Can one communicate in a world of truthiness?

Anonymous Liberal captures the frustration of the current political scene in a post called “An Army of Trumans.”

In this Bubble World, it is an accepted truth that our President is a bumbling ignoramus who can only string together a coherent sentence if he uses a teleprompter (which, apparently, other politicians don’t use). I can understand a world in which Obama’s political opponents mock him as a being too professorial or out-of-touch or arrogant. But unintelligent? Inarticulate? I don’t know how to deal with that. It’s like mocking John Boehner for being pale. …

In Bubble World, cutting taxes actually raises revenue. In Bubble World, “the market” will magically solve all of our health care problems and true “freedom” is defined by one’s ability to be denied health coverage for pre-existing conditions. …

If you’re working on behalf of Wall Street lobbyists to kill a bill that would impose more accountability on Wall Street, you simply accuse those who support the bill of doing Wall Street’s bidding. It doesn’t matter that this is the opposite of the truth and is, in fact, exactly what you’re doing. While these facts might matter to people in the empirical world, the facts in Bubble World are whatever the right wing wants them to be. …

We’ve reached a point where the right wing in this country has achieved complete epistemic closure. …

How do you begin to make your case when there aren’t any mutually accepted facts? How do you convince someone that the people they trust are liars and charlatans? Writing posts trying to correct the record and dispel misinformation can at times feel about as pointless as trying to bail water out of the ocean. …

The central dilemma for those us left in the empirical world is how to puncture the bubble. What can we do to make facts once again relevant? What can be done to dis-incentivize the kind of lying and reality denial that has become the hallmark of the modern conservative movement? I can’t say that I have answers to these questions, but I’m pretty confident that these are THE questions that we should be asking.

The Anonymous Liberal is a litigator at a large national law firm, which is why he remains anonymous.

Update 10/14/10:
Truthiness (The New York Times)

The origin and subsequent history of the word.

Truthiness, Colbert pointed out, is in no need of restoring, since it continues to define those who appeal to raw feelings at the expense of facts. “I doubt that many people in American politics are acting on the facts,” he observed ruefully. “Everybody on both sides is acting on the things that move them emotionally the most.”

Related posts:

Andrew Sullivan on the Tea Party
How socialist is the US?
Obama on race and the Tea Party
Our only language is English
Reaction to health care: A step backwards

Sources:

(Links will open in a separate window or tab.)

Anonymous Liberal, An Army of Trumans, The Anonymous Liberal, April 20, 2010

Share

Sorry, comments are closed for this post.

Skip to toolbar