Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (191547)	1/11/2021 7:21:03 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 355816

the only real consequences Trump has faced so far are from private Silicon Valley companies. If they can shut him up, they're the ONLY ones who've been able to do it for four fucking years. That's a feature, not a bug. For better or worse, it was intentional. Private companies are free to manage speech and association to a great extent. The government is proscribed from doing so. I have yet to hear of any proposal for government action to obviate the consequences that has more upside than downside. What we need, imo, is a source of objective truth for such matters for which that is knowable. If I were a bazilliononaire, I might be trying to establish one. It would produce investigative reports. There would be fact finding, reporting both the facts and, sorted out in separate sections, what is either not knowable or popular opinion, and reporting on the tactics in play to manipulate the public. In an earlier time, the government could have played that role. Now, no one is trusted to do it. What we also need is education on cognition that, if not resulting in widespread critical thinking, at least provides a framework for people to understand how it is that they know what they think they know so they can self-evaluate and also have a basis for communicating what is happening with them and around them when there is are conflicting viewpoints. For example, such an education would include notions like projection so that when someone proposes that as an explanation for some pov, the possibility can be evaluated. People need to be able to see and evaluate when they're being manipulated or radicalized or whatever. It's no longer enough to evaluate disparate views on the basis of different interests or backgrounds, for example, farmers vs consumers or rich vs poor, when there was an assumption that people were thinking straight but simply had different perspectives, thus the differences were legitimate and could be dealt with rationally. What we have now is an epidemic of not thinking straight and we need a mechanism to operate in that environment. There might also be opportunity in an offshoot of the legal system or something modeled after the legal system set up to make a determination of truth, a way of suing simply for a finding of truth rather than for damages. It's way too early in the morning to entertain a question this heavy. I read your post and just started noodling on a topic I had not considered before. Heaven help me...