Well, I think that's a cultural problem that spans the political spectrum. I agree that it's a problem—it's the root of anti-vax hysteria and other real-world, dangerous ideas.
I'd argue, though, it stems partially from technology but not entirely—after all, panics and hysterias that spread misinformation are nothing new; technology just accelerates it. More significant, though, is the decline of an intellectual ideological tradition. I may disagree, violently, with the conservatives of the past, but they had their intellectuals and their theories. As did the left. Today, there's an idea that thinking is best left to other people, the best position is somewhere in the middle, and how a political issue makes you feel or appear to others is far more important than rational arguments. I think this is worse on the right and supposed middle of the political spectrum, simply because that's where the power and influence is. The chocolate bird incident is actually quite useful because it makes intelligent people stop and think before they share an outraged post. Where it gets dangerous is "refugees did the Paris attacks" and then you have people not quite bright enough to be brownshirts burning down a refugee camp before the truth comes out. Whereas the animal rights activists hurt no one besides themselves because they just end up looking stupid on the internet.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2016-01-24 04:44 pm (UTC)I'd argue, though, it stems partially from technology but not entirely—after all, panics and hysterias that spread misinformation are nothing new; technology just accelerates it. More significant, though, is the decline of an intellectual ideological tradition. I may disagree, violently, with the conservatives of the past, but they had their intellectuals and their theories. As did the left. Today, there's an idea that thinking is best left to other people, the best position is somewhere in the middle, and how a political issue makes you feel or appear to others is far more important than rational arguments. I think this is worse on the right and supposed middle of the political spectrum, simply because that's where the power and influence is. The chocolate bird incident is actually quite useful because it makes intelligent people stop and think before they share an outraged post. Where it gets dangerous is "refugees did the Paris attacks" and then you have people not quite bright enough to be brownshirts burning down a refugee camp before the truth comes out. Whereas the animal rights activists hurt no one besides themselves because they just end up looking stupid on the internet.