The crunch

[sandGroundZero]

Illustration: Nathalie Lees

Why we stopped trusting elites

For hundreds of years, modern societies have depended on something that is so ubiquitous, so ordinary, that we scarcely ever stop to notice it: trust. …a remarkable achievement, but one that is more fragile than is often recognised.

— William Davies, sociologist and political economist at Goldsmiths

A worthwhile read originally published in November, 2018. It was part of a series titled: The new populism.

[Toodles McGinty]

Why we stopped trusting elites

A worthwhile read originally published in November, 2018. It was part of a series titled: The new populism.

It's a shame those articles ended around a year ago. Some of the graphs and charts involving the UK end in 2019. I'd like to see how populism is viewed now under the current government.

A particular paragraph caught my eye:

Perhaps the most intriguing data in the speech-analysis, however, relates to the UK. A succession of prime ministers, including Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron, all scored very low scores on the populism scale. However, the average populism score given to Theresa May was 0.5, nudging her into the lower end of the same band of “somewhat populist” leaders that includes Trump, Modi, Orbán, Putin and Bolsonaro.

That wasn't really how I viewed May. But with the benefit of hindsight, the sloganeering 'Leave Means Leave', 'Strong and Stable' and the fact that she always seemed to be hanging on by her fingernails, I can see how she tried to appeal to those swayed by simple repetition. Attempting to offer 'the people' vs 'the Elite', when, as is always the case, she was very much part of the elite. She did stop short of 'drain the swamp', but only just.

I particularly enjoyed the 'Populists far more likely to believe in conspiracy theories' page. The categories:

Global warming ‘is a hoax’
Aids invented by CIA
Harm from vaccines hidden from public
US government involved in 9/11 attacks
Secret group of people who rule world
Alien contact hidden from public
Official account of Holocaust exaggerated

seem to appeal to an awful lot of people. Many one or two, some all of them. I'd now add 'Q-Anon', the '5g phone masts' and 'Coronavirus is a hoax' to those.

I suppose it links with the thread I started that developed into a discussion on how social media influences and nudges us into certain views. Whereas once propaganda took a while to take hold, since the late 2000s, a piece of disinformation can be spread across the globe in seconds.

[local]

The inescapable proof is there in the European Parliament;





All 28 European commissioners are white and only three of the 751 MEPs are black

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-make-it-worse


The Europhiles talk the talk but that's it, they demonstrably don't want to upset their white applecart.

The mudslinging jibes of racist and xenophobe are slung out as smokescreens from under the white duvets by the remoaners.

[Hamble]

Illustration: Nathalie Lees

Why we stopped trusting elites

A worthwhile read originally published in November, 2018. It was part of a series titled: The new populism.

Have you read the counter point of view to the above?

Regular man (not born with elite advantages) said hey we can be elite just give us some of your advantages/equality/a step up and WILL make a better job because we can.

Elite man said that makes perfect sense.

So regular man became elite and guess what?

Trust in elite's increased exponentially duping Labourites to vote for the Capitalist EU.

[Toodles McGinty]

Have you read the counter point of view to the above?

Regular man (not born with elite advantages) said hey we can be elite just give us some of your advantages/equality/a step up and WILL make a better job because we can.

Elite man said that makes perfect sense.

So regular man became elite and guess what?

Trust in elite's increased exponentially duping Labourites to vote for the Capitalist EU.

The EU / Brexit wasn't a 'left / right' or 'socialist / capitalist' issue. The lines were much more clearly drawn by age rather than political leanings. Most of the Commons was pro-remain, regardless which side of the house they sat on.

'Elite' is rarely a left / right issue either. Both Blair and Cameron could be construed as 'elite', if you're gullible enough to believe the propaganda. Trump is as 'elite' as you get financially (according to him, anyway), yet managed to convince people that Clinton was.

There's a huge difference between social mobility and elitism.

[sandGroundZero]

It is worth noting that Why we stopped trusting elites was about trust; it was not about 'elites' per se. It is the decline in trust that threatens our democracy (such as it is).

To understand the crisis liberal democracy faces today – whether we identify this primarily in terms of “populism” or “post-truth” – it’s not enough to simply bemoan the rising cynicism of the public. We need also to consider some of the reasons why trust has been withdrawn. The infrastructure of fact has been undermined in part by a combination of technology and market forces – but we must seriously reckon with the underlying truth of the populists’ charge against the establishment today. Too often, the rise of insurgent political parties and demagogues is viewed as the source of liberalism’s problems, rather than as a symptom. But by focusing on trust, and the failure of liberal institutions to sustain it, we get a clearer sense of why this is happening now. — ex: William Davies' article

[local]

The EU / Brexit wasn't a 'left / right' or 'socialist / capitalist' issue. The lines were much more clearly drawn by age rather than political leanings. Most of the Commons was pro-remain, regardless which side of the house they sat on.

'Elite' is rarely a left / right issue either. Both Blair and Cameron could be construed as 'elite', if you're gullible enough to believe the propaganda. Trump is as 'elite' as you get financially (according to him, anyway), yet managed to convince people that Clinton was.

There's a huge difference between social mobility and elitism.

Oh so all those rabid right winger jibes will be withdrawn will they ?

Maybe it was about those who wanted to embrace the world and those who didn't ?

Those who aren't xenophobes.

Or maybe its just the usual mighty swerve because I have hit a nerve showing the truth about the lack of representation for the people of europe who aren't white.

[The PNP]

Or maybe its just the usual mighty swerve because I have hit a nerve showing the truth about the lack of representation for the people of Europe who aren't white.

Most people (in any country) vote for a party, whose policies most closely match their own views. I always do - tactical voting excepted.......Why would it matter what colour/race an M.P. happened to be, so long as they do what they promised?

[Toodles McGinty]

It is worth noting that Why we stopped trusting elites was about trust; it was not about 'elites' per se. It is the decline in trust that threatens our democracy (such as it is).

Depends on your definition of 'elite'. The elites aren't usually that elite. From what I can see, it's usually rabble rousers with enough wit to sway the populace against, say, the intelligentsia, or the establishment, that declare the 'elite' are somehow working against them. Trump did it with a little help from his friends.

The difference, as I said before, between now and say 80 years ago, or even 8 years ago, is the tools involved reach a whole lot of people instantly. Particularly gullible people, or those looking for someone or something to blame for their lot. The 'left behind'. The 'red wall'.

People savvy enough to take advantage have historically used this to their advantage. They do usually eventually wind up dead at the hands of those plebs they sought to manipulate, when the scales fall. But they cause almighty problems between time.

Right now, I'd say the public need to be a lot more cynical than they are. It'll filter through eventually. As I said, only one country really benefits from disruption in Europe and the USA.

[sandGroundZero]

NOUN elite (noun)·elites (plural noun) 1. a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society. — Oxford Dictionaries & Byng

The term seems somewhat paradoxical, given the way it is employed by the likes of Nigel Farage and/or the PM.

Notwithstanding Cold War tensions, the 1950s & 60s seemed (to me) to have been optimistic and forward-looking. Any distinguished looking geezer in a lab coat could sell laundry detergent and shampoo. Perhaps as a population, we have simultaneously become more sceptical and gullible. Politicians, journalists and merchant bankers are just among many whose 'elite' authority has evaporated. All manner of practitioners of the sciences who might formerly have been credited with training, experience and 'elite' knowledge are now viewed as compromised agents of dishonest coteries.

There are very serious consequences of the loss of public trust in so-called "elites".

[Toodles McGinty]

NOUN elite (noun)·elites (plural noun) 1. a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society. — Oxford Dictionaries & Byng

The term seems somewhat paradoxical, given the way it is employed by the likes of Nigel Farage and/or the PM.

Notwithstanding Cold War tensions, the 1950s & 60s seemed (to me) to have been optimistic and forward-looking. Any distinguished looking geezer in a lab coat could sell laundry detergent and shampoo. Perhaps as a population, we have simultaneously become more sceptical and gullible. Politicians, journalists and merchant bankers are just among many whose 'elite' authority has evaporated. All manner of practitioners of the sciences who might formerly have been credited with training, experience and 'elite' knowledge are now viewed as compromised agents of dishonest coteries.

There are very serious consequences of the loss of public trust in so-called "elites".

We are living with the consequences of those decrying experts in the name of bringing down the 'elite'. I don't think, as you say, years ago politicians would have ignored, or even worse turned on those experts. Much less the public. We should, by now, have advanced to a stage where we live in a meritocracy.

Sadly we live in a kakistocracy.

We live in an era where, according to Michael Gove 'the public have had enough of experts'. Personally, I tend to rely on experts. On account of their expertise.

In his case, Gove was attacking all the expert economists over Brexit. But it continues. Accountancy firms taking roles that the NHS should be filling. And my personal bugbear, Diana Harding, an expert on failure, heading the 'NHS' track and trace system. It isn't the NHS, it is Serco, Randox, Deloitte. Her senior management team is stuffed with ex-executives from Waitrose, Jaguar-Landrover, Travelex and her most spectacular failure before this debacle, Talk-Talk. No experts. Not one. And we wonder why it is all going so wrong.

When people can't get tests, they'll probably blame the NHS. Who cant get them either.

We are led by nepotistic donkeys. It feels like the easier it is to communicate, the dumber we get. The public have had enough of experts, because they've been told they've had enough. Attack the perceived elite, to put those eminently unsuitable in power.

Insane.

[sandGroundZero]

With reference to posts 454, 445 and others:

A Guardian comment piece by Alex Niven might be of interest. I wonder what you'd think of it, T M.

There appears to be a suggestion that conservatives (note the lower case 'c') or anti-progressives by any name are leading the way in terms of socio-psychological manipulation. The undermining of democratic politics is exploiting science even as it discredits! Though certainly not the last word on the subject, it is an idea worth contemplating. Mass protests are ineffective, if 'the masses' are fractured.

By the by, have you (Toodles McGinty) noted a BBC series presented by Simon Schama titled: The Romantics and Us ?

[Toodles McGinty]

With reference to posts 454, 445 and others:

A Guardian comment piece by Alex Niven might be of interest. I wonder what you'd think of it, T M.

There appears to be a suggestion that conservatives (note the lower case 'c') or anti-progressives by any name are leading the way in terms of socio-psychological manipulation. The undermining of democratic politics is exploiting science even as it discredits! Though certainly not the last word on the subject, it is an idea worth contemplating. Mass protests are ineffective, if 'the masses' are fractured.

By the by, have you (Toodles McGinty) noted a BBC series presented by Simon Schama titled: The Romantics and Us ?

Haven't seen the Schama series, but a quick read of the Graun review seems to indicate that there's nothing new, really.

Socio-psychological manipulation, or propaganda, again is nothing new. Might be more sophisticated now, back to another thread on AI and nudging, but the outcome is the same.

Another symptom of this is a strong positive association with 'teams' or 'sides'. While not new, it is being strongly enforced through media and social media. My team first, making people 'other'. Tribal posturing. Totemic affiliations. Again, nothing new. Those leaning hardest into it would probably sneer at football fans for their frenzied obsession, but nail their colours to the mast even before country.

It's rendered political discourse all but obsolete. The victims would never admit to gullibility, or see themselves lacking critical thought, principally because the all-consuming hatred of 'other' has been built into the program. It's a hard nut to crack, as you have observed, as only root and branch changes will shift the focus.

Perhaps only the political, sociological and economic upheaval we are about to experience in the next 6-12 months can incite that particular revolution?

[sandGroundZero]

MP for Mansfield, Ben Bradley, Day in the life vlog

[Toodles McGinty]

MP for Mansfield, Ben Bradley, Day in the life vlog

Not the most interesting vlog I've ever seen. Very 'middle management in a stationery firm' vibe. His Wiki entry proves him something of an a-hole.