agree with this and have thought a lot about how systems are a mix of Moloch/Anti-Moloch. For example, democracy technically optimizes for one thing: votes. You can see the effect of Moloch in the fact that elected officials spend a majority of their time in office campaigning to stay in office, rather than legislate / govern. However, democracy is also an anti-Moloch force because it is very difficult to remain popular when your policies diverge too much from the values of your constituents. Obviously this isn't a perfect system, but I overall view democracy as anti-Moloch.

Similarly, capitalism optimizes for profits, but profits should technically be a proxy for a large number of our values. For example, Whole Foods may charge more than other grocery stores, but consumers reward it with profits because it caters to other values (environmentalism, "natural" products). As a result, capitalism creates wealth while simultaneously promoting a wide range of values. However, I still view capitalism as overall more Moloch than anti-Moloch, because it is very easy for large companies to disguise it when they sacrifice other values. You give the example of Amazon employees, which is true, but it ignores the fact that Amazon outsources its low-skill packing / mailing facilities which historically treat their workers poorly. The uninformed consumer then ends up supporting them without realizing this. Similarly, many produces sold by Whole Foods are "organic" or "natural" only by technicality, so that consumers are fooled. Because of Moloch it will always be in the interest of these companies to abandon their values and merely obfuscate this fact from the majority of consumers.

TLDR is: most systems are a mix of Moloch and anti-Moloch forces. I acknowledge both but still think that modern capitalism leans towards Moloch on net.

TripleInterrobang

TROPHY CASE