Please take this with a grain of salt. It's kind of just venting.

The inflammatory TLDR is: I don't think conspiracism is enough to explain the situation. It feels more like "everyone" is becoming a paranoid schizophrenic.

So, since I saw the conspiracism video, I thought it had some problems and what I thought were some glaring omissions. At the time, I tried to comment with my constructive criticism, but the comments were like 75% screeching conspiracists, and I was kind of bummed out by that. So I decided not to add anything to the conversation.

So basically my original criticism was something along the lines of: "This video focuses almost all of its attention on conspiracism and the right wing. It may touch a bit on how conspiracism is also present on the left and it basically ignores conspiracism in the center or liberal spaces. And that's bad"

I understand why this is the case. Obviously the right was the first to embrace this way of thinking to the maximum extent. But my argument is that society is basically embracing this way of thinking in every space, and ignoring it when it comes to your own group only means it will metastasize and grow there..

The right is already talked about by the video and honestly, it's hopeless, so I won't talk about it more. Personally, I'm from the left, and I have obviously seen conspiracist thinking explode. But I have also seen the same in liberal spaces. That's why I say it feels more like everyone (a big % of people in every part of society) is basically acting like paranoid schizophrenics towards the concept of knowledge and especially learning new things. AI has put the whole thing on overdrive.

I think it is easy to see this in other communities and see how they are becoming delusional and detached from reality. (So if you are on the left you see it in the libs and vice versa) But the hardest part is seeing it in your own groups AND especially on oneself.

Like, be honest with yourself, how many times have you found conflicting information (or even just opinions) with your own beliefs and just dismissed it with a hundred types of excuses (It must be AI, they are a bot, they always lie, they are part of X community which I automatically ignore, they are stupid and don't know what they are talking about [when you don't really know much yourself], they are malicious, I don't feel like dealing with this, and on and on and on).

I come from a scientific background (Go physics 🤓) and I have noticed these thought-terminating clichés popping into my mind more and more. It's a stark contrast to see my physics brain working on a problem and then see my brain on Twitter.

I don't know where I'm going, but, yeah, what are your thoughts? I really think this goes beyond left vs libs vs right or leftist unity or anything like that. But if we don't look into ourselves and our own communities, there's no hope (probably no hope anyway 🤷‍♂️ )

My personal believe is that this is a consequence of the internet and AI is going to accelerate it. And that basically our early 2010s believes that the internet would just change society a bit for the better (Arab Spring and all that) were sooooo naive. The internet is going to be a revolution bigger than the printing press was in its time (it affects more population). And in the same way the printing press did to its society, it's going to transform our society completely and leave it unrecognizable in the span of a century. For the better or worse will depend on the specific area, some will improve others will get worse.

Thoughts??

Edit: What I mean by schizophrenic thinking is this: We approach knowledge and new information in the way a paranoid schizophrenic would. Everything that comes from within (oneself or the ingroup) is rarely questioned and taken to be most likely true; everything that comes from outside is extremely suspect, many times treated as malicious or not even considered. In the long run, this way of learning will drive you crazy.

The point of the post is not to litigate any particular conspiracist thinking (by the left or liberals or right) but to take a look at the paranoid schizophrenic within 🧘‍♂️

I know she lurks this Reddit sometimes and wanted to try my luck. I come from watching her interview with Joshua Citarella and the same question kept creeping into my mind. This is meant totally in good faith and in trying to understand her position and also simply curiosity from my part.

The question: Why are you so uninterested (Both in your work and political viewpoint) in exploring the labor movement?

I genuinely am curious if she has talked about this or has reflected upon it. The question often comes to mind because Contrapoints seems to have such a good pulse on the psychological reasoning behind political matters more in the sphere of culture (culture wars) and feminism. This is understandable to me. But of course, a big part of the left political movement, historically and currently, is labor. Labor movements etc. In fact, labor has a big intersection with feminism.

I always feel like she has a glaring blindspot there and I am curious to hear from her if she agrees, and why that might be.

To reiterate. This is meant as the extension of an olive branch and trying to understand. Not trying to scold her or tell her what she should focus on. Everyone has their interests and talents and all that. But I do personally believe exploring this side of politics could be a challenge and growth point for her. I don't know if I would agree with her opinions on labor issues but it would be interesting to hear her opinions anyway.

To be more explicit in what inspired me to ask: In the interview, she is asked a question about how she squares that the heyday of social democracy (Mommy politics) was a historical time of a profoundly masculine workforce and labor movements. She is kind of blindsided by this angle and shows interest, saying she would like to think more about this. (Vaguely paraphrasing the whole bit)

Edit: Yes, the question is framed through my perspective and with my biases. I actually think it is more interesting when questions are a bit pointed. She can reframe it in her answer however she likes. That's how dialog works. I'm not trying to attack her please 😭