Opinion Lying vs. Post-Truth: The REAL Danger of Trump

[luckyshot]

There are important ideas in this article from philosopher Lee McIntyre. He puts a lot of the "Trump phenomena" into specific words. This is why, in my opinion, a person who really cares about the country should be an anti-Trumper, even if you like his judiciary picks or tax cuts.

Cliffs:

• Trump has told 6,420 lies since taking office. In the lead up to the midterm, his rate of lying increased to 30 per day.
• Almost all politicians lie. The real story is not the quantitative but the qualitative difference in Trump's lying.
• Normal politicians (and people) tend to explain, spin, or rationalize a lie when presented with objective evidence. Trump simply repeats the lie.
• "Any amateur politician can engage in lying, but Trump is engaging in 'post truth.'"
• "The point of a lie is to convince someone that a falsehood is true. But the point of post-truth is domination [... it] is an assertion of power.
• "[...] When Trump lies he does not do so to get someone to accept that what he is saying is true, but to show that he is powerful enough to say it."
  
• Post-truth is the hallmark of an authoritarian political ideology. "Post truth is pre-fascism [...] it is a tactic used in electoral dictatorships."

Most politicians lie.

Or do they?

Even if we could find some isolated example of a politician who was scrupulously honest — former President Jimmy Carter, perhaps — the question is how to think about the rest of them.

And if most politicians lie, then why are some Americans so hard on President Donald Trump?

According to The Washington Post, Trump has told 6,420 lies so far in his presidency. In the seven weeks leading up to the midterms, his rate increased to 30 per day.

That's a lot, but isn't this a difference in degree and not a difference in kind with other politicians?

From my perspective as a philosopher who studies truth and belief, it doesn't seem so. And even if most politicians lie, that doesn't make all lying equal.

Yet the difference in Trump's prevarication seems to be found not in the quantity or enormity of his lies, but in the way that Trump uses his lies in service to a proto-authoritarian political ideology.

I recently wrote a book, titled "Post-Truth," about what happens when "alternative facts" replace actual facts, and feelings have more weight than evidence. Looked at from this perspective, calling Trump a liar fails to capture his key strategic purpose.

Any amateur politician can engage in lying. Trump is engaging in "post-truth."

The Oxford English Dictionaries named "post-truth" its word of the year in November 2016, right before the US election.

Citing a 2,000% spike in usage — due to Brexit and the American presidential campaign — they defined post-truthas "relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief."

Ideology, in other words, takes precedence over reality.

When an individual believes their thoughts can influence reality, we call it "magical thinking" and might worry about their mental health. When a government official uses ideology to trump reality, it's more like propaganda, and it puts us on the road to fascism.

As Yale philosopher Jason Stanley argues, "The key thing is that fascist politics is about identifying enemies, appealing to the in-group (usually the majority group), and smashing truth and replacing it with power."

Consider the example of Trump's recent decision not to cancel two political rallies on the same day as the Pittsburgh massacre. He said that this was based on the fact that the New York Stock Exchange was open the day after 9/11.

This isn't true. The stock exchange stayed closed for six days after 9/11.

So was this a mistake? A lie? Trump didn't seem to treat it so. In fact, he repeated the falsehood later in the same day.

When a politician gets caught in a lie, there's usually a bit of sweat, perhaps some shame and the expectation of consequences.

Not for Trump. After many commentators pointed out to him that the stock exchange was in fact closed for several days after 9/11, he merely shrugged it off, never bothering to acknowledge — let alone correct — his error.

Why would he do this?

The point of a lie is to convince someone that a falsehood is true. But the point of post-truth is domination. In my analysis, post-truth is an assertion of power.

As journalist Masha Gessen and others have argued, when Trump lies he does so not to get someone to accept what he's saying as true, but to show that he is powerful enough to say it.

He has asserted, "I'm the President and you're not," as if such high political office comes with the prerogative of creating his own reality. This would explain why Trump doesn't seem to care much if there is videotape or other evidence that contradicts him. When you're the boss, what does that matter?

Should we be worried about this flight from mere lying to post-truth?

Even if all politicians lie, I believe that post-truth foreshadows something more sinister. In his powerful book "On Tyranny,"historian Timothy Snyder writes that "post-truth is pre-fascism."

It is a tactic seen in "electoral dictatorships" — where a society retains the facade of voting without the institutions or trust to ensure that it is an actual democracy, like those in Putin's Russia or Erdogan's Turkey.

In this, Trump is following the authoritarian playbook, characterized by leaders lying, the erosion of public institutions and the consolidation of power. You do not need to convince someone that you are telling the truth when you can simply assert your will over them and dominate their reality.

https://www.businessinsider.com/whi...ZOfob4Zugv_9innGSoHCfLl34iFq934_9EQOQqPswX2V4

 

[Headkicktoleg]

He's definitely a pathological liar. I've met one or two of them and they just lie about absolutely nothing. I remember a kid in high school lying about what class he was going to in the next period.

 

[DespicablePeep]

the universe changed after Trump

 

[nac386]

He is just a liar who knows nobody that supports him holds him to any reasonable standard and has no accountability whatsoever.

 

[SaiWa]

He's definitely a pathological liar. I've met one or two of them and they just lie about absolutely nothing. I remember a kid in high school lying about what class he was going to in the next period.

Yeah I met someone like that. Wouldn’t have believed it unless I had seen and heard the lies. It was about the stupidest things that were not necessary (like your example). It’s a weird sickness/condition...

 

[Fawlty]

The tone of that makes it seem like this guy is giving Trump too much credit. Maybe he's not, and I agree with his description of the effect of right-wing postmodernism.

I don't want to lose sight of the fact that Trump is not some maniacal genius, but in fact just a pathological liar whose father had enough money to make people agree with him, in his formative years. This is just how he learned to act.

And it's not that I don't want to give him credit for being a clever liar. There's a temptation to see things as orderly, as intentional. That he's crazy like a fox. That would make this whole thing make sense. But that's just not what is happening. It's important to see what's really happening. If we pretend that Trump is somehow clever, we play right into the "post-truth" game.

These people (the would-be and actual authoritarian monsters) are usually cranks and liars. It bothers me that we never learn.

 

[French Canadian]

The tone of that makes it seem like this guy is giving Trump too much credit. Maybe he's not, and I agree with his description of the effect of right-wing postmodernism.

I don't want to lose sight of the fact that Trump is not some maniacal genius, but in fact just a pathological liar whose father had enough money to make people agree with him, in his formative years. This is just how he learned to act.

And it's not that I don't want to give him credit for being a clever liar. There's a temptation to see things as orderly, as intentional. That he's crazy like a fox. That would make this whole thing make sense. But that's just not what is happening. It's important to see what's really happening. If we pretend that Trump is somehow clever, we play right into the "post-truth" game.

These people (the would-be and actual authoritarian monsters) are usually cranks and liars. It bothers me that we never learn.

No matter if he is clever enough to pull this off intentionally, I think the broader point is he is elected while being obviously shameless about lying.

 

[Fawlty]

No matter if he is clever enough to pull this off intentionally, I think the broader point is he is elected while being obviously shameless about lying.

That's a huge part of it, and it's the easiest for us to see, and the one we can condition ourselves to react to ("don't elect a shameless liar" is a relatively easy brain software patch). It's hard to tell if we're doing that, or if we're just going along for the ride.

This is where I think being accurate is important. For instance, if we recognize that he's a pathological liar and that this is just a learned behavior instead of a master plot ("4-D chess"), then we'll react more like how we would react to a normal person with a lying problem, and it will be easier to disregard the nonsense and to ignore partisanship. Ideally, we would see him as a pathetic figure and not as anything great, not some edifice. If we see his lying as intentional, that's something that millions of people will actually support. That's when the lies become "emotionally true" like religious lies.

I think the broader point is that the lying, along with things like making enemies lists, eroding freedom of the press and weakening public institutions, is a major feature of emerging right-wing authoritarianism.

 

[French Canadian]

That's a huge part of it, and it's the easiest for us to see, and the one we can condition ourselves to react to ("don't elect a shameless liar" is a relatively easy brain software patch). It's hard to tell if we're doing that, or if we're just going along for the ride.

This is where I think being accurate is important. For instance, if we recognize that he's a pathological liar and that this is just a learned behavior instead of a master plot ("4-D chess"), then we'll react more like how we would react to a normal person with a lying problem, and it will be easier to disregard the nonsense and to ignore partisanship. Ideally, we would see him as a pathetic figure and not as anything great, not some edifice. If we see his lying as intentional, that's something that millions of people will actually support. That's when the lies become "emotionally true" like religious lies.

I think the broader point is that the lying, along with things like making enemies lists, eroding freedom of the press and weakening public institutions, is a major feature of emerging right-wing authoritarianism.

I agree. So while it may or may not be intentional, it is paving the way for right wing authoritarianism. Or it will be a wake up call that there is some pathological liar in the white house and that should be a no-no.

 

[Fawlty]

I agree. So while it may or may not be intentional, it is paving the way for right wing authoritarianism. Or it will be a wake up call that there is some pathological liar in the white house and that should be a no-no.

My only problem with saying it that way is that I think we inadvertently help pave the way by giving him too much credit as a skillful liar.

 

[Jack V Savage]

My only problem with saying it that way is that I think we inadvertently help pave the way by giving him too much credit as a skillful liar.

Because he lies so blatantly, it is a kind of joint effort. He's not really fooling anyone with the individual lies, if we're thinking of belief in classic terms. He lies and his followers make an active choice to submit to him and "believe" and defend the lies. That, in turn, makes them feel that they are in on it and have power over people who are part of what Karl Rove derisively referred to as "the reality-based community."

 

[Fawlty]

Because he lies so blatantly, it is a kind of joint effort. He's not really fooling anyone with the individual lies, if we're thinking of belief in classic terms. He lies and his followers make an active choice to submit to him and "believe" and defend the lies. That, in turn, makes them feel that they are in on it and have power over people who are part of what Karl Rove derisively referred to as "the reality-based community."

Are you saying that it doesn't matter very much whether "the reality-based community" views Trump as a skillful, tactical liar or as the sort of insecure blustering fool that we've all known at some point?

Clearly his followers have religious faith in him, I agree. I see this as somewhat analogous to the Catholic coverups. People who see the Church as a monolith (and therefore too big to jail) are not as effective as people who just want to prosecute the child molesters and those who cover for them.

I feel like there must be a significant difference between seeing Trump as an evil (or good!) monolith and seeing him as sad, despicable and well-understood. One of those must be preferable to the other.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Are you saying that it doesn't matter very much whether "the reality-based community" views Trump as a skillful, tactical liar or as the sort of insecure blustering fool that we've all known at some point?

Clearly his followers have religious faith in him, I agree. I see this as somewhat analogous to the Catholic coverups. People who see the Church as a monolith (and therefore too big to jail) are not as effective as people who just want to prosecute the child molesters and those who cover for them.

I feel like there must be a significant difference between seeing Trump as an evil (or good!) monolith and seeing him as sad, despicable and well-understood. One of those must be preferable to the other.

I think he's sad and despicable, but he has an instinctive grasp of power games. More than that, though, I see the threat as being bigger than Trump (which is why I hinted at W) because we don't have one guy putting something over on everyone. We have a large group of people who are willing to submit to a leader in this way, and another large group (together making up roughly half the population) that is willing to try to use that element to achieve some otherwise unpopular policy ends. There are always demagogues and liars lurking around; there isn't always a politically significant group of malcontents who are willing to bow to them (and note that left-wing malcontents are inherently less susceptible to that, though they bring a different danger).

 

[panamaican]

Are you saying that it doesn't matter very much whether "the reality-based community" views Trump as a skillful, tactical liar or as the sort of insecure blustering fool that we've all known at some point?

Clearly his followers have religious faith in him, I agree. I see this as somewhat analogous to the Catholic coverups. People who see the Church as a monolith (and therefore too big to jail) are not as effective as people who just want to prosecute the child molesters and those who cover for them.

I feel like there must be a significant difference between seeing Trump as an evil (or good!) monolith and seeing him as sad, despicable and well-understood. One of those must be preferable to the other.

I actually don't think it matters very much how the "reality-based community" views Trump. They're not the ones electing him. And they're not the ones who will ultimately support the rapid descent into authoritarianism that he makes possible.

I agree with you that it's important to not paint basic pathological lying as skilled manipulation. He lies because, as the OP points out, he can and because you can't do anything about it.

But those who turn a blind eye to his lying are not doing it because they're being manipulated by Trump's skillful lies or his abuse of the power behind his lies. They turn a blind eye to his lying because it makes them feel powerful as well. That by supporting his lies, they can claim dominance over their perceived enemies.

This is the crux of Trump's appeal and the real problem. What's he shown is that these people will accept any lie, no matter how absurd, it they feel it empowers them in their reality based and internet arguments. Trump might not be clever as a fox but the next guy might be. We're already seeing various politicians testing if they can emulate Trump's outright disregard for the truth for personal gain.

The only solace is that the trend lines suggest that their behavior is actually driving people away, not towards, the GOP.

 

[Trotsky]

lol @ all you triggered libs and your TDS.

This is it.

Orange man bad.

Get over it, she lost.

 

[Trotsky]

He's definitely a pathological liar. I've met one or two of them and they just lie about absolutely nothing. I remember a kid in high school lying about what class he was going to in the next period.

I think it's inaccurate to call him a pathological liar, as you and @Fawlty have done. He's not a guy who lies because of a pathological impulse to lie or because he derives some deviant joy out of it: he lies because it suits him, he has no shame, and he's extremely, extremely petty so any benefit that he believes he derives from lying, no matter how trivial or arbitrary, justifies the lie.

 

[regmma123]

lol @ all you triggered libs and your TDS.

This is it.

Orange man bad.

Get over it, she lost.

NPC (whatever that is)

 

[Prefect]

I think it's inaccurate to call him a pathological liar, as you and @Fawlty have done. He's not a guy who lies because of a pathological impulse to lie or because he derives some deviant joy out of it: he lies because it suits him, he has no shame, and he's extremely, extremely petty so any benefit that he believes he derives from lying, no matter how trivial or arbitrary, justifies the lie.

Trump's lying is no different from a kid who grabs money out of the bank during a game of Monopoly. He knows you have two options: call him out on it and quit playing the game or do nothing continue playing the game hoping it won't matter. If you call him out on it, he will just say it is a game and you are being a snowflake for taking it so seriously. Both scenarios are losing scenarios because you want to just play the game and neither are attractive. Trump does this. He is a perpetual rule pusher and line stepper and he believes no one can or will stop him because no one wants to wreck the game. He does what he does because no one will wreck the game to stop him.

 

[Quipling]

 

[nostradumbass]

I think it's inaccurate to call him a pathological liar, as you and @Fawlty have done. He's not a guy who lies because of a pathological impulse to lie or because he derives some deviant joy out of it: he lies because it suits him, he has no shame, and he's extremely, extremely petty so any benefit that he believes he derives from lying, no matter how trivial or arbitrary, justifies the lie.

That's untrue. It's often some misspeak or some wrong information that's off by a fairly small margin. It's not a lie to benefit himself if he doesn't make up his mind on what to do about it until later. Most, and I mean a strong most, doesn't benefit him at all. He's an egomaniac who is either pumping up what he's already done(distorting numbers) or has gotten incorrect numbers on and makes a plan based upon that.

The problem with you lefties is you act like chicken little over every inconsequential thing. Some of us would actually like to pick our shots and complain where it's needed, like spending in the current case, but it's become so muddy with "Trump wants to ____" or "Hitler also did ____" and "the world's going to implode and they'll be dead bodies in the streets" that legit criticisms just blend right in. Same thing with racists. Almost nobody is in favor of racism, but when you call everything and everyone racist, a fucking backwoods Klansman now has the same label as Dennis Prager and Mitt Romney.