This isn't limited to the political realm - it is an important distinction, and learning this can also help you avoid harmful people in your personal life as well.
Thread
/1
Language just happens; it's part of our natural development, and it pours out when we need to express something.
But what's the difference between informative and instrumental speech?
/2
When we need to communicate something with a partner, our goal should be to describe what's on our mind in the best way that we can - in other words, to be open and honest. To share and inform, and expect it to be received in kind.
/3
In some ways, we are wired to believe that what people tell us is being delivered in good faith - openly with good intentions.
We all know that liars exist, but we tend to think that we can spot those.
/4
This is what gets us in trouble.
/5
We may say certain things (true things) to get someone to like us. We may outright ask people to do things to help us get what we want.
This is still honest, and perfectly normal.
/6
It can be a tool - or even a weapon - to use in pursuit of what they want.
/7
We can't understand why this person would lie to us and use us, for money or property, or for what we can do for them.
Their words no longer mean anything - just empty vessels, tools for what drives them.
/8
Money
Ideology
Compromise
Ego
Drugs aren't listed here specifically, but that one is obvious enough that it probably doesn't need to be covered. ;-)
/9
This is where the concept of trust comes in. Trust - like respect - needs to be earned, for good reason.
/10
It's helpful to think of this in terms of dating - vetting dating partners applies to politics and candidates more than any other analogy that I can imagine. :-)
/11
*Have a list of red flags: things that would rule them out as a partner.
Not having your red flags top-of-mind going in, is like picking up twitter without a specific goal in mind: you run the risk of being sucked in for way too long. ;-)
/12
We have to treat each other, to an extent, as people that can be trusted, just to be able to have a conversation.
But we don't share deeply personal things that someone could use to hurt us, until we deeply trust them.
/13
But we wouldn't trust a new person to promise us that they will drive us to a surgery, or watch our kids. That's deep trust territory.
/14
But there are some things that short-circuit the trust-earning process.
Two come to mind:
/15
Some people can overwhelm us with charisma and affection, to the point that it tricks our wiring into trusting them.
This is why narcissists "love bomb" people early in relationships; because it often works, if we aren't watching for it.
/16
Our framers recognized this and, believe it or not, this is why they created the Electoral College - as a safeguard against demagogues.
SCOTUS just took a case on this btw, some background here:
/17
Because in some very real ways, we are about to trust them with our lives.
/18
Just like charism can personally short-circuit our trust-earning process, institutions can do this in a larger, less personal way.
Society is designed to teach us to trust institutions, and we rely on them now more than ever.
/19
How do I know this router will work with my PC? Because standards organizations have enforced standards.
How do we know a politician is trustworthy? Well, that's an interesting question...
/20
It is terrible when one of them fails; but that usually is a sign that we need to fix & improve it, so that it doesn't happen again - not to destroy it.)
/21
As it turns out, the framers expected *us* to do that for ourselves - with the help of a strong free press.
We have institutions that kind of do this, but not for *us*
/22
What happens when one of those parties no longer considers hypocrisy and dishonesty to be political liabilities?
Well, we end up trusting people that we shouldn't have.
/23
/24
Money
Ideology
Compromise
Ego
Just like an addict, they have decided to give up everything, in pursuit of something that they cannot speak of, or admit publicly.
/25
Well, we are all working to figure that out - and our intelligence agencies have already figured out a *lot* more than we have, for sure.
I hinted at one aspect in this thread, but there are others:
/26
In fact, they are actively using those norms instrumentally, just like language:
/27
Trump and the GOP are cynically using this system.
/28
So, what are some of the ways that trump and the GOP are using their language instrumentally, and manipulating the press to help them achieve their goals?
A couple of examples...
/30
We can never discount this.
He once called a woman's husband on speaker, and got him to admit infidelity. Just to hurt their relationship.
/31
In the 80s, Trump became notorious for "greenmailing" - claiming he was buying stock, hinting of takeovers, and then either selling on the run-up or trying to extract lucrative concessions.
/32
salon.com/2019/10/22/don…
1) Allows them to frame it first
2) It allows them to claim to their base that this is no big deal - just look, "both sides" do it.
Neutralizes critcism.
/33
Remember when Elijah Cummings exposed the Saudi Nuclear Tech transfer?
No?
Most people don't.
/34
So they take a thread of truth, and release a highly misleading narrative.
This is very similar to the way Russia creates propaganda.
e.g. Unmasking
/35