Post AxA3LLlvQbbLbgBFp2 by GuerillaOntologist@social.coop
(DIR) More posts by GuerillaOntologist@social.coop
(DIR) Post #Ax9zstC3myf7098ryK by interfluidity@zirk.us
2025-08-14T12:22:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
it’s the authentic will of the people when they seem to agree with me.it’s the way the system is rigged when it appears that they do not.(hint: there’s no such thing as the authentic will of the people independent of the system by which it is ascertained or constituted.)
(DIR) Post #AxA1HrupmEJEERYlMG by admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org
2025-08-14T12:38:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity Exactly the point why i am wondering if humanity failed as a general thing. This much suffering without at least some authentic free will? Sounds like a bad fantasy from a utilitarian nightmare.
(DIR) Post #AxA1IDpyGzUWDjSBpg by GuerillaOntologist@social.coop
2025-08-14T12:38:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity As Ed Whitfield once said, "Most people think democracy means everybody gets to have a say, and I get to have my way." That said, I do think that there is a lot of validity in the methodology of Gilens and Page (2014) showing the massive disconnect between popular sentiment as ascertained by polling numbers and political outcomes.
(DIR) Post #AxA1mzG8WWWjz7MVsG by interfluidity@zirk.us
2025-08-14T12:43:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@GuerillaOntologist if popular sentiment as ascertained by polling numbers were “the authentic will of the people”, then should we replace elections or legislative outcomes with polling numbers?i also think our political outcomes are plutocratic, poorly serve the general welfare. I’m glad to use Gilens+Page to help make that case.but args abt democratic “preference aggregation” i think ultimately have to be consequentialist, not framed in terms of accuracy in adducing some preexisting truth.
(DIR) Post #AxA1u3nG41H04gE9JI by interfluidity@zirk.us
2025-08-14T12:45:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@admitsWrongIfProven whatever it is, we are irredeemably within it and have little choice but to work our way through it.
(DIR) Post #AxA3LLlvQbbLbgBFp2 by GuerillaOntologist@social.coop
2025-08-14T13:01:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity A: Maybe. If that would lead to policies that better serve the general welfare, which I think there is a good argument for, then from a consequentialist standpoint it would seem like a reasonable case to make (tho it would turn polling methodology into a battlefield).For the record, tho, I'm a sortitionist, as I think that random selection from among the voting age population would give us far better outcomes than the system we have now that selects for scruplelessness.
(DIR) Post #AxA3SJGf8ZHTrosO4O by admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org
2025-08-14T13:02:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity We are special as the propaganda didn't get to us 100% We are defective because the instructions provided did not correctly reach us
(DIR) Post #AxA4VUYRjHb7hBH9Jw by interfluidity@zirk.us
2025-08-14T13:14:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@GuerillaOntologist i agree that the current system selects pathologically. i disagree that sortition under anything like existing institutions would be much better. selection effects would be replaced by capture effects, the selected would very quickly cease to be representative by virtue of their selection and ensuing experience, and not just in desirable ways like learning to act in their new roles on behalf of the public.
(DIR) Post #AxA6BEKgX4N7V6IyrA by admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org
2025-08-14T13:18:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@interfluidity If it's the latter, we might be in a simulation and should work to stop the nonsense. If an entity tries to cultivate artificial intelligence but just lets happen what happens instead of parenting, it's not mature enough to have ai.
(DIR) Post #AxA6BF6tdow7ucrU0G by interfluidity@zirk.us
2025-08-14T13:33:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@admitsWrongIfProven don’t worry, the simulation is only simulated, we needn’t take it so seriously.