• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What happens when Herd Mentality flips? Racism in France is reaching new heights

RiverDad

RiverDad

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
5,039
Reaction score
1,515
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What happens when a preference cascade starts in the public sphere? What's a preference cascade?

Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one's wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. . . A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.

In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.​

The cascade occurs when people begin to realize that the Private Truth that they hold in opposition to the Public Lie is in fact held by most people and so they begin to adhere to the Public Lie less and less.

That distortion of public opinion played out last week with the firing of the Mozilla CEO. Is the acceptance of homosexual marriage a Public Lie or a Private Truth? Is pubic opinion being shaped in reaction to how people really feel or by how they're being coerced into feeling?

What happens though when the coercive tactics no longer work and Private Truths begin to be acknowledged in public? Look at France:

As many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist, an annual report for the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia, revealed this week, suggesting that intolerance in France was on the rise.

And the 2013 end of year report makes for sober reading once again, with levels of intolerance apparently on the rise for the fourth year running and the number of French people concerned by immigration (16 percent) at the highest level since 2002.

And according to the BVA poll which the report is based on as many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist. In a survey of just over 1,000 people, nine percent said they were “quite” racist, which is an increase of two percentage points compared to the same survey in 2012. A further 26 percent admitted to being “a little” racist, which is an increase from 22 percent in 2012.

The poll was published in the week after the anti-immigration National Front (FN) party secured historic results in the local elections, picking up a record 11 towns. . . .

Tin said the most worrying stat from the report was the fact that six out ten French people said “certain behaviour can sometimes justify racist reactions”, which he says “makes racist opinions excusable”.​
 
Absolutely fascinating stuff RiverDad! :applaud

IMO; should Private Truth ever become Public Truth it will signal the end of Political Correctness and Liberalism_
 
RiverDad said:
What happens when a preference cascade starts in the public sphere? What's a preference cascade?

Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one's wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. . . A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.

In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.​

The cascade occurs when people begin to realize that the Private Truth that they hold in opposition to the Public Lie is in fact held by most people and so they begin to adhere to the Public Lie less and less.

That distortion of public opinion played out last week with the firing of the Mozilla CEO. Is the acceptance of homosexual marriage a Public Lie or a Private Truth? Is pubic opinion being shaped in reaction to how people really feel or by how they're being coerced into feeling?

What happens though when the coercive tactics no longer work and Private Truths begin to be acknowledged in public? Look at France:

As many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist, an annual report for the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia, revealed this week, suggesting that intolerance in France was on the rise.

And the 2013 end of year report makes for sober reading once again, with levels of intolerance apparently on the rise for the fourth year running and the number of French people concerned by immigration (16 percent) at the highest level since 2002.

And according to the BVA poll which the report is based on as many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist. In a survey of just over 1,000 people, nine percent said they were “quite” racist, which is an increase of two percentage points compared to the same survey in 2012. A further 26 percent admitted to being “a little” racist, which is an increase from 22 percent in 2012.

The poll was published in the week after the anti-immigration National Front (FN) party secured historic results in the local elections, picking up a record 11 towns. . . .

Tin said the most worrying stat from the report was the fact that six out ten French people said “certain behaviour can sometimes justify racist reactions”, which he says “makes racist opinions excusable”.​
Click to expand...

Racism, tribalism, xenophobia, call it what you like- it ain't news. Nor is the fact that many people who hide their racism feel free to express it when others around them do. Hey, sometimes the cascade builds up momentum 'till you got a good, old-fashioned lynch mob happening!
Primatologists call the series of responses, "See the stranger, fear the stranger, hate the stranger, kill the stranger." Personally, I deplore it. I can't help thinking that we can do better, ya know? That we're an improvement on monkeys and apes. But, do what thou wilt.
 
RiverDad said:
What happens when a preference cascade starts in the public sphere? What's a preference cascade?
Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one's wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. . . A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.

In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.​

The cascade occurs when people begin to realize that the Private Truth that they hold in opposition to the Public Lie is in fact held by most people and so they begin to adhere to the Public Lie less and less.

That distortion of public opinion played out last week with the firing of the Mozilla CEO. Is the acceptance of homosexual marriage a Public Lie or a Private Truth? Is pubic opinion being shaped in reaction to how people really feel or by how they're being coerced into feeling?

What happens though when the coercive tactics no longer work and Private Truths begin to be acknowledged in public? Look at France:
As many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist, an annual report for the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia, revealed this week, suggesting that intolerance in France was on the rise.

And the 2013 end of year report makes for sober reading once again, with levels of intolerance apparently on the rise for the fourth year running and the number of French people concerned by immigration (16 percent) at the highest level since 2002.

And according to the BVA poll which the report is based on as many as 35 percent of French people admit to being “quite” or “a little” racist. In a survey of just over 1,000 people, nine percent said they were “quite” racist, which is an increase of two percentage points compared to the same survey in 2012. A further 26 percent admitted to being “a little” racist, which is an increase from 22 percent in 2012.

The poll was published in the week after the anti-immigration National Front (FN) party secured historic results in the local elections, picking up a record 11 towns. . . .

Tin said the most worrying stat from the report was the fact that six out ten French people said “certain behaviour can sometimes justify racist reactions”, which he says “makes racist opinions excusable”.​
Click to expand...

It is the other way around for gays in the United States. The Public Lie was disapproval of homosexuality and same sex marriage and the Private Truth was indifference towards both. That is why it has shifted so suddenly and rapidly. In the United States they pushed laws criminalizing sodomy, taught in public classrooms that gays were mentally ill and dangerous, and demonized gays as people seeking to corrupt children. In 2003 the dam broke with Lawrence versus Texas and Massachusetts legalized same sex marriage and then there was a huge push to prohibit same sex marriage in the states.

The last few years we have seen the most rapid shift in public opinion on an issue in United States history. The only way that shift makes sense is that if it reflects opinions that people already held in secret and are only now comfortable to share in public now that they know other people are comfortable sharing. As gay people have been coming out and the falsehoods that people have been spreading have become increasingly apparent, the Public Lie is falling apart.
 
CriticalThought said:
The last few years we have seen the most rapid shift in public opinion on an issue in United States history. The only way that shift makes sense is that if it reflects opinions that people already held in secret and are only now comfortable to share in public now that they know other people are comfortable sharing. As gay people have been coming out and the falsehoods that people have been spreading have become increasingly apparent, the Public Lie is falling apart.
Click to expand...

What is incongruent with your hypothesis is the ever escalating harsh enforcement against heresy. The stakes are increasing and so is the intolerance towards dissenting opinion which opposes the pro-homosexual viewpoint. This should not be the happening if the Public Lie was not so difficult to maintain because it aligned with the Private Truth.

What we should be seeing is a relaxation of the heresy hunt as more people uncloak and declare their acceptance of homosexuality. What keeps their same-ideal brothers in the dark when they can see that there is no consequence to showing support? All of the negative sanctioning is directed at those who oppose homosexuality's missions. What kind of special idiot would one have to be to publicly oppose homosexuality and take that abuse when one could shed that Public Lie and reveal one's Private Truth that they support homosexuality's reform missions?

The reality before us doesn't support your hypothesis. The evidence points to the Public Lie being "acceptance of homosexuality" while the Private Truth is now "disapproval of homosexuality." People have an easier road ahead of them (permitted to keep their jobs) if they sing the praises of homosexuality in public.
 
RiverDad said:
What is incongruent with your hypothesis is the ever escalating harsh enforcement against heresy. The stakes are increasing and so is the intolerance towards dissenting opinion which opposes the pro-homosexual viewpoint. This should not be the happening if the Public Lie was not so difficult to maintain because it aligned with the Private Truth.
Click to expand...

Rather absurd. What harsh enforcement against heresy? That is the irony. There are so few cases that it is national news when it happens. The CEO of Mozilla, the President of Chick Fil A, the patriarch of Duck Dynasty, the baker in Coloarado, and the wedding photographer in New Mexico. Those are the cases that are used repetitively to make the narrative of "quieting dissent". This is the crafting of a new lie, in which the people who have been oppressed are now the oppressors. But so few are the cases, and so strong the backlash even from within the own ranks of the LGBT community to such a role, that it is a fabrication. Only the most naive accept it.

My case is self evident. To date the people who oppose homosexuality and same sex marriage have not been fired form their jobs, imprisoned, and treated as mentally ill. Just like the old white slave owners shivered at the prospect of what their former property would do with their freedom, the religious bigots who sought to demonize and persecute gays and lesbians now worry how a newly empowered gay community will move forward. But there is no doubt. The Public Lie, is, and has always been that gays and lesbians deserve to be treated as second class citizens.
 
CriticalThought said:
Rather absurd. What harsh enforcement against heresy? That is the irony. There are so few cases that it is national news when it happens. The CEO of Mozilla, the President of Chick Fil A, the patriarch of Duck Dynasty, the baker in Coloarado, and the wedding photographer in New Mexico. Those are the cases that are used repetitively to make the narrative of "quieting dissent".
Click to expand...

You don't need more cases in order to enforce standards. That's how self-censorship works. Look at how issues played out in Europe with regard to criticism of Muslims. Editorialists and cartoonists just avoided the topic - The Public Lie was that all was swell, the Private Truth was that people were pissed off. Finally a newspaper published the cartoons and the enforcement hammer came down hard. They were just cartoons but look at what happened. Now examine what has happened since. The Public Lie is still enforced because the lesson was learned, it's just not worth the risk of some crazy Muslim shooting you

Van Gogh was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri as he was cycling to work on 2 November 2004 at about 9 o'clock in the morning. . . The killer shot van Gogh eight times with an HS2000 handgun. Initially from his bicycle, Bouyeri fired several bullets at Van Gogh, who was hit, as were two bystanders. Wounded, Van Gogh ran to the other side of the road and fell to the ground on the cycle lane. According to eyewitnesses, Van Gogh's last words were: "Mercy, mercy! We can talk about it, can't we?" Bouyeri then walked up to Van Gogh, who was still lying down, and calmly shot him several more times at close range. Bouyeri then cut Van Gogh’s throat, and tried to decapitate him with a large knife, after which he stabbed the knife deep into Van Gogh's chest, reaching his spinal cord. He then attached a note to the body with a smaller knife. Van Gogh died on the spot.​

What business wants to suffer the same targeting as Chick-fil-A? The lesson was learned. Everyone knows that homosexual activists are ready to pounce and ruin your livelihood if you go against the Public Lie. They attacked Robertson and would have been ecstatic if the family business went into ruins. They attacked two nobodies, a photographer and a baker and would be floating on cloud nine if they could bankrupt these people for their crime of violating the Pubic Lie. The Eich saga shows just how far the heresy hunters go against those who violate the Pubic Lie and utter a Private Truth, even in the sanctity of a voting booth.

Heretic hunters don't need to be like King Herod with his Massacre of the Innocents to enforce orthodoxy.
 
RiverDad said:
You don't need more cases in order to enforce standards. That's how self-censorship works. Look at how issues played out in Europe with regard to criticism of Muslims. Editorialists and cartoonists just avoided the topic - The Public Lie was that all was swell, the Private Truth was that people were pissed off. Finally a newspaper published the cartoons and the enforcement hammer came down hard. They were just cartoons but look at what happened. Now examine what has happened since. The Public Lie is still enforced because the lesson was learned, it's just not worth the risk of some crazy Muslim shooting you
Van Gogh was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri as he was cycling to work on 2 November 2004 at about 9 o'clock in the morning. . . The killer shot van Gogh eight times with an HS2000 handgun. Initially from his bicycle, Bouyeri fired several bullets at Van Gogh, who was hit, as were two bystanders. Wounded, Van Gogh ran to the other side of the road and fell to the ground on the cycle lane. According to eyewitnesses, Van Gogh's last words were: "Mercy, mercy! We can talk about it, can't we?" Bouyeri then walked up to Van Gogh, who was still lying down, and calmly shot him several more times at close range. Bouyeri then cut Van Gogh’s throat, and tried to decapitate him with a large knife, after which he stabbed the knife deep into Van Gogh's chest, reaching his spinal cord. He then attached a note to the body with a smaller knife. Van Gogh died on the spot.​

What business wants to suffer the same targeting as Chick-fil-A? The lesson was learned. Everyone knows that homosexual activists are ready to pounce and ruin your livelihood if you go against the Public Lie. They attacked Robertson and would have been ecstatic if the family business went into ruins. They attacked two nobodies, a photographer and a baker and would be floating on cloud nine if they could bankrupt these people for their crime of violating the Pubic Lie. The Eich saga shows just how far the heresy hunters go against those who violate the Pubic Lie and utter a Private Truth, even in the sanctity of a voting booth.

Heretic hunters don't need to be like King Herod with his Massacre of the Innocents to enforce orthodoxy.
Click to expand...

Whose livelihood has been ruined by gay activists? Your hyperbole knows no end.

You could upset just about any minority group in this country and face a backlash from that community and the people who support them.

You grasp at such straws. In a country of over 300 million there have been 5 cases, which are repetitively cited in ads against same sex marriage and which are parroted by right wingers like the gospel as evidence of the free speech suppressing efforts of a minority. The very backlash of Chick Fil A, Duck Dynasty, and now Mozilla is evidence that disproves the very claim you are trying to make. Militant gay activists can't enforce a "quieting the dissent" tactic on anyone without facing an equal or greater backlash of their own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom