Long Live the American Populist Plutocrat Christian Party

The Republican Party is dead!  Long live the American Populist, Plutocrat Christian Party! All hail Trump and Musk!

The results are in and Donald Trump has won a decisive victory over Kamala Harris.  I wonder if he thinks this election was stolen?  He didn’t have a lot of faith in the process.  But as usual, the polls were pretty far off and here we are with another four years of Trump.

 

I regard this as the death knell of the Republican Party.  The Trump platform (to the extent there is one) has little in common with the republican values of the last 80 years.  The most notable figures in republican administrations from Reagan to Bush lined up against Trump to no avail.  The pendulum has swung violently away from the traditional two-party American system.

 

So, what does Trump represent?  What is this party that he now has so completely dominated that its political class is terrified of offending him?  How is it that a majority of Americans lined up behind a man who lies with each breath, who brags without ceasing, and who is so thin-skinned that he viciously attacks and demeans anyone who offends him?

 

Like so many things in politics, it is both simple and complex.  It is simple because a large number of people in the USA are feeling unsettled and suspicious of the government and the so-called ruling elites. 

 

It is simple because globalization and neo-liberalism have been a huge disappointment and have never delivered on their promises of increasing prosperity for all and peace through economic cooperation.

 

It is simple because the rapid pace of cultural change – non-traditional families, new norms of sexuality, homosexuality and gay marriage, transgender issues, abortion, gender equality, continuing racial struggles – has frightened a large part of the USA, especially those who subscribe to traditional religious doctrine, and created a massive backlash.

 

It is simple because a significant part of the population will never vote for a democratic candidate and is betting that a Trump presidency, for all of its chaos and drama, will make them richer than they are today.

 

It is simple because most Americans feel superior to the rest of the world and hate being entangled in organizations, treaties, or other encumbrances with countries they neither respect nor trust.

 

It is simple because a world broken by so many ills (war, climate change, economic failure) is causing more and more desperate people to cross our borders to chase the American Dream and it scares the hell out of people for so many reasons despite the fact that every one of them has ancestors that did the same thing.

 

It is simple because 100 years of Hollywood has brainwashed us into believing that only an apparently tough, no-holds-barred, extremely cocky kind of guy can protect American interests.

It is simple because we have allowed individuals to acquire so much wealth that a single person with a huge ego can significantly alter an election.

It is simple because many Americans are still unable to get their minds around a woman leading the country.

 

It is simple because the pandemic brought a couple years of high inflation, and, ultimately, Americans vote their pocketbook.

 

And finally, it is complex because none of those simple things are really simple at all, and the American public is not educated enough to understand the challenges the USA and the rest of the world currently face and that humanity always evolves in a way that requires new thinking, and their first instinct is to make a bunker of the USA and try to keep the rest of the world and its problems out.

 

So, now we have a coalition of disgruntled Americans backed by a growing bro cabal of tech plutocrats who believe they are the only possible future saviors.  How do you come up with a name for this party? Admittedly, my choice is a bit wordy and cumbersome.  But did I mention that the whole thing is a bit complex?

Free Speech and Mis- or Disinformation

Is the world destined to sink into a quagmire of mis/disinformation in the years ahead?  Will there be any way to balance free speech, social media, AI and data mining to inform the public and decision-makers on important issues in a way that clearly identifies scientific or public consensus and flags misinformation?

For clarity – misinformation is information that is false but sent without malintent, whereas disinformation is false information sent for nefarious purposes.  Both have contributed dramatically to the increasingly fractious partisanship and populism in the USA and other countries.

 

The question of whether something is information or mis/disinformation is a thorny one.  There is a spectrum of information ranging from absolute truths (for example, a mathematical proof) to generally accepted facts or events, to speculation and contrarian theories, and ultimately, to conspiracy theories or outright falsehoods that are clearly absurd and/or anti-factual.  Where should one draw the line and who should be empowered to do so?

 

In recent years we have seen the spectacular growth of social media and other means for propagating information and allowing Internet users to perform their own inquiries into topics of interest.  With this growth we have seen the emergence of a flood of misinformation, speculation, conspiracy theories, dissent, denialism and a host of other contrarian views or even deep fakes and disinformation.  

 

Social media is reluctant to play the role of judging and hence limiting, filtering or even banning this avalanche of information for reasons both of self-interest and the principle of free speech.  Moreover, the algorithms that social media uses to maximize views and thus increase ad revenue tend to bias the system in a way that multiplies the impact of mis/disinformation.

 

In recent years the mega companies that control and profit from social media have increasingly argued that the right to free speech prevents them from stopping the spread of any but the most egregious disinformation, and they reject the role of censor.

 

The principle of free speech argues that everyone should have the right to freely voice their opinion or beliefs in the public domain.  There are limits to free speech that have been described in court cases over the years – incitement to imminent unlawful action or speech that presents a ‘clear and present danger’.  But most information, even deep fakes and outright falsehoods, is difficult to characterize as ‘a clear and present danger’.

 

The example of the COVID pandemic is perfect for understanding the problem.  Both the scope of the pandemic (i.e. how many cases there were and how many deaths occurred) and the recommendations to avoid exposure and spread were available from credible domestic and international medical authorities.  For example, Johns Hopkins updated an excellent site in real time with the latest statistics, and the CDC issued its recommendations for healthy practices (masks, social-distancing, treatments, etc.). 

 

 But anyone on social media could make their own interpretations of statistics or forward any anecdotal cures or critiques of the medical community’s information.  Partisan politics amplified this effect and planted doubt in many minds about the veracity of ‘official’ or scientific information.  This created a very confusing mix of information and sadly, much of the USA is still misinformed today over what actually happened and what we should have learned.  This does not bode well for the next pandemic.

 

There have always been alternative views and theories to capture the imagination of those who mistrust the government, scientists or the traditional media.  There were conspiracy theories long before the Internet.  But the Internet and social media have essentially eliminated any curbs or sanity checks on information exchange.  There is no longer a Walter Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley to deliver trustworthy information.  The Internet is the wild west and there is no likely way to tame it.

 

AI and deep fakes will no doubt exacerbate the situation.  Disinformation will seem ever more convincing.  The average person will have limited ability to discern the difference between valid reports and false or misleading ones.

 

There is no easy solution to this problem.  Any attempts by the government or other legal authorities to curtail or flag mis/disinformation will be condemned by many as censorship, especially in today’s highly partisan atmosphere.

 

The only real answer to this problem is education.  Parents, schools and other organizations must address this plague of mis/disinformation and give people the analytical skills to differentiate between truth and fake news.  Faith in critical institutions – scientists, government agencies, credible news agencies, medical organizations – must be restored so that the public will seek out and prioritize information from these sources.

 

There is little reason to be optimistic about the future in this regard.  Social media is a Pandora’s Box of ills and it is likely that technology advances will only serve to make things worse.  The Internet has linked the world as never before and provides incredibly wonderful tools for humans to connect, learn and create, but sadly, it has also allowed the worst of human nature to flourish.