Oftentimes, the homeless themselves don't want to be fed or housed. In fact, they--especially the ones with mental health and/or addiction problems--often destroy public housing. Reality does not match the propaganda that all homeless are just down-on-their-luck unfortunate people who would otherwise fit into society.
I don't agree with this blanket statement. The internet is low trust for lots of reasons, but regular (read small, proximal/spatiotemporally constrained) communities still exist and are not grifters all the way down. Acknowledging that distant strangers are not trustworthy in the traditional sense seems reasonable, but is categorically different than addressing natural social groups (small and local).
Yes, and most young Americans are locked out of those small, high-trust suburbs due to high housing prices. So instead they get to experience the magic of low-trust America first-hand, hence the disconnect between the young and the boomers.
Exactly. Sadly, low-trust America has become the default where most people live. There are still nice, small-town, local shopping, suburban high-trust enclaves here and there, but as soon as you go online or deal with a business with more than a handful of locations, you're back in the low-trust grifting zone.
In high-trust societies these things work, yes. Not all societies are high-trust. Often, they once were high-trust but are no longer thanks to sociopathic, non-empathetic actors.
I do think people put too much stock in how many things RCV would fix in the US, but I am a big fan of it and it would certainly be a big first step improving representation in this country. Unfortunately, multiple states (all Republican dominated) have already outlawed RCV as an option. So in order to do it you would have to overturn the existing ban as well. It’s ridiculous.
Trump rode to the White House pitching that the government is broken/corrupt and as an outsider he would fix it. A significant part of his appeal is that he was a big middle finger to the establishment and current system writ large. This is well studied, documented, and easy to see in our daily lives. How many campaign ads begin with “the system is broken” or “Washington is out of touch”? Nobody ever lost voters for saying the government isn’t doing enough for them and isn’t trustworthy.
You can look at any Gallup or Pew poll or whatever sources you prefer and you will likely see that Americans have been steadily losing trust in their government. It has been in steady decline since the post-war era with some notable brief increases, but they don’t last.
>citation needed
I disagree as it is incredibly easy information to track down. But here you go anyway:
Obviously social trust in the US has declined and Trump benefited from that. But this is not evidence that the primary cause is sociopathic, non-empathetic actors. Theoretically it could also be things such as increased diversity, loss of shared identity, people acting in good faith but failing to adapt to social media.
Go and look around in former high-trust societies where this trust has broken down or is breaking down - my points of reference are the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and to a lesser extent the UK - and you'll get your citations. What you'll probably find is that in 'marginalised areas' people have trust in governmental institutions - those which provide social welfare, healthcare, schools and such - while they have little trust in 'other (groups of) people'. In other words they trust the state but distrust their neighbours, especially those from different ethnic groups. If you look in more well-to-do areas you'll find the opposite: people mostly trust their neighbours but they have lost trust in the higher echelons of the state which in their eyes has been instrumental in the dissolution of their former high-trust society. They'll still mostly trust their local police and fire brigade but they see academia and the social workers and soft-on-crime judicial institutions it produces as part of the problem. Any articles produced by academia which claim to provide proof of the opposite are seen in the light of the severe political bias in those institutions - sociology as a discipline has lost nearly all trust due to this - so citing those only feeds the fire.
Sweden is not a society were trust has broken down. Neither is Germany. Maybe the Netherlands can be argued to have a breaking down of trust. Go look at actual data, and don't rely on racist internet memes to form your arguments.
In neighboring Denmark, where they do gather and publish crime stats by the country of perp's origin, it turns out that some people (like Somalis) have up to 10 times more criminal convictions than the country baseline.
One would have to be crazy in order to extend exactly the same trust towards a random Danish Dane vs. a random Somali Dane.
Not every negative statement about non-white people is rooted in racism, and the ugly, fanatical attitude "everyone who has a negative observation about any sort of immigrants must be racist, stupid and evil" is what upended the political spectrum and brought the far right to power in many places.
I know you said or is breaking down. I'm telling you that its only for Netherlands you can argue a drop in trust. I'm sorry that you take the racist label as an insult. But the Sweden has fallen talking point is a racist lie, so don't perpetuate it if you don't want to be called out on it. Again I invite you to look at data on trust, and stop making stuff up.
Why do you think AfD is close to becoming the biggest party in Germany, why is (or was?) Wilders big in the Netherlands, why is Sverigedemokraterna close to becoming the biggest party in Sweden? Do you think suddenly 25% of the population of these countries has turned rabidly racist?
That 'racism' word has lost its meaning due to severe overuse, find another argument. As to finding 'data', that is easy enough if you ask people around you. I live in Sweden and I hear this every day, everywhere, both in the countryside where I live as well as in the more urbanised areas on the west coast where I work and where my daughter goes to school.
If you want to get a bit closer to the actual truth than your knee-jerk 'racism' accusation you should look into the clash of cultures - not races - which lies at the bottom of these problems. Go and speak to people from low-trust societies as well as those from high-trust societies and ask them where they put their trust, how they think about their neighbours - not just the ones in the house next door but also those in other areas.
It has fallen due to many reasons, some of which are related to migration, many others with no or only tangential relations to it. You already mentioned the 'housing crisis' which is partly related to migration - where asylum seekers with residence permits ('statushouders' [1] in Dutch) get preferential treatment and now stand for 8% of the total, 20% of the housing for 'first time renters' and 78% of the 'first time renters with children' [2]. This is only part of the problem though and not the largest one, that being the fact that there are simply too few housing units (apartments, houses, etc.) available. This in turn is partly due to the fact that it is hard to get permission to build something due to the heavy regulatory burdens and especially the rules around nitrogen emissions ('stikstofregels' [3], nitrogen oxide emissions by diesel engines used in construction put strict limits on what can be built when and where).
Then there are problems like the childcare benefits scandal ('toeslagenaffaire') - again partly related to migration by way of Bulgarian migrant fraud [4] - where the tax department made erroneous claims about benefit fraud without every really acknowledging they were wrong. I have some experience with the Dutch tax authorities making clear mistakes without accepting responsibility, instead they come up with mysterious restitutions which somehow exactly match the erroneously claimed taxes due.
The restrictive and SARS2 unpleasantness hit trust in public institutions hard which caused the universities of Rotterdam and Leiden to publish a report calling the Netherlands a new low-trust society ('de laag-vertrouwensamenleving', [6]). This trend has not reversed, especially among those with 'higher educational levels' [7] who used to have a higher trust in governmental institutions but now slid down to resemble the trust levels seen among those with 'lower educational levels' - this could simply be related to the fact that the left-wing parties favoured by those with 'higher education' did not participate in the government at that time.
I grew up in the Netherlands and lived there until about 25 years ago. I have seen this slide in trust with my own eyes, from the country where I could open the front door by pulling the string which dangled through the letter slot when I cycled home from school at 6 years old to the Fort-Knox-with-cameras now required, from the police officer on his bike greeting the people on his beat to "romeo's" (undercover arrest teams) being accused of inciting riots [8], from nearly the entire village coming out to welcome Sinterklaas (St. Nicholas who brings presents to children at the 5th of December) to those events being cancelled due to the fear of violence and protests, etcetera.
If there were a string in the mail slot in the house where I grew up it would not end well, unfortunately. Even the mail slot itself is suspect since these have been used by burglars to open unlocked doors (metal wire through the slot, easy), by vandals to throw in fireworks (one house burned down that way), by creeps to pee through it (another house in the same area), by other vandals to put a garden hose in to flood the hallway just for kicks, etc.
This was in Amstelveen, to the south of Amsterdam. Where do you live?
> Then they can stand alone on a pile of ashes at The End of the World and then see how much happiness their "money" bought them.
Like the book "Don't Create the Torment Nexus," the wisdom of this cartoon is an inspiration to business leaders everywhere who know that shareholder value is paramount:
It's algorithmically based - if the algorithm is built to promote certain patterns, those will be promoted.
Populist messaging, such as extremist right-wing stuff, does well on a lot of platforms because it optimizes engagment. It's purposefully stupid, simple, and outrageous. That's a recipe for success on Twitter, Facebook, and some others.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted for this, but it's the same thing for me. The For You tab is a cesspool, but if you stick to the Following tab and unfollow anybody who says pretty much anything political, it's actually a pretty nice platform.
I feel like it's more "if you don't sprint through the middle of the freeway and instead cross at the crosswalk, you're safe from cars". Also, there's not some genie sprinkling fairy dust on all of the political posts that's making them go up to the top, it's because that's what most people interact the most with. If you have atypical tastes (as most people on this website do), then you shouldn't be surprised when content tailored for typical tastes do not fit your tastes. After enough time on Twitter, even the For You becomes a bit better, with only occasional political posts.
We don't accept it on the street either, and if you think that's what Main Street looks like, you either live in Memphis, an active warzone, or you need to turn off the telly.
I agree with your comment about the "for you" tab. It is really the death of Twitter. Like Faecebook and YouTube, much of their suggested content is suss.
I continually catch it trying to take me down rabbitholes. It's always trying to get me to watch a Monty Python video for example. Also testing my political views to take me down one road or another. I clicked "not interested" on both MSNBC and Fox videos... They're just bipartisan trash.
Youtube, without fail, every SINGLE time I look up anything in my native language, suggests me videos of the local far-right party. Doesn't matter if I'm watching a funny video or educational content, in comes (autoplayed, no less) some variation of "the gypsies and communists are coming to steal your money". I should note neither centre nor left parties have the honour of such promotions. I am not logged in.
Fuck all of these platforms with a retractable baton (to quote a great letter).
I do get those types of suggestions, and it's one reason I don't like autoplay. I suspect centrist videos don't garner much attention because they are less dramatic.
For what it's worth, I do try and watch videos by people I don't agree with politically. Yet YouTube keeps trying to lock me into one worldview or another.
But I do get far left suggestions and from other political groupings. For the last two or three days, for example, YouTube keeps suggesting videos about the transgender movement. (I suspect this is because I had just watched a music video by someone who seemed to discuss this elsewhere on his channel.) I have also been suggested videos by a white man from Scotland who is an out-and-out Maoist, who is very interesting and very intelligent, but often very wrong.
When I first set up my current YouTube account, I noticed it kept trying to work out whether I supported the US Democrats or Republicans, and to take me down one of those rabbit holes. Like social media, I think there is an agenda to divide folk up into two polarities and set them up against each other.
One of my friends has fallen for some of this. His suggestions are full of what I call Trumpbait videos, where people rant about Trump but don't really tell you anything new or of value. He also gets propaganda videos about Russia saying it is about to collapse or lose the Ukraine War (which may sound okay, but they've been peddling this idea for several years and it hasn't happened yet). I try to point him to analyses which are less superficial.
I signed up for a new account a month ago for a specific purpose, and the default timeline was full of literal Nazi crap, like dumb 1488 references, and blaming weather on Jews, and other bullshit like that. I did absolutely nothing to get that. I signed up and that’s what it showed me until I went on a spree of blocking stuff.
With that description you could have been using tiktok with a new account or instagram with a non-us account. Twitter is no more or less a cesspool of misinformation that every other algorythmic content addiction generator (aka 'social media' site).
I recently signed up for TikTok. The default feed is entirely pop culture driven. Twitter really is bottom the garbage bin rage bait slop by default. It’s no comparison and no coincidence. It’s exactly what’s driving Elon Musk to do and say the things he does.
reply