Inside Cummings' Mind: Exploring Johnson's Chief Strategist's Blog - TLDR News 

you should combine with other tabs to poetic effect!

Sounds like one of those tips they add at the end of arts and crafts videos/ tv episodes.

Actually, you haven't been paying attention. He replaced Sajid political advisers with experts who will collaborate with the rest of the team. Sajid resigned. Sajid or any MP are not competent enough to produce a good budget. You need advisors. But Javids advisors were expert politicians serving Javids political career. That's why they had to go.

Sajids advisors were occupied with maximising treasury power which goes against everything in this video with respect to collaboration. Sajid could've stayed presumably if he had more team player advisors (which doesn't mean slaves..)

Yeah, he's preaching water wile drinking wine spiked with brandy and amphetamine

@@kyrilluk Please explain the removal of Julian Smith credited for devolved assembly in Stormont coming back praised by both sides of the house in Ireland. He was probably the most successful MP in the country.

@@LEThavFUNnSMILE What make you think that Dominic Cummings has anything to do with that? Is it not a decision made by Boris?

yeh deffo psycopathic ,apparently he tried to shove someone down the stairs for opposing him ,do I like him ,hmn ,I definitely admire him he is a brilliant strategist .

Adblock..

@@ameyas7726 what has Adblock got to do with the average loudness of a RU-vid video?

-12 is the norm right?

@@LexTNeville in broadcasting, yes. But I believe that RU-vid was -16LUFS and people say they changed it to -14LUFS. I am not sure how true that is, but I would not go louder than this, because RU-vid then will pull the levels down and your video will end up super quiet.

Jeremy Greysmark Broadcast LUFS standard is -23, typically web is -16 as you say though this isn’t standardised.

He is not advocating for replacing Capitalism with another system. He is just saying that Ministers are dealing with extremely complex systems which require their advisor to understand well such systems to the point of been able to predict the actual outcome of their own decision. But right now, the MPs advisors are incompetent. If you want to run the NHS, it is better to have health expert combined with economic expert rather than the current bureaucrats for example.

I couldn't disagree with your statement more. Capitalism, by which I mean free market, zero tariffs, small state, property rights, rule of law, no protectionism, capitalism benefits from the minimum regulation possible, preferably none at all. Cummings, I think agrees with me. We should not regulate to mitigate waste, regulation _causes_ waste. We should not regulate to prevent inequality (I assume you mean equality of outcome) because doing so is immoral, unfair, and everybody ends up worse off.

@@kyrilluk Where did FriedEgg imply that Cummings was advocating for replacing capitalism? What he said was that capitalism works like the complex systems Cummings describes, and while we make use of capitalism (for good reasons), we also regulate and supplement it - for good reasons. So taking Cummings' ideas at face value and trying to implement them as purely as possible, will lead to similarly severe problems as just letting capitalism run wild.

@@varana But this is only to reform the civil services. He wants people to be taken accountable. Like it is, usually in firms where people that don't perform well or make too many mistakes tends to get fired. The complex systems that dom describes exists already. It is not something he wants to invent. This is something that he wants to control.

@@kyrilluk The hospital where I work has a project to actively employ people with learning difficulties, people often seen as unemployable in other sectors, and find them things to do for the hospital. Is this something that should be discouraged? Should the complex system be left to evolve and shut those people out? What then?

No retirement fond and sick pay, as we know them. I'd like to say, his influence into government plans is way higher than into the world wars.

This idea just shows how stupid and not conservative the tory party has become. The idea of german reunification was not one introduced by bismark. Bismarck ensured the creation of a 100% ethnicaö german state with a 100% sustainable insurance system that would later be falsely used as a justification zo create the non sustainable wellfare systems we have today. Btw bismarck was opposed to the idea of fighting (especially) britain and/or russia. I think his assumption of a war between these partys destroying germany and europe wasnt to incorrect. Of it wouldnt have been a ww1 between germany and britain it would have probably ended ik a war between britain and russia.

Without Germany, Britain would have likely attacked France and Russia to assert their global dominance. The young german Empire was just the easier target.

Mor Kaubl You'll feel more conflicted if you compare these ideas with the Trump style, slogan heavy campaign that Leave actually ran.

Yeah it's ok to agree, since Big Dom isn't following these ideals anyway

deeply. i guess he believes the ends justified the means, which i can support, but i do not agree with his conclusions drawn from complex systems theory. efficient systems do indeed require lots of experimentation and incentive structures, however to this end it is crucial that we allow humans not to fear this experimentation through high minimum living standards. similarly, decentralization is actually a goal of the EU, recently they even mentioned subsidiarity on tldr, but only where it makes sense-it does not in all cases, level playing field and all that as a precondition to maximizing opportunities for experimentation.

It's normal to feel that way, Mor, since you don't have all the facts (neither do I).

Totally fair. Dominic Cummings is an interesting man with interesting ideas. Not neceasarily good ideas, but interesting ones. Of course, clever & bad is the most dangerous combination...

That "victory or death" delusion can be seen played out in the holocaust. Leveraging his complete control of the national space he enforced death on millions of innocent people to claim victory by proxy.

Slippery slope nonsense. Evolutionary systems apply to everything, literally everything. They've existed since time immemorial ,from the beginnings of civilizations, whether codified or not, the successful ones tended to prosper the ones that weren't logical/reasonable to their environment didnt. Drawing comparisons to Hitler is ridiculous and it's clear where your beliefs lie. Outside reason. Better incentive structures towards making the country the leader in the world in science and education makes you literally hitler.

Well said mate. I watch this video and broadly agree with a lot of his ideologies but as far as implementation, there's much to be desired with this Johnson dictatorship style of government.

I think the diagnosis social darwinism sugarcoated with popular science lingo is spot on. /: btw: The brain is a bad example for the butterfly effect. A persistent consciousness is proof of the ramarkable effective homeostasis achieved. Random fluctiuations are getting damped or we wouldn't be able to function. Anyway: All those emergent behaviour dsiciples consistently fail at predicting complex systems behaviour, like we all tend to do. So what's the edge this theory provides? (:

@Tomas Sullivan I think he's referring more to his "foreign policy" /war mongering but maybe you have a point in that he didn't essentially believe in Social Darwinism because he was biased to believe in the German Master race...?

Only path into analysing current necrotric state of the UK !

Not actual psychiatry. 1. Cummings denies the ever present greed of the Tory party that led to defunding social systems including his own actions. 2. Cummings cherry picks history and simplifies it by saying the assassination of Otto Bismark led to WW1 instead of looking at the situation in that era which Otto Bismark is part of the authoritarian state that didn't care about worker's rights or women rights leading to demonstrations where the demonstrators were killed by the authoritarian state...and of course this led to radicalization of people like Ferdinand Colin-Blind(the assassinator) because they didn't see any other way to be taken seriously as the people were easily killed. Otto Bismark was just another shit head interested in more power and money. Other cherry pickings include ancient Athens which interests lie in NOT GIVING everyone an education because that would mean less slaves to serve them. Also these people took advantage of women as they went out drinking and discussing until morning (deadbeat husbands and they were not grateful to their wives) 3. Cummings tries to justify decentralization when this means destroying checks and balances which does occur in dictatorship countries. And it would mean destroying the information network(between different departments) that could stop terrorists, infections, contamination, economic downfalls, and even curbing the efforts of natural disaster recovery. Ever wonder why the majority of dictatorships have poor systems in place? Decentralization is very much part of it other than the obvious corruption that took place. 4. Cummings used a political scientist's research for his decentralization theory but as every researcher would say, never focus on just that 1 research alone but take it as part of the complex mind of humans. This is just all part of Cummings con based on a edited history written for children instead of actual history. I find this Cummings to be very disingenuous when he ignores the problems he and his party made in the 1st place for greed which will happen far more easily in decentralization.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

@@jod125 understanding somebody's philosophy or psychology is one thing invoking psychiatry is quite a different matter !

A snuggle bunny?

@@Margarinetaylorgrease ...sure

Perhaps they'll follow up with "Outside Cumming's mind", power-grab in action

He believes the media is the most corrupt of all and he has plans to enforce rules against their propoganda and brainwashing tactics. I'm sure he does not engage with the media for this reason. He is their greatest fear and this is why they've called him "arrogant". They want people to hate him. Be careful what you see in the media and from seeking the truth by researching is what the media does not want us to do.

I think he just wants clever people who have made a career outside of politcs and have to something to offer rather than the majority of self serving activists who have never operated in the real world we currently have in parliament.. He's got a point..

I think cummings has some good points. But he's too quick to judge the situation he finds himself in. I think it's a case of the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.

Boris needed the best and most efficient political campaign manager. As a reward, Cummings is in charge of trying to change Whitehall culture.

davide gentili He’s been an advisor for other Tory cabinet members & proved himself, so Boris promoted him

He needed to get himself into a position of power to effect his changes. He doesn't want to be PM because then he'd wouldn't be able to directly apply his changes.

Boris is far from a simpleton.

Johnson is so thick he needs somebody else pulling the strings.

JE For the Forster yes he does look like Gollum well spotted.

Gollum or Grima Wormtongue?

Don't insult Gollum like that.

@@pussieswillneverbeheroes6019 nah, but your white women look tasty!!!

@Pro Pane As a matter of fact - yes, and you genuinely should listen to him long form - "Dominic Cummings Hollow Men" would be good keywords to find a lecture of his. He hates bankers, he hates civil servants, he hates politicians, he hates the sorts of midwit who clog the arteries of HR departments, NGOs, think tanks and policy recommendation teams - he doesn't want power. He wants to set up a team which will do sufficient damage to the civil service's avenues of control and revolving doors with chairmanship and consultancy positions with moneyed interests. Olly Robbins (a guy as pro-EU as it gets) - how much did he get as a retainer for his one-day-a-week consultancy position with Goldman Sachs after he left? Take a guess - these are the sorts of people we're trying to burn out. You ever seen someone pour hot liquid metal into an ant's nest? That's what our halls of power need - and if Cummings achieves 20% of what he's set on - that will have made leaving absolutely worth it.

@@fterimage I've got more hope in Cummings than Boris but I like Boris. He should do that zip line thing again. Anyway, what do I know? I voted leave so I'm a "far right"...

@@redghost6386 Maybe it is just that what you want is not even real.

probably sees them as a means to an end

Nspnspker politics is, in general, not nearly as ideal as Cummings makes it out to be. Politics is about selfish jerks screwing over millions of people in order to get benefits. It always has been. And I’m not taking sides here, because every “side” is just another private interest trying to screw everyone /else/ over. That’s why politics doesn’t apply realism. Nobody cares to actually try to find the best solution. Flinging shit is just too much fun, I guess, even if it costs everyone tons of money and kills people. The problem with the idea of ending the feud is that politics MUST be about protecting private interests. That’s because, for any real discussion to be had on what actions a government should take or what objective it should set, you must first agree on the fundamental assumptions that drive everything else. Is equality of outcome important? (Just one assumption for example) Some say no, and some say yes. If you got everyone to agree on one of the two, then you could move forward... but they don’t. And, unlike former eras where compromise allowed good government, nobody wants to compromise. Therefore, chaos.

Sleeping Insomiac How do you know? No sign of failure yet...

@@chrisbuxton1958 Exactly what the Germans were saying in `39...

@@chrisbuxton1958 keep dreamin boy. In 5 years time even inside the bullet proof bubble that many brexiteers have shelled themselves in the mind will have wearied trying to carry on with the reality/logic defying 'things are going to get better' schtick that still rules today. See you in 5 years.

@alan bane Pretty lame attempt at trolling, 3/10. Nothing has happened, because, for all intents and purposes, you're still in.

Being ruled by an unaccountable and corrupt bureaucracy has little appeal, frankly. Leave really does mean leave, for better or for worse.

I use DDG at work and I actually had to turn on strict safesearch because searching for literally anything will give back NSFW pictures.

they have differing world views. the only similarity is that they are both great campaign managers able to get people into office

@@ahmedsuliman6640 Both are amazing manipulators of weak leaders. Charlatans

Pretty much. All turning point shite.

Cummings isn't cool tho

Steve Bannon at least love his country and served in the military! Cummings is just a parasite !

Darth Fluffy he also wanting Uk to lead in education and scientific research yet is part of the Tories who promises less funding for education and headed the leave campaign where the EU provides a huge amount of funding for research. His actions seem to be at odds with his ideals.

CAPITALISM IS THE ONLY MERITOCRACY

Why not partner with the tories? If he signed up with Labour he wouldn't be able to change anything. Better to be in government and be able to influence things than in opposition with no power but at least you can feel good because you're not working with the tories :)

If you wanted to change society, why wouldn't you get close to the most powerful man in the country? You could take the Momentum/XR route of going on protest marches and writing angry tweets; that hasn't really paid dividend thus far, though, has it?

That's why he's a proponent of having "Maths for Presidents" as a University module to supplement Politics Philosophy and Economics degrees.

I hope we don't have people governing the country who make decisions on the toss of a coin!

Generally, competent people are driven out of politics and the only people left are ideologues and corrupt cynics

Well I wouldn't know that and I consider myself reasonably intelligent and well educated. I suspect most of the population would be the same. Only gambling addicts would have such detailed knowledge of odds. I would prefer the country is ruled by people who make decisions based on well researched evidence, not as a game of chance! If that's where Cummings is leading his puppet Boris I fear for the future

@@johnhooper7040 Cummings' point is that if politicians cannot even understand fairly simple mathematical terms, how can we trust them to understand how best to run the education system, how best to spend/save money. Thinking you need to be a gambler to understand probability is absurd and frankly only goes to show his point, that the average UK citizen is a grossly uneducated in the sciences.

I happened to watch this video earlier today, then not by coincidence a video of Dominic Cummings speech for IPPR appeared in my feed. I'm 30 minutes in and already he's covered most of the points mentioned in this video. I guess they found his blog TLDR.

Science? Lolzords. These kids did McDegrees.

What field of science do you work in?

@@ARCANEmateCLAN Chemical Physics :)

Ikr, usually the media just pick fun of him as a bogeyman, or somehow try to present him as the Prime Minister’s puppet master

Ricardo Guanipa Like Eichmann?

I'm gonna get grief for saying this, but the whole "we don't need experts" is the biggest misquotation in contemporary politics. What Gove said was "people in this country have had enough of experts making predictions and getting them wrong." He wasn't saying experts were worthless, he was saying that they weren't infallible. And on this particular occasion - well, the economy has held up much better than most economists thought it would in the wake of the Brexit vote. Gove was right to be sceptical. Overall I agree with many of the observations in your post. It's just the whole Gove quote is one of my personal bugbears, particularly as it is generally raised in the context of how fake news has become acceptable while itself being an example of fake news.

Alex Potts Thanks for bring this to my attention, I didn’t know about it. I would like to add that while various predictions may well have been off, it’s clear that the motive of the statement is populist. He's setting 'the people' against the 'experts' who are clearly the educated and therefore the elite. Someone who genuinely had 'the people's' interest in mind would set out to provide them with information that would help them. Economics is a social science as well as simply a numbers game. It’s the product of numbers and social behaviour, and therefore not a simplistic system, the outcomes of which are easily predicted. Imagine what it would be like to have a leader who explained this sort of thing to the people who have never bothered to think about it.

Well, experts on Brexit were wrong (I and many others predicted that). The experts in the OBR predicted numbers which I and others didn't buy. We were right and we did not have all their data to hand. There is paper to be written on 'instinct'. It doesn't just lay in the deep parts of our minds from the period where we had to fight or flight whilst hunting animals. Instinct serves us well today in markets and events the world over. Some may just call it common sense - the ability to speak to many people in life and then build a picture - what does it look like on the ground? If it doesn't match, then the experts are sat in Whitehall commuting short distances in a bubble and are clueless about reality. There they sit, on tv and in offices predicting, and more often than not getting it wrong. For all their education I have a better record of calling it. My education is not specific to their field yet I have better outcomes - work that one out. I too am tired of experts. Oh and this whole green (new Marxism) agenda - that is going to be found out to be the largest hoax and robbing of the poor the country and the world has ever seen. It is a perfect excuse to suck money up from the bottom where it can be ill-afforded to serve the interests of companies whom have run out of road when it comes to consumer power to purchase products. This is a new socialist doctrine. I'll give it 20-30 years.

Richard Wills-Woodward Excellent. Do you diagnose your own medical complaints as well? As there is no reason for anyone to go to university, or acquire any knowledge base through extended study, let's close down the NHS altogether and save ourselves a lot of money by simply asking our neighbours to cure our illnesses with their common sense. Perhaps the local amateur theatre group can come up a solution to the coronavirus? Or perhaps the next quiz night can feature designs for that bridge Johnson has been going on about? Down With Architects And Orthodontists!! You would think that someone so gifted in native understanding would come up with a more persuasive argument than, 'I knew it before anyone else!' That doesn’t even work in primary school.

@@pencilfriendpaperscribbler6032 Definitely down with most architects - nothing today is much good and certainly not attractive for the most part. You refer much to the health service, but of course in health I would refer to the doctor. As for the 'I knew it before anyone else' - I didn't say that. You would think after so much fake news you would learn to be competent with the English language and not state things that weren't stated. When it comes to the economics and economic forecasts, yes I do have a better record and yes others not in that bubble too, so I don't stand alone there. The 'educated' in many fields still know little when it comes to 'getting it' and forecasting the animal spirit and instinct. This is the part that hurts so many 'experts' - the facts that detail is for the interest of the subject and in no way makes you better at understanding the big picture...at all. This still kills so many university graduates and even older people inside. You should do your best to educate yourself but do not think that makes you a master of your subject in all aspects of your field. It has been shown most people outside a field predict better than those within due to more lateral thinking and not getting bogged down in (unnecessary) detail. What matters is whether you can read the winds. I'll give you another on the NHS too - I am no doctor (as already stated indirectly)... doctors (most) defend it but the system is poor and yet few can see the poor management in it, the bloated management structures and the poor logic of theatre allocation, the fat and lazy people that get more unfit by the second meaning the NHS spends 11% of its budget on diabetes now. Then there's smoking and drinking to excess. Those things with poor management are costings us tens of billion of pounds but the public have an NHS religion and so do the doctors. Nothing gets any better. It doesn't need money, it needs management and discipline with an enormous does of outside interference to shake up the narcissistic management and over-sized unions.

But that makes sense. Not that Cummings has any interests in eugenics, but that someone that reckless to have written that is clearly no career politician. He doesn't want people with filtres who are thinking about career paths but unfiltered minds that he can deploy strategically.

@@oliverlane9716 So he wants bad ideas to prop him up?

@@oliverlane9716 what strategy would that have been? We'll never find out now anyway, unless the strategy was to hire a toxic nut case to fire.

fiona fiona I really doubt a eugenics policy would have came about

​@@DaveParr What's wrong with eugenics?

You mean Archduke Ferdinand of Austria

@@jeffharmed1616 I would have, but this video was talking about Bismark and his plans for a unified Germany. Ferdinands death was the catalyst that bismark used for justification... or at least some of it.

It sounds great but in practice he just hired a eugenicist because he called himself a 'super forecaster'. Cummings conveniently forgets he's vulnerable to the same short sighted bias and stupidity that he admonishes the political system for.

B Frosty he didn’t hire a eugenist, he hired someone who thinks that we “could” selectively breed humans to be faster, stronger or have higher IQ. He even said “we shouldn’t” but we “could” which is just stating a fact

SteinbrecherBack harsh

@@jamesgiles6134 You just described eugenics.

@@theMoporter Yes. And he described someone who thinks that eugenics is possible but it's a bad idea. Probably for moral reasons if I had to guess.

What did he talk about? (to avoid me destroying my phone, which is what would happen if I tried to listen to 30 secs of him talking)

Boris is the patsy and Europe would hold him back, some how. Something, something, profit.

Him running the vote leave campaign wasn't because he was a brexiteer at heart or anything, but more that he saw it as a chance to change politics by running a different kind of campaign and he succeeded in that. Politics and the way people look at elections/referendums is different because the leave campaign won. He thinks the EU holds us back in some ways but the biggest issue is the UK system itself. So by working with Boris he can try to tackle the UK's faults and by promoting Brexit he can cut out the EU problems by leaving, as he has no chance at all of changing/fixing the EU.

Yes

why did u find them disturbing

He can’t read

In Plato's time philosophers meant scientists.

That's the extreme. Seems more like he's describing a system that leans towards a meritocracy that's balanced between fields. Not just philosophers or [insert academic field]ers. Given where the UK is at now that's incredibly bold. Too bold. So bold it won't happen. And I hope he's accounting for the dangers of incomplete changes. I do software so incomplete changes and their dangers is my specialty.

Not exactly. He'd have a bunch of scientists competing against each other, with some as-yet-unexplained mechanism which would be able to tell us who had the right ideas. I don't know what this mechanism would be, and it's not obvious to me that such a mechanism is possible, but I agree with Cummings that democracy isn't it. (To quote Churchill, "democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others"; and "the most persuasive argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.")

@Bing Bang Because it's working soooo well for social sciences, right. :D

@Bing Bang Joke aside, yes, it will sort itself out in the end, but at the rate things are going, it could be decades of bad science making everyone lose time, both by pursuing dead ends that should have been weeded out long ago and by burying the good studies among a mountain of chaff. Worse, it might create a bias (justified or not), by pushing scientists to ignore, let's say (entirely randomly, I swear), papers from Chinese scientists even though they might not be complete bunk published to pad publication stats.

In the EU the beurocrats make law and the elected MEPs rubber stamp it. Go and read about it so you can avoid making embarrassing mistakes in public.

Hold my what?

Billie Piper’s Teeth Hold these 🥜

​@wargent99 Questioned for their speech? I'll be honest, little unclear on what you mean by that. If you mean, should some forms of speech be legislated for or against, I'd argue yes, the same as other types of behaviour. We have legislation against behaviour that is likely or even designed to result in harm to others, and while freedom of expression is important, it's also something that shouldn't be without consequence if said expression causes genuine harm to others. This area of the law can be a bit murky though, as there are a lot of laws against speech, art and so on that are written vaguely and given to police interpretation for the purpose of arrest and even on the spot fines, so that's where the discussion would get more technical than I think the Comments section warrants.

Never liked Cameron, but what Cameron said about him is right, a career psychopath.

Cummings is still a massive hypocrite and wannabe authoritarian

caleb pearce Does it change your opinion of the Leave campaign? Why is the Right following Trump in their style of campaigning if these are the ideas behind it? Do turn that over in your head before becoming enamoured with Cummings because he says these things on his blog. Good ideas do not belong to Cummings simply because he is the only one you have heard talk about them. What does belong to him is the actual outcome of his behaviour.

@@pencilfriendpaperscribbler6032 yea I agree with that too, if he essentially wants politics to attract the 'right' kind of person then yes he has done the complete opposite with boris so there are definitely better people to carry out those ideals

@@pencilfriendpaperscribbler6032 You keep on going on about Trump election. You are aware that Brexit vote happened BEFORE Trump election, right??! Also that Cummins was a campaign manger for keep the pound a decade earlier, right???

kyrilluk Yes. The political Right was around long before either of them. These are the sorts of things you learn from studying Liberal Arts degrees like history.

Pencilfriend Paperscribbler I’m honestly struggling to see your connection between Trump & Leave. People in the UK have always been very sceptical of the EU 🤔