Scholars estimate that 70-80% of the American public actively avoids political news. The rest of us are "highly engaged" political true-fans and, basically, party extremists. This dynamic has warped politics completely.
See Wrong: How Media, Politics, and Identity Drive Our Appetite for Misinformation, expert in media and politics, Dannagal Goldthwaite Young: amazon.com/Wrong-Politics…
The highly engaged pay for news subs., give attention to political news, spend time on political news on platforms, vote in primaries, contribute to political campaigns. So news orgs, platforms, candidates, & parties shape themselves around the highly engaged, who pay the bills.
Folks who are disengaged still get news in ambient ways, usually from unreliable sources, second or third hand. They hear conspiracy lies & the "outrage of the day" that they can't easily avoid. And, yes, these folks do vote. Anyway, it's a big mess.
So while we highly engaged are doing good democracy, we're also the problem.
I think about this research a lot when I think about what it means to "communicate for the democratic way of life." Like, we would want people to be highly engaged, just not like that. And it feeds on itself, getting more outrageous, extreme, intense--and alienating. 😬
Hard to solve: systemic problems (two-party system, for-profit media, EC), ethical problems ($ in politics, people gaming the system), language problems (outrage-bait, appeals to hypocrisy, threats of force, conspiracy lies, prop), and platform problems (niche media, algorithms).
Plus our cognitive & emotional vulnerabilities (motivated reasoning, right-wing authoritarian personalities, fear & threat responses, etc). There's a lot of vulnerabilities to exploit.
We have more in common than we think, but it's to no one's advantage to convey that message.
This is what I study/work towards in my teaching and research (mostly, lately focusing on those who exploit our vulnerabilities 😒). I regularly do a public lecture on "communicating for the democratic way of life." It's interesting some folks would want to silence that. 🙄
This is how life is worse for folks when politics is so polarized. These extremist conservative governors will claim they're rejecting the money bc of some <principle> but it's a cruel political calculation that people who get help will vote for Democrats.
I would like to make an argument that Trump is taking a "great man" approach to the presidency. What does that mean? 😱 I'm afraid that it is not good. 🧵
First, Hegel: “The great men in history are those whose own particular aims contain the substantial will that is the will of the World Spirit. They can be called heroes, because they have drawn their aim and their vocation not merely from the calm and orderly system..."
"An elderly man, pale and weak in mind, body, and morals, stands on a stage in front of an adoring crowd. He appears before them in disguise—orange make-up and dark bronzer attempt to give his pale skin a color that suggests youthfulness."
"A cotton candy-like confection of bright blond hair-stuff covers his head, suggesting an angelic vitality. His voice is loud, he talks rough, suggesting strength and a powerful toughness. His suit is tailored to cover up his aged and deformed body."
"Shoe lifts give him height but also make him tilt forward awkwardly—and clumsily. His loyal audience doesn’t see with their own eyes but with his. Likewise, they don’t hear him with their own ears. They hear only what he wants them to hear."
Things I've seen that show me people still don't get what 2024 is about:
"We've already seen what Trump is like as president, it will be like that."
"He can't do that."
If Trump wins, his 2nd term won't be anything like his first. It will be much worse. Laws won't stop him.
Democratic erosion scholars call this "competitive authoritarianism"--it's the way that most democracies go authoritarian now--coups with the veneer of still being democratic:
I've tried to explain this before: Trump thinks he was too nice the last time he was president. He's pissed that his generals & staff prevented him from doing what he wanted while president, made him leave the WH when he lost. He wants unlimited power.
WARNING: anyone thinking of paying anyone to vote a certain way OR anyone accepting money to vote a certain way is violating 18 US Code 597 and will be punished with fines and/or two years in jail.
Like, just FYI. There are actual laws against accepting money for votes.
Reminds me of when I teach political campaigning and we talk about GOTV strategies and I have to tell my students that there are actual laws and most of their ideas for getting folks to vote are illegal.
Here are three explainers that might be helpful for thinking about why Trump's Big Election Lie worked on his followers, why they still believe it, and why even this mountain of evidence may not change their minds.
One of the biggest weaknesses of fascist leaders is they refuse to listen to advice. They’re afraid of appearing weak. They don’t want to acknowledge that other people know more than they do. They’re cognitively irresponsible, they want the authority to declare reality.
One thing you learn when you become an expert in something is how little you know compared to how much there is to know. When you speak to a lot of experts you learn how many other things there are to know and how impossible it would be to be an expert in more than one thing.
Subject matter experts are valuable, we’re much smarter together than we are in isolation. Autocrats never want to admit that. They treat experts as threats to the autocrat’s authority (they are) & try to punish experts or force them to comply with the authoritarian’s “truth.”