Vlad's main channel ru-vid.comvideos Support Vlad's work on Patreon! www.patreon.com/vladvexler Support Vlad via PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/vladvexler?country.x=GB&locale.x=en_GB
Vlad, small point on the ending of your videos. You end them abruptly, and that's fine but it doesn't leave sufficient time for me to listen to the entire episode and pause it in time to leave a comment. The RU-vid lords then skip immediately to the next video. Maybe some sort of warning, 5 seconds earlier, would be helpful. Thanks as always.
Vlad, I’ve been listening to you for almost two years. Your explanation of the difference between ‘liar politicians’ and ‘post truth populist politicians’ is one of the most valuable things that I’ve learned from you.
Same, very important distinction. The thought crossed my mind that Tucker's interview with Putin didn't go too well, because it was between a post truther and a liar. The liar didn't like being asked to confirm post truths directed at a specific US audience.
@@artmcteagle What was your reaction to the video of Tucker Carlson shopping for groceries in an upscale Russian market, and his "conclusions" from that experience? In some ways, I thought that was more telling of Carlson's motives than his interview with Putin.
Трамп НИКОГДА не поддерживал Путина. Не повторяйте лжи, которую распространяет лево-либеральная шваль - главный спонсор Путина и его ГЛАВНЫЙ партнёр по развязыванию войны в Украине и уничтожению свободы и жизни на земле.
I am replying here but I usually don’t communicate on social media. People can easily misunderstand what you are saying because they don’t hear your voice and how what you are saying is being said along with no facial expressions.
@@deeh1965 Spoken words are much easier to misunderstand than written media, especially if it includes tables, drawings, diagrams etc. Facial expressions do not have to do anything with the topic that is currently being discussed. Same for the voice. People often see connections here where there are none.
Yeah I had to stop watching and unsub to Jake Bro because of his vehemently pro-Israeli stance, inc. pro-indiscriminate bombings & genocide of Palestinians, when he'd only a few months prior said he could *never* support bombings of civilian targets (when Ukraine first stated to hit Moscow with drones). His initial anti-drone stance I thought was misguided but at least understandable but after his pro-Israel bombing statements, I realised he was just choosing which truths he felt most comfortable with in the moment. It was just too depressing to hear such hatred for another group of people and now I don't have any faith in his moral compass so can't watch him. It reminded me how cautious we must be when someone is telling us how to react, how to feel, and how their own prejudices inform their opinions (as do our own biases - but being ignorant of them is terrifying and corrosive).
@@CMY187 Hi there again, where did you see comments under my name being pro-Russian? I'm vehemently pro-Ukrainian (regardless of who's 'ahead' on the battlefield - I'm with them as long as they need our support, I'm Australian) and detest the Putin regime, but some of my comments are being deleted (and I don't say anything offensive, nor use links) so if you've really seen my username & profile pic with pro-Russian comments, can you please send me the name of the video?
You're like a voice of reason & intelligence and sometimes nowadays it feel like there are so so few of these voices left. Thank you for being here I really appreciate it
“Liberation through the denial of truth. The truth puts me in chains; engaging in a coconspiracy in which I throw it off liberates me.” This is sums it up perfectly. It’s more pleasant for people to not have to face reality. The classic “I reject your reality and substitute my own.” - But now people surround themselves with likeminded individuals and they all just live in their bubble of lies, confirming each others biases. We see this on both sides of the political spectrum. I have no idea how we come back from this. People like being comfortable in their bubbles. Reality can be a cold, cruel and inconvenient thing.
Algorithmic effect! Good to have a name for it. This is exactly what my uncle was doing on Facebook. They have him trained so well he doesn't see the ridiculousness inherent in saying "but biden oppressed us with covid vaccines" when I post something about how unfree russia is.
I am sorry about your uncle. Yeah, I see this as being about signals and symbols - seeing certain constellations of words and responding with other constellations of words.
@@VladVexlerChat yes constellations of words ... associated with constellations of feelings and automatic (perhaps limbic) responses ... seemingly all based on fear and anger ... and with no necessity to be similar between and among us... it is easy to agree on "not this" particularly when we are not asked to agree on "what instead". This understanding is literally giving me a physical sense untethered free fall ... I guess I'll just fall until something else comes to me
Rather serendipitously Beau of the Fifth just put out a video letting people know about some trending disinformation people might need to correct their uncles on lol. A slightly different case of an intentionally false story, however with a similarly intended goal of obfuscating pre-established historical truths, or replacing them via the algorithmic effect with nonsense such that the lessons of history are lost to contemporary political talking points.
I think the algorythmification you're talking about is what I've heard others calling "dialogue-tree". A discussion becomes like talking to a NPC in a videogame, everything you say has a pre-programmed response, critical thought goes out the window
Coming from a background in which I have often had to use the word 'algorithmic' in its strict, rather than attempted metaphorical sense, I wish we could find another word for the 'auto-association' or 'conditioned association' of unrelated ideas. I would especially like to get rid of 'algorithmification' 😊.
Most people are NPCs. They have a few lines they say and generally are incapable of behaving differently or changing their minds. Realising this is the key to not get mad at other people.
@@svr5423 No. This is profoundly wrong. To think of other people in this eay is literally dehumanising and obliterates their lived experience. It’s just a smartass way to say they are insignificant and impotent: even if someone is unintelligent, you have no clue how worthy or rich their unseen life is. I have known many people with borderline or “subnormal” IQ, &or with autism, who more or less parrot platitudes, their conversation is truisms. That does not prevent someone from being compassionate, emotionally sensitive, fun to be with, skilled at thungs, or a million other things.
Thanks Vlad, this really cleared up a few confusions I had. Seeing through the murky world of modern politics can be quite difficult amid the flood of i formation we are subject too.
we shouldn't forget that Trump is very unlikely to know who Navalny was. He either picked it up on TV or somebody told him that he should say something and mentioned the name.
The statement is incoherent to say the least. This is not a statement written by a political committee on behalf of someone ignorant on a matter. It's written by someone looking for pity points. Biden's statement is 'designed by committee'. But that's pretty much par for the course.
Modero that is just arrogant and stupid. He was president of the United States. And intitially he was not an incompetent businessman. He was better than the rubbish eastern academics or the degenerate old New York families. He s just bet on one trend too long...but the perchase of his first hotel and first casino was brilliant and very very brave. I would strongly suspect his father had skills in Corrupting NYC too. But then again Jacob Astor had the support of Jefferson in trying to displace us the british on the colombia river. And commodore Vanderbilt played politics to get his steam boat monopoly. Big money comes with political manipulation even bribery. After trump chrashed he reinvented him self as a media persona , something other elite families did too. And NOW after a coup in the Republican party or taking over what others like the Kochs and Bushes started , he has a money making machine and the ability to spend untold millions on his lawyers. This is his third reincarnation. And for a rich guy in a crazy world he did raise kids who were functional not spoiled and crazy. AND he has read the mood of America brilliantly got ahead of the demand for deglobalization and seperation from continental Europe. By the way Biden just continues what Trump started.
About prosecuting Trump instead of waiting for the elections to take their course: There is no "convenient" time to enforce the law. Either you do or you do not, and I don't want to meet the person who honestly believes it's better to have no law at all.
@@hugoguerreiro1078 That seems doubtful to me. The impeachment proceedings kind of proved for a fact that his poll numbers thrive on this kind of thing.
@@ugiswrong Well, I'd be careful how you phrase that, because, as you should well know, there are trials going on related to 6 January 2021 right now, and that in theory these statements of yours could end up costing you your eligibility to hold office--depending on where you take this. But to the general point on how disruptive protests can be, on 6 June 2020 alone, 50k people protested George Floyd's death. Estimates are that 15 to 26 million people protested his death that year altogether. That doesn't seem to have changed anything. So I'm not too concerned about Right Wing intimidation fantasies.
@@robertfreitag687his poll numbers went up among people who already supoorted him anyway. Among independents, the voters who actually matter, this whole ordeal harms his numbers. To believe the timing of these prosecutions doesn't harm his campaign is just willful ignorance or outright dishonesty.
I don't have a comment specific to this video because, as usual, I have to ponder it and probably view it a second time. But it did occur to me that I could express how much I appreciate your commentary, and that I should thank you for being such a reflective voice on a medium that is geared towards reaction. So thank you, Vlad, for this and all your other videos. Now I will go and ponder some of the issues you raised.
This was a grandiose piece, thank you for sharing that, I just feel I understand and see more after listening to this one. Superb, thank you very much Vlad
Vlad, I’m so glad you focused on the fiendish incoherence of Trump’s statement about Navalny. I was most struck that he doesn’t even try anymore to make a plausible bridge between the things he presents as related or sometimes even causal. We’re getting conditioned to accept things that make no sense except in our unconscious grasp of the algorithm. Such a helpful chat ❤️❤️❤️
Vlad, I find your talks mesmerising. I sort of understand what you’re saying but sometimes have to scroll back on the odd occasion. This is quite brilliant!! Much respect my friend.
Thank you for sharing this video Vlad. The discussion about "liar politicians vs. post truth politicians" was particularly salient, and contributed to a lively discussion in my household today. I especially appreciate your open and frank discussions about the role of the algorithm in internet-based discourse. It's so important, and it's almost ignored in most discussions of current events and societal engagement. I hope that your health is improving, and that you continue to be able to talk with us in the beautiful community.
The key to solving this problem is preventing ideological monopolies (i.e., orthodox conservatism being defined by a single political party). When everybody thinks they know something, they stop asking themselves if what they're being told actually makes sense.
I'd say that we experience the least amount of ideological monopolies in the history of mankind thanks to free speech, the internet and our established scientific and engineering principles.
@@svr5423 Really? What probability do you give the election of a 3rd party president in the US for 2024? I may hold the minority opinion here, but I'm going to say somewhere between zero and -1.
No. This goes deeper than that. These people are well beyond not asking if what they're being told makes sense. They are ideologically opposed to truth itself. All else being equal they actually _prefer_ the lie because they hold caring about truth in utter contempt and see lying as a demonstration of strength. To understand the mind of the fascist, you need to imagine a worldview where truth, itself, is inherently the enemy.
This goes deeper than that. These people are well beyond not asking if what they're being told makes sense. They are ideologically opposed to truth itself. All else being equal they actually _prefer_ the lie because they hold caring about truth in utter contempt and see lying as a demonstration of strength. To understand the mind of the f*ist, you need to imagine a worldview where truth, itself, is inherently the enemy.
This goes deeper than that. These people are well beyond not asking if what they're being told makes sense. They are ideologically opposed to truth itself. All else being equal they actually _prefer_ the falsehood because they hold caring about truth in utter contempt and see lying as a demonstration of strength. To understand the mind of the f*, you need to imagine a worldview where truth, itself, is inherently the enemy.
While not invalidating your overall points, I think it's relevant to point out that Trump's disconnected leap between ideas isn't as large as you're making it out to be. He's indicating to his supporters that he sees himself as being in the same kind of physical and political danger as Navalny. Understanding this subtext links the disconnected ideas and isn't as incoherent as it seems. He wants to be seen as a political martyr on the same level or greater than Navalny was.
@@elkiebeerepoot5829 It's normal for Trump, yes. The difference now is that his particular pathologies are out in the open for everyone to see in real time.
@@elkiebeerepoot5829 Humans think parallel, language is serial. It is totally normal to jump between topics. The other person just sorts it into the right context. I'm not sure Trump will achieve with this what Vlad expects him to want. When people do this to me, I just skip the part I'm not interested in. And after years of social justice, I'm not interested in hearing someone being the victim of the "system". Doesn't matter if it's Donald Trump or some blue-haired feminist.
Having studied politics and history and working in the public administration (and therefore in the wider zone of influence of politics) for almost 25 years now, I have to say that I truly enjoy the comments by Vlad Vexler. Even more, I found them more enlightening and more of an inspiration than probably 90 percent of the books I read on the topic of politics. Thanks for that.
I can’t stop Watching all your videos! Some Times are very very intersting and some times they blows my mind (leave me speechless) they are enlightened! ❤Thank you! (And sorry for my English, I am a beginner)
Dear Vlad, your comment on zz russians really got to me, because I started to spell them with a small "r" instead of a capital "R" about a year ago. I thought a lot about it (and that doesn't mean I was right), but for me it is a sign that they lost my respect and if they want to earn it back, they should at least say "I am sorry". I don't blame every russian civilian, I know they can't say what they think, but still, the majority of them don't refuse to answer, they support the war. I am open for your views here, but please remember that I am really engaged in the Ukrainian course, so I am biased as hell. Thank you for your work, and thank you for holding my hand. Love from Germany. 🌻
I'm ring-wing politically... not ashamed of that. But it's crazy how some associates of mine act. You are not allowed to care about the truth, if you state something that is true but against the "party line", you are insulted and shunned. Noone cares about the truth, they care about staying in lock step. It's troubling, and I know it happens on both sides.
@@oskarfabian5200I mean predominantly the Ukrainian response from the left has been exactly that, and Vlad took you through the entirety of the painful journey with it. Committing to Ukrainian survival, and not victory. The laughable amount of arms and money sent to Ukraine. The denial of Ukrainian agency. Yet if at any point you'd bring that up 1.5 years ago, let's say about time when HIMARS just arrived, if you pointed out simple truth that aid is insufficient and will not lead to Ukrainian victory; if you pointed out the very obvious and predictable failure of Ukrainian summer offensive to reach Crimea, or Melitopol, with only real shot of maybe taking Tokmak... you'd be called nasty names. I was. If you pointed out that Russia continues to import billions worth of semiconductors it uses in its missiles... Or whatever highly sophisticated technical equipment needed for military factories from Taiwan.. and that West is doing nothing, and continues to do nothing about it... yeah. $300 billion of frozen Russian assets, enough to fund Ukraine for 3 years. Real prison terms for Western citizens that make millions selling critical items to Russia. Forceful, inhumane expulsion of Ukrainian men back to Ukraine to be conscripted. A real provocation by NATO through military exercise at the Finnish border and Kaliningrad. Those are things that had to be done 2 years ago. And now we're at the point where the major US party is aligning itself with Putin.
I don’t think “algorithm” is the right word for this. Something being algorithmic doesn’t imply that it’s devoid of sound logic (in fact usually the opposite).
Algorithm works. An algorithm is just a process, or set of rules to be followed. Conversations then become algorithmic, not thoughtful. Person A says "X". Person B is programmed to say "Y" because of it. Then Person A responds back with "Z". It is a predictable set of steps that begins with "X".
@@renstein8210 That's a misunderstanding of what an algorithm is. Algorithms can include randomness, algorithms can be arbitrarily complex, algorithms can be smarter than you and me. I don't want to dive into physics or philosophy here, but in fact, there is no reason to think that the human brain can't be reduced to an (very complex) algorithm.
This video was extremely helpful in helping me identify a difference between the leader of my country (a traditional lying politician), and the leader of the opposition (a post-truth politician). I feel like this will really help me going forward. That being said, please riddle me this, Vlad: You have stated (I believe correctly) in the past that we cannot treat the people we disagree with on a political level as of they don't exist and go forward with the mindset of, "if we just ignore them, they will eventually go away and then everything will be fine". However, if they have decided to engage with the PTPs as willing co-conspirators, how can we engage with them at all? If they are not being deceived, and in fact know that they are deliberately ignoring the truth, what can possibly be said?
Trump's post also uses much the same language as that of official Russian sources to "explain" Navalny's demise. "Sudden Unexplained Death" according to Russian sources, translated into "Sudden death " on Trump's "Truth/Pravda Social." I've heard of SUDEP, Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy, the other is nonsense in medical nomenclature.
I think this “algorithmic” system of kneejerk responses is very comforting for fearful, angry people as an operating system. It gives them a sense of certainty and of knowledgeability.
@Vlad I hope you can one day touch on these two points: #1: Does it make sense to talk about politics as if politics is independent from human biology? What do we gain by looking at behavior patterns exhibited by politicians and coming up with theories that rely on terminology like „algorithmic post-truth fukuyamianism“, as opposed to talking about environments that attract people with certain behavioral traits and environments which make the wider populus accept or desire these traits? #2: Perhaps one day we could have a deeper discussion about truth and deceit. Perhaps touch on some examples of when lies made by politicians have benefited the masses, or talk about how a politician should judge when to lie or say the truth. How does the act of lying fit in with values that are, in principle, at the foundation of democracies.
It's not about benefit to the masses, but their agreement. Have you ever heard the phrase "Can't cheat a cheater"? It's an inherently post-truth statement. The people who agree with it assume that their opposition acts as they do and any deceit on their part or on their behalf is fair game. That the truth doesn't matter as long as you win - because your opponents are just as underhanded. However the people saying it forget that their preferred candidate is also a lying cheat and therefore has no reason to honor their agreements they make in return for their support. You seem to assume that a politician has to hold any principle besides power in order to seek a democratic office. If the people don't guard against it then a tyrant may rise at any point and abolish all the vaunted principles shatter the very foundations of the democracy that gave them power.
Vlad’s story reminds me of the reality that a defense attorney can argue multiple theories for why his client didn’t do what he is accused of - those theories can be argued simultaneously even if they are contradictory. Some I might argue that a Post Truth Politician is just putting his law degree (which most but not all politicians have) to work. The politician in this case had made a decision and was happy to put forward multiple justifications for that decision. He didn’t care which justification was accepted as long as the decision itself was accepted.
American citizen here I believe in freedom I believe in democracy I don't believe in Trump, I don't believe in Christian conservatism. freedom is a privilege, It's not a right people had to fight for that freedom and you don't honor that by thinking that you're entitled to it.....
I lol’d at 0:50. Never in my life have I ever thought I should trust a politician more, or that a politician had more integrity than the people around me.
Same. It is the fundamental principle of our democracy. If we could trust a politician, we'd just need one dictator. But we can't, so we need checks and balances.
"It has been said that power corrupts but it is more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted to things other than power."
Thank you. I listened twice to really get it. I have always been slightly uncomfortable calling Trump a liar and now I know why. Post truth discourse, covers all Trump ever utters, and post truth populism has been his shtick all along. This is very important.
at first i was thinking the word should be algorithmization, like summarization, but algorithmicification connotes inducing algorithmic responses whereas algorithmization connotes transforming something into an algorithm. i enjoy the thoughts these videos produce.
Ive asked it before but ill just keep asking ;D could you please share some further reading/sources/experts/search terms so i can develop my own understanding of algorithmification/algorithmic drift? Your wisdom continues to be much appreciated
I find it quite pointless to dissect Trump politically or morally. He has narcissistic personality disorder. This means that he is a narcissist, first, last and always. That is all he is and all he can be. Judging Trump as a politician, or a moral being, is a bit like judging how much a dog is a hedgehog, or in what way it’s is a sparrow. A dog is a dog. This seems very hard for people to grasp about narcissists, that you can really only analyze them from a psychological perspective.
“Good -Old Boris” - I also wanted to give a warning about that at Blackrock. Many have no idea what is coming. “Corrosive” to Democracy is also an accurate terminology.
Vlad, you've expressed a dislike of expressive politics rather than effective politics. You've also expressed the need for the Russian space to become politicized for there to be any possibility of an alternative to Putin. Don't you think that expressive politics are, in effect, an attempt to politicize a previously depoliticized environment? That to some extent they can succeed in politicizing the environment and engage more people such that effective politics are more possible? Personally I reckon that I engage in some expressive politics in an attempt to combat the nihilistic (but in all likelihood true) idea that I am so insignificant and I will not be able to effect any meaningful change. But the collective decision of enough people to engage in expressive politics can result in meaningful results on occasion, that's what a boycott is. Curious what you may think about this.
The idea of "throwing off the chains liberates me" is an interesting idea. I hadn't really thought of it that way. But, liberates me to do what? I've thought of it more as justification, which I think fits. They want to justify their actions and the lies liberate them to do that.
Thanks for the effort you put into this Vlad. As a former civil servant( fairly low grade! Lol), in the Home office in Whitehall. I came into contact, with many senior civil servants, as well as politicians. I wactually worked in the legal library, so had frequent contact with law makers, and civil servants that were tasked to provide answers to members of parliament asking questions , for . which the home office was responsible. At the time,( the early 1970's), the Irish Republican Army, were very active, setting off bombs , particularly in London! Most Tuesday evenings, I used to go and eat in the restaurant ( available to the public at that time!) in tge house of commons.. whilst there I would go and watch the debates in the chamber. Most if the time, there were only a couple of dozen people in the chamber, some were even asleep!! Lol. My point is Unfortunately, political discussion, these days, is all about ' sound bites', getting a minute or two on a news broadcast. Hardly enough time to expound on the whys and whats, of a particular policy.. Trump is the epitomy of this, now adays, with his obsessive use of twitter. His advisors, must be pulling their hair out, to repair the impression he is giving. Which is basically that of bringing down of the federal givernment and it's centralised supervision of the country...This would leave the USA wide open for unscrupulous individuals and companies to indulge in a free for all. Ultimately, . leading to the destruction of the USA as an entity.
Ever since Trump started leading in the polls in 2016, I knew there was something about Trump that I was just not understanding. This entire time I've been searching for an explanation, both in my mind and from others. I think your commentary hits the nail 100% on the head. Thank you so much for sharing this perspective. And I think you should do something on the main channel explaining about this 'post truth' phenomenon. I'm sure there are many others like me, and I think this is one of the most important issues facing democracy at this time.
Very sensible of them, given the limited information they had. Because they could see that the seasons, for example were in train with celestial events. Harvest. The weather. Animal behavior. (In Lithuanian, the Milky Way is called “the bird path”). Famines follow bad harvests and low immune response follows the stress of poor nutrition, and plagues follow famines, and so do rebellions and wars. And wars generally switch on and off according to seasons too. Even in the 21st century.
21:30 that Iraq war example you bring up reminds me of my first encounter with post truth. That was through Tony Blair. It was so obvious that Blair was not made for this new world of lies and deceit. Tony could barely finish his justifications for war after he finished a meeting with Dubya Bush.
Not really. An algorithm is a designed and programmed process, with it's own internal logic. I.e.,Trump is a puppet of the algorithm created by his political advisors. His actions are no reflection of what he really believes, but of a framework followed to achieve a particular result. It doesn't have to be true, logical, or comprehensive, or even relevant. It just has to be effective in having a particular effect. Think Dog Whistle political statements aimed at a populist base that is welded together by excluding others. There the algorithm is aimed to reinforce what keeps the base together: "those people, things, etc are not us, and are not worthy of us." Rinse and Repeat. Trump's response was a planned programmed response for his base, to have maximum impact in the media it appears in.
I am glad that you described it, because now I can see things more clearly. But then, I am missing a reccomendation of what to do when I am confronted with the algoritmization of thoughts, or that post-truth statements in general. I have recognized that I myself have done things like that in the past, and that I have already stopped doing them. But what if I am in conversation with someone who does these algorithmic long jumps? Or spreading chaos in post-truth way of thinking? AND - what if it is all happening on social media? Because in that situation, whole conversation is not only about the two discussing, but also about anyone else who reads it. Maybe I will not be able do change the way my opponent is thinking, but I might be able to influence thinking of bystanders.
Sharp and exact as ever. Thank you Vlad. I wanted to ask what do you think is even relevant counter act vs the PTP phenomenon? Because i have feeling that there is not much you can do in a space or discourse that is completely without rules and where is no truth or not truth in things and statements. Is there any relevant form of act to fight this? Also thank you for your content and lots of love!
