In the wake of an assassination attempt on the life of ex-President and presumptive Republican nominee Donald J Trump, a virtual army of conspiracy theorists, armchair psychologists and amateur law enforcement wannabes are having a collective field day. Their chosen place of battle, needless to say, is X, formerly known as Twitter.
Perhaps it is time to take a deep breath and lay off; at least until actual facts come to light and in their proper context. That is very unlikely to happen because, among other things, the population at large distrusts the mainstream media and other assorted institutions. And truth be told, that distrust is well earned.
Leaving aside the devout beliefs of the simpletons among us, there is not just one single reason for the degrading of trust in our institutions. Certainly the overheated rhetoric of politicians is one factor. Another is the change in incentives faced by media and other public players. When newspapers and broadcasters depended on broad-based advertising for revenue their incentives favored an appeal to a broad based audience. Now, however, narrowcasting changes that incentive structure. The same players now have an incentive to appeal to those who are highly motivated; they are often fringe players.
Let’s not leave out politicians. That politicians routinely lie, and have lied for a very long time, is hardly a news flash. Recall it was Lyndon Johnson who in 1964 proclaimed “We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves” before doing precisely that.
But Johnson’s lie was an attempt to make a broad based appeal. Today’s lies are more specific and tailored to reach specific voting groups in a way that before would not have been possible. Only after a committed interest group has been assembled is an attempt made to mainstream the underlying goal.
It usually begins with a change in language designed to draw attention away from the underlying concept. The “Trans” movement is a case in point; so is the abortion rights movement—it has reframed the issue as reproductive freedom. Challenges—both real and imagined—are routinely marketed as existential threats. For example, think climate change, pandemics, population growth, asteroid collisions, environmental degradation etc. etc.
What is different from past eras is that we live in a DIY era in which people have been taught to disregard reason and instead follow their feelings. Unless, of course, their feelings contradict whatever the received wisdom of the day is, in which case they will be shamed into accepting “the science TM “.
Which, by the way, the public does not understand. They do not understand that science is about methodology and that scientific conclusions are contingent. The public however, aided and abetted by an unthinking media complex suffers from white coat naiveté. As long as somebody wears a white lab coat and proclaims himself a scientist, he must be the font of all that is true and good. At least as long as he speaks the conventional wisdom. But I digress.
We actually know very little about the apparent assassination attempt on Donald Trump. It is certainly legitimate to ask questions. But we should not assume the answer. For instance, it is perfectly reasonable to ask the obvious question: how in the world was the alleged shooter able to get into position where he apparently had a clear shot? But it is not reasonable to assume the answer ahead of time.
In any event, let’s wait for the facts to trickle in and not jump to any conclusions. We will probably know soon enough what happened and why.
JFB
