To the Congregation,

Canada has recently thrown out a crony conservative party replaced by a 
supposedly more moderate liberal party.
But very recently we have become alarmed by their behavior, they presume to be 
speaking on the constituents behalf.
We ask where those ideas came from in stunned disbelief, only to here it is the 
overwhelming consensus.
Since when did consensus have so many interpretations?
This has been puzzling, and seems to forecast what Trump's legions are expected 
to do.
How on earth could a  Canadian Liberal Party accidentally have the same 
behavior as 
an American Right Wing Republican party. In both cases they are mistaking their 
own voices for that of the public's voice.

This does not appear to be a political issue any longer but rather a 
coincidence of narcissistic psychopathy. In some sense even the democrats 
may have been entranced by their own voices.  There have now been numerous 
insinuations that people are living in an information bubble
dispensing  appealing nonsense and outright lies. This is not typical for 
either country and I suspect the British are doing the same.

All three countries are moving along parallel vectors. And the pundits have 
different and unique explanations for each country. 
And they never happen to listen to eachother.
I suspect we are entering an era of failed or limping democracies for the want 
of reality checks.
Now the French seem to be cooking up something bitter. Are we all going mad 
after so much optimistic delusionary deceit.
British citizens are also demanding jail time for Tony Blair.

It is much more than one country's peculiar problem or so methinks.
From my point of view it did seem like it would not have made much difference 
whichever candidate had won
in any of our countries.
Perhaps these elites all share an aversion to reality.  Such as stage 
performers who despise theatre critics.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [] On Behalf Of ?glen?
Sent: December-01-16 1:28 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Stop Calling People "Low Information Voters" | Quillette

Well, sure.  But, speaking for myself, I see plenty of snobbish, aloof, and 
patronizing expression in the speech and action of people like Richard Spencer 
and Mencius Moldbug (Curtis Yarvin) -- and the intellectuals they tend to fawn 
over.  Hell, Ayn Rand has a huge dose of it, too.  To go even further, hang out 
amongst any elite group for awhile, and you'll notice how they treat "noobs".  
While most domains (e.g. martial arts or programming, say) have a nice dose of 
mentors and teachers, who treat novices earnestly, there's _always_ a large 
contingent of the elite in that domain that treat novices the same way you're 

So what?  Being a novice in any domain is difficult.  But you don't run around 
complaining about how snobbish the elite swimmers are.  You swim!  You improve. 
 Then when you become competitive, you haze the novices just like you were 

Conservatives who yap about "liberal elitism" are just expressing their 
_entitlement_.  They want you to take them seriously even though they haven't 
put in any effort.  They want a trophy just for showing up.

On 12/01/2016 11:12 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> The style matters. Oddly quite a bit. "Liberal elitism" is snobbish, aloof, 
> and patronizing. Note, it is not the way in which they are "elite", but the 
> "elitism" that rankles the most. Trump's financial-elite bull-in-a-china-shop 
> schtick looks and feels very different, and there are many people who would 
> much rather deal with it. Bill Clinton was a friggin' Rhodes scholar, but 
> connected with everyday Americans, and wasn't, until he sought to get so 
> aggressively dynastic, at risk of the "liberal elite" label. I've not heard 
> it leveled at Carter either. On the other hand, Gore and Kerry reeked of it, 
> and that was part of their problem.
> As the article says towards the end:
> " “High information” people ignore evidence if it conflicts with their 
> preferred narrative /all the time./ And while it may be naïve for voters to 
> believe the promises of Trump and the Brexit campaigners — it has also been 
> profoundly naïve for the cosmopolitan classes to believe that years of forced 
> internationalism and forced political correctness were never going to end 
> with a large scale backlash."


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe
FRIAM-COMIC by Dr. Strangelove

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
FRIAM-COMIC by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to