How To Create A Low-Trust Society
I stumbled across this tweet by American Conservative editor Helen Andrews, in which she remarks on pausing her commute at the local Metro, in Washington, DC, and counting the number of fare-dodgers that could be spotted within a five-minute period. An exercise she repeated, with an average of 22 fare-dodgers and a peak of 40. In five minutes.
What stood out, however, were the tweeted replies, often from blue-ticked progressives and self-styled creatives with many flags in their bios, and ostentatious pronouns, and which conveyed a kind of pre-emptive disapproval of any thoughts along such lines.
“Do you literally have nothing better to do?” asked one film and TV director, adding, “Why don’t you stand outside a bank and interview business owners who steal wages from hourly employees?” Some insisted that an escalation of fare-dodging has no victims or unhappy social effects, and that fares are a “classist, racist” assault on “poor and BIPOC folks.” Others, including lecturers and lawyers, added “who cares?” or deployed the terms “narc” and “snitch,” again suggesting that certain observations are not to be aired. One “Oscar-nominated screenwriter” expressed his “exhausted rage” at such things being noticed at all.
The general theme of the replies, and the air of annoyance, reminded me of Ms Claudia Balducci, a woman responsible for Seattle’s public transport network. Faced with evidence that up to 70% of passengers are now freeloading with impunity, Ms Balducci replied:
Which is progress, apparently. An achievement unlocked.
Update, via the comments:
Readers who poke through the linked thread may register an odd uniformity among the reactions, and considerable self-satisfaction. One progressive podcaster, a purveyor of “media and political analysis,” was quite adamant that such “fake crime” would be “solved” by simply not charging people, at all, for services they use frequently and which cost a great deal to maintain. This was presented as some unassailable insight, a basis for applause. Several pious souls insisted that habitual lawbreakers shouldn’t be “shamed,” even when no mention had been made of their identities. Because noticing routine and shameless thievery is apparently much worse than indulging in it.
Or as one chap put it,
Such sentiments were by no means uncommon, and the thread does rather suggest that one is not supposed to ask, even tentatively, whether such behaviour, however frequent, and however flagrant, might have wider and regrettable effects.
Those expressing their disapproval of Certain Things Being Noticed didn’t seem at all concerned by the fragility of civilised behaviour, or the effects of a large and growing minority disregarding norms of behaviour, seemingly with impunity and with no expectation of ever being asked to behave otherwise. As if such exemptions couldn’t engender resentments, social friction, and an erosion of social trust and goodwill.
Assets that, once lost, are very difficult to retrieve.
Some insisted that an escalation of fare-dodging has no victims or unhappy social effects,
Like taxpayers who end up sitting next to lots of people who think stealing is cool.
The reactions were oddly uniform. Other, equally pious souls joined the thread, insisting that habitual lawbreakers shouldn’t be “shamed,” even when no mention had been made, at all, of their identities. Because noticing routine and shameless thievery is apparently much worse than indulging in it.
Or as one chap put it,
Such sentiments were by no means uncommon, and the subsequent thread does rather suggest that one is not supposed to ask, even tentatively, whether such behaviour, however frequent, might have wider and regrettable effects.
There was a recent UK newspaper article on similar lines. Someone had commented on Facebook that they had watched someone walk out of Tesco with a full trolley they hadn’t paid for.
Replies were on the lines of, ‘Don’t you know there’s a cost of living crisis?’, and other such excuses for theft
These people are in a cult but they don’t realize they’re in a cult. They are aware of what they’re supposed to say (or else face consequences from their peers) due to cue absorption and mimicry. There is a thin veneer of plausibility over their supposed beliefs which break down when challenged.
Which explains all the shrieking when that happens.
What stood out, however, were the tweeted replies, often from blue-ticked progressives and self-styled creatives with many flags in their bios, and ostentatious pronouns, and which conveyed a kind of pre-emptive disapproval of any thoughts along such lines.
Many such cases, from her tweet about theft,
Because, as has been noted a bag full of iphones is tasty and pairs nicely with a 55 inch TV and a fine Chianti with an arm full if Izod for dessert. Of course those things should be free too.
Another has thoughts, because of course her tweet was, like all things, racist.
Of course a “producer” (he/him) makes a compelling argument.
These are all people we should take very seriously indeed.
These people, and by “these people” I means the vast majority of people who really matter, believe all kinds of idiocy including that Donald Trump told people to drink bleach. No one, and by “no one” I mean no one who really matters, has even the tiniest of cajones to step up and tell them otherwise in spite of the otherwise being a clear, objective fact. As objective as a clear objective fact can be. Thus their reality, the cargo cult reality, is the only one that truly matters. Ignore this at your peril. And “unfortunately” mine as well. Decades of trying to get people, smaaaaart people, doctors, technical people, educators…so called, “thought leaders”…so called, conservative…”conservative” political leaders, religious leaders, law enforcement people, etc. to understand this pushed me to the edge of my sanity about ten years ago. Our society is fucking insane yet still, even now, at this probably too late a date to do anything about it, pointing it out, speaking up forcefully about it makes you the crazy one. Don’t blame social media, nor Twitter, nor the internet nor any other technology. We’ve been headed down this road for decades. The idiocy has just finally been exposed by those tools to such a degree that the smaaaaart people can no longer pretend it isn’t there and finally have to deal with it themselves. But hey, too late Charlie. You’ve put everyone who might help you on prozac and God knows what else. Because it was easier that way. Everyone agreed. Everyone that mattered of course.
Failure to take these people seriously is what has gotten us to this point. But go ahead. Ignore them some more. It is working ever so well.
Speaking of thin veneers, the people expressing their disapproval of Certain Things Being Noticed didn’t seem at all concerned by the fragility of civilised behaviour, or the effects of a large and growing minority disregarding norms of behaviour, seemingly with impunity and with no expectation of being asked to behave otherwise. As if such exemptions couldn’t engender resentments, social friction, and an erosion of social trust and goodwill.
Assets that, once lost, are very difficult to retrieve.
They are masters of First Order Thinking, which is enough to simultaneously signal their compliance and false virtue, send the message that they don’t want to be abused by the leftist hordes and also say “it’s those fuckers over there who are the evil ones, let’s attack them!”
When the pendulum swings the other way, and it always does, there will be blood.
Well, it does, I think, bear a passing resemblance to “It’s happening to someone else, somewhere I don’t live, so I don’t care.”
Which brings to mind this fairly typical example.
That.
Such sentiments were by no means uncommon, and the thread does rather suggest that one is not supposed to ask, even tentatively, whether such behaviour, however frequent, and however flagrant, might have wider and regrettable effects.
Common everywhere among white liberals, but especially common in D.C., I suspect, because political power centers attract morally bankrupt scum.
Others, including lecturers and lawyers, added “who cares?” or deployed the terms “narc” and “snitch,” again suggesting that certain observations are not to be aired.
Anybody remember the “stop snitching” craze of the 1990’s? Which demanded that people never call 911 or testify against gang members? I used to see that graffiti quite often, and it was sometimes discussed in the newspapers–usually in terms of how we should “understand” how the “oppressed” and “marginalized” felt.
I’ll bet these same people who are outraged at Helen Andrews’ snitchery are the ones who delighted in catching people buying non-essential supplies (e.g. toys for children who had to play indoors) during the Covid lockdowns.
What struck me was the air of self-satisfied dismissal, as if some embarrassing social gaffe had been committed – “Oh dear, how unfashionable…” – and the mocking of values that would be the norm among my own family, and among the families of many people here, I would guess.
The ‘progressive’ tendency to excuse crime and antisocial behaviour, even outright sociopathy, has been noted here many times. See, for instance, this.
Or the second item here, in which readers of the Guardian were told with great certainty that burglary is “really quite inconsequential,” unworthy of punishment, and that anger at being burgled and the subsequent sense of violation are somehow trivial, plebeian and unsophisticated. Such that expectations of lawfulness and justice – and not being preyed upon, repeatedly, with impunity – were airily dismissed as “idiotic attitudes.”
When the subway has to curtail services, reduce security, and shutter lines, hurting poor people, everyone will be outraged.
A low trust society is a pain in the ass to live in. We are already getting there in the US. Recently at doctor’s and for lab tests they want my portion of the payment up front instead of sending it to insurance for processing. Clearly they are getting burned with non-payments. You need more forms of ID to do certain things. Items at stores are behind locked cases.
The government and corporations seem so big and powerful that people assume it doesn’t matter, you can just steal from them. But this is why inner city grocery stores are more expensive. Railing about capitalism reveals their mindset: everything should just be free.
Multiple economics studies have shown that two of the key ingredients for a successful economy are the rule of law and a high trust society. We are losing both.
And the same low-trust effect, and consequent degradation, can be very localised. Having over the years lived in some rough neighbourhoods, where, say, the person burgling your home was likely to be someone living three doors up the road, I can testify to this. Now, happily, should some mail go astray, I’m not worried that the package will have been rifled through and its contents pilfered by that nice Mrs Wilson at number 52.
Or the second item here, in which readers of the Guardian were told with great certainty that burglary is “really quite inconsequential,” unworthy of punishment, and that anger at being burgled and the subsequent sense of violation are somehow trivial
Such people really need to be frequent victims of burglary, including the kind in which the thieves trash what they don’t steal and finish by defecating on the carpets and sofas.
Similarly, the defenders of graffiti vandalism need to have their personal property defaced. And the excusers of street crime need to get mugged regularly.
If it were to happen to Mr Clive Stafford Smith – say, two dozen times – this wouldn’t strike me as morally inapt.
Public transit is just another word for things we do together: or so I have lately been informed.
Turnstile jumping is just another word for screwing over the people that pay for the things we do together. That’s just the math (which is cisheteropatriarchosuprematicism, or so I have lately been told).
I think I might just stop believing the things I am lately being told.
burglary or a mugging is not just that some stuff got taken, it is that you are not safe. If someone can break into your house, then next time they might just shoot you for no particular reason, or rape you. Muggings often result in injury or death. These wokies are so determined to defend criminals that they sanitize events as “no big deal” when in fact they are very very scary.
It is all part of destroying America and the western world, by our know-it-all elites.
We are a middle class, somewhat entitled culture that the world envies, cannot emulate and therefore must destroy in the name of fairness and for other more nefarious reasons … such as population reduction and total global control.
Sadly, most of us are sitting back doing nothing about it. America’s history will be erased.
Nevermind
up to 70% of passengers are now freeloading with impunity
Sounds like Liverpool in the 1980s under the control of the Marxist Militant Tendency.
Perhaps needless to say, but for anyone not recognising the reference – it didn’t work out too well, to say the least.
When things have to be explained.
It is all part of destroying America and the western world, by our know-it-all elites.
Those nightmarish scenes in Bladerunner and other dystopian movies? It’s what the “elites” want.
Common everywhere among white liberals,
Because white leftists are struggling everyday against their inherent and inherited evil.
these people have adopted all the trappings of religion: original sin (being white), saved vs sinners, apostasy, heresy, doctrine, genuflecting, rites, persecution of unbelievers.
But they missed one: forgiveness and redemption.
and they are totally clueless that this is what they have done.
and they are totally clueless that this is what they have done.
I’ll quibble a bit at that. I believe the drivers of this know exactly what they’re doing. Call it the equivalent to the fake pastors who take the life savings of gullible widows.
Or the gullible who poured millions into Buys Large Mansions.
When things have to be explained.
Now in place of Adam H. Johnson’s gibberish about “fake crimes”:
LMAO, as I’m told the kids are fond of saying …
[ Completes a successful level-10 red star run in Hades’ Star, thumps chest, roars at heavens. ]
OT, but I could have sworn just the other day the experts told us we mustn’t consider race and the like regarding medical issues.
The good news is this study will be cheap at a mere 2.7 million clams, but I am sure it will be sound Science!™
The Phoenix, AZ transit agency was running free shuttle buses from the state capitol building to the downtown area (about a mile away) so that state workers and others could get to the downtown lunch areas without having to drive. The homeless, er, excuse me, “The Unhoused,” spotted it as a great way to get out of the heat and took over the buses and rode around all day enjoying the air conditioning. The stench kept everyone else off and generated complaints from the poor drivers. So they started charging a quarter to ride, the bums immediately disappeared and the buses were safe to ride again. Sometime free causes more problems.
It’s perhaps worth noting that no word of thanks was offered for the quite thorough factual corrections or the links to relevant data. Indeed, so far as I can see, beyond the self-serving deletion of one tweet, there was no actual acknowledgement of error. And so, I’m inclined to wonder whether Mr Johnson, our podcaster and purveyor of “media and political analysis,” will nonetheless make much the same noises again at some point in the future, perhaps the near future, as if said corrections had never occurred.
And so, I’m inclined to wonder whether Mr Johnson, our podcaster and purveyor of “media and political analysis,” will nonetheless make much the same noises again at some point in the future,
You could put money on it.
Well, I’m guessing, of course. But it’s a phenomenon we’ve seen more times than I can count. And I suppose that from Mr Johnson’s point of view, as someone ostentatiously progressive, there’s no social status to be gained, no peer-group approval, by adapting to this new information.
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author.
For those who may have missed it.
The inanity in the whole thread would be astounding if we haven’t seen the like on other subjects.
My favorite is bozos attempting to do cost/benefit analysis to prove evasion is cheaper than enforcement, because NYPD & Transit Cops just stand around and do nothing other than try to catch evaders as the subways are otherwise crime free.
The moral gulf it evokes is quite a thing, almost cartoonish. But then, if you consider the possibility that much of the ostensibly moral posturing is actually an exercise in rather perverse self-flattery and social positioning, it may make a kind of sense.
That.
And which, if so, would rather speak to Mr Johnson’s priorities, and his character, and by extension, those of any peers who perform similar manoeuvres.
Tweet deleted: when you define any facts offered or corrections to logic as hate, learning cannot occur.
“Do you literally [sic] have nothing better to do?” Asked the person who spends eight hours a day on Twitter.
I wonder how they feel about shoplifting.
Extrapolating from the tweeted replies, I’d guess that, for many of them, whether shoplifting is objectionable and a basis for punishment would depend on the melanin levels of the person doing it.
See also, rioting and arson, looting, doorstep theft, etc.
My favorite is bozos attempting to do cost/benefit analysis to prove evasion is cheaper than enforcement, because NYPD & Transit Cops just stand around and do nothing other than try to catch evaders as the subways are otherwise crime free.
I don’t know if anyone in those threads addressed, but the best way to lose MORE money on public transportation than just ignoring the fare thieves is chasing away law-abiding, fare paying customers who refuse to use a tightly enclosed space where criminals are allowed to operate. Those ‘fare evaders’ are NOT the lower working class – who probably balk at using their economic status as an excuse for criminal behavior – but muggers, mentally ill, homeless, gangbangers, and other predators – where fare evasion is just another part of their SOP.
My favorite is bozos attempting to do cost/benefit analysis to prove evasion is cheaper than enforcement, because NYPD & Transit Cops just stand around and do nothing other than try to catch evaders as the subways are otherwise crime free.
Funny how those cost/benefit analyses assume that the police will have to cover every station 24/7/365 in perpetuity. Those of us who live in the real world know that arrests will teach the criminally inclined to stop doing the things that lead to being arrested.
Akshully…in Orlando last I checked the SunRail system was losing money just selling the tickets. Fair jumping would actually save everyone money. During the one month that I tried it, I was tempted to do it myself as I could see how bloody easy it would be for a respectable looking person to get away with it. But then I decided it was doing more damage to the system to buy a ticket. I’m an asshole that way. And a few others…
You need an Orlando Sentinel subscription, which even I refuse to get, but here’s the excerpt from Google:
“Is it by age we define children?”
Video at Ace’s if you can’t view on twit, scroll down to Billboard Chris..
Video at Ace’s if you can’t view on twit
Both links require me to log in to Twitter. 🙁
[ Completes a successful level-10 red star run in Hades’ Star, thumps chest, roars at heavens. ]
I just managed to acquire via eBay a copy of Hind Commander, which is as far as I know the only helicopter-focused miniatures wargame in existence. Polish publisher now out of business and no electronics copies exist.
Having just read Danger Close and Guts ‘n’ Gunships I’m looking forward to seeing how it plays on the table.
Both links require me to log in to Twitter.
The video plays at Ace’s site, don’t need to click over to twit.
And this is exactly why it is…well now apparently ‘was’…important to fight the philosophers who tried to…well now apparently did…define away the concept of the slippery slope. Ah, but that was way, way too esoteric for serious people. Don’t take those philosophy people and their arguments seriously and they will just go away. We don’t care that they are teaching this idiocy to the next generation of children. It’s just some eggheads in an ivory tower somewhere. Stop whining about having to pay for it too.
Depending on the browser, the configuration of that browser, or God only knows what else, even playing the Twitter videos on Ace can be a problem. I am constantly bouncing twixt Chrome and Brave and Safari to make stuff work anymore. Maybe it’s just an iPad problem but I also just now noticed that I was able to copy your text which I quoted on my 3:23 am post but am just now not able to copy text to quote for this post. Same browser, same page, the only reload was when I hit post. Reloading after that didn’t help either.
The people who excuse this live in the inner city (the only place where public transport works even though they could easily walk everywhere) and have jobs (or not) which can and will automatically increase their pay to cover the rising costs because said job is government-funded.
The video plays at Ace’s site, don’t need to click over to twit.
Ah, I had forgotten to unblock one or more URL’s. Thanks.
Good Lord, the creepy smile on that creep’s face as he attempts to play word games with the interviewer. His face should be on warning posters wherever he lives.
And this is exactly why it is…well now apparently ‘was’…important to fight the philosophers who tried to…well now apparently did…define away the concept of the slippery slope.
I have had that argument with a number of “libertarian” people. They all had “reasons” to be “tolerant” of such propagandists, such as “He’s interesting” or “He makes you think” or “He writes good sci-fi stories” or “the slippery slope is a fallacy”, whereas my position was “He has chosen to be an enemy of our civilization and should be treated as such”.
Good Lord, the creepy smile on that creep’s face as he attempts to play word games with the interviewer.
One of the tactics favored by trolls is to demand that you define various terms, terms whose meanings are well understood.
One of the tactics favored by trolls is to demand that you define various terms, terms whose meanings are well understood.
Well, it is the first class in PHIL 101 and a cornerstone of all intentional logic. Most people are just really, really bad at it and so trolls know they can make an opponent look silly by asking them to. It’s not for nothing that the Fallacy of Four Terms exists.
Of course, when up against someone who knows how to think clearly and logically you get Jordan Peterson vs. Cathy Newman.
Lest we forget.
Here’s the thing that really infuriates me about that when discussing things with professional “thinkers” like college professors or, God help me please, members of the psychological professions, HR departments, “diversity”-focused managers, etc. is how they use this to play “gotcha” games and then refuse to allow you to clarify your terms should you know better but simply misspeak. It’s one thing to have to tolerate that crap amongst the severely educated but quite another to put up with it from those sorts of professional people. Especially when you’ve let a few similar “gotcha” opportunities pass in the interest of simply carrying the discussion. Especially still when you have been clear in your presentation of complex logical details up until that point.
Well, it is the first class in PHIL 101 and a cornerstone of all intentional logic. Most people are just really, really bad at it and so trolls know they can make an opponent look silly by asking them to. It’s not for nothing that the Fallacy of Four Terms exists.
From Wikipedia:
In everyday reasoning, the fallacy of four terms occurs most frequently by equivocation: using the same word or phrase but with a different meaning each time, creating a fourth term even though only three distinct words are used:
I seem to recall that Foucault and Derrida were frequent abusers of that fallacy–and that their use of convoluted rhetoric served to obscure what they were doing. (Please correct me if my memory is wrong.)
Here.