I would say people in countries with poor or non-existent public education are more prone. The USA's public education system was eviscerated in the 70's I think.
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
I would say people in countries with poor or non-existent public education are more prone. The USA’s public education system was eviscerated in the 70’s I think.
As early as the 60s, but really the 80s. Through the 70s US had some of the best public education on the planet. The move to privatize education started in earnest under Reagan (in California, as governor), and then further under Reagan (and every president and congress to now).
Specifically:
• calling for an end to free tuition for state college and university students
• annually demanding 20 percent across-the-board cuts in higher education funding
• repeatedly slashing construction funds for state campuses
• engineering the firing of Clark Kerr, the highly respected president of the University of California
• declaring that the state “should not subsidize intellectual curiosity”
How the fuck do you come to the conclusion that you're spending too much money on education
Educated people tend to lean liberal and conservatives hate open minded people.
It's this. People with good educations will figure out that the Republicans are lying to them to take advantage of them. Republicans don't want their pigeon/fools to think too hard about the lies they tell.
Look at Trump. Is he an obvious liar? Yes. But there are very "poorly educated" people who believe all the lies he says.
With Reagan, it was because Republicans at the time thought there would be too many educated poor people. One of his advisors (Roger Freeman) said:
“We are in danger of producing an educated proletariat…That’s dynamite! We have to be selective on who we allow [to go to college]…If not, we will have a large number of highly trained and unemployed people.”
He was basically worried about a revolution because of it.
Source: https://theintercept.com/2022/08/25/student-loans-debt-reagan/
There’s other sources if you don’t like the Intercept.
Easy
They are talking at the dinner table about doing things that are against my self interest. I don’t want those damn kids learning that. Therefore cut education
Rather that you know the market place of ideas that I espouse; as long as they match what I believe.
R E A G A N.
The Trump era began by ripping out the solar panels on the White House and tricking blue collars into voting against themselves.
It was, and is, fucking awful.
Just look at the GOP. They repeat garbage until their pawns believe it.
That last one hits hard. The state must subsidize intellectual curiosity. Intellectual curiosity gave us everything from electricity to modern governmental theory to the mathematics that would later turn out to allow wireless communications. Curiosity without a point is extremely valuable.
And it should be noted that even in late medieval Europe the state funded intellectual curiosity. The nobility were the state and many either were curious themselves or would patronize intellectuals
No, we just have a larger presence on the internet relative to our share of the global population, meaning our idiocy is noticed a lot more often.
Call it the Florida Man effect, it's not that other states don't also have crazies, it's just that Florida's are more well documented and publicized.
The Simple answer is No. Every country has its fair share of loud and dumb.
The complicated answer is, the less education and the more propaganda, the more likely you are to believe dumb shit.
Studies have found ( for example ) conspiracy thinking correlates with extremist political beliefs, especially right wing political beliefs, across countries. That linked study found the effect was strengthened by lack of political control.
So countries with more political extremists, especially far right wing in media platforms, leads to more popular conspiracy theories.
We conclude that conspiracy mentality is associated with extreme left- and especially extreme right-wing beliefs, and that this non-linear relation may be strengthened by, but is not reducible to, deprivation of political control.
To add to this, radicalism spreads thru a social contagion effect and requires repeated reinforcement, and social media acts as a catalyst. However, local organizing also plays a vital role in the spread far-right extremism.
Here is an article I have written on my blog detailing how people become radicalized. I have ads turned off and do not benefit in any way from my blog.
One important section I'd like to share here is for the false 'both sides' arguments:
There is a stark difference in the means with which the two groups engage in acts of extremism. In a study evaluating Left-Wing and Right-Wing domestic extremism between 1994 and 2020, there was one fatality as the result of Left-Wing extremism, versus 329 fatalities resulting from Far Right extremism in that 25 year period. [5] The Far-Right movement is the oldest and most deadly form of domestic terrorism in the United States, and The Anti-Defamation League Center on Extremism found that the Far-Right is responsible for 98% of extremist murders in the U.S. [24] Furthermore, for nearly every year since 2011, Far-Right terrorist attacks/plots have accounted for over half of all terror attacks/plots in the United States. [21] In the U.S., Right-Wing extremism was responsible for two-thirds of all failed, foiled, or successful terror attacks in 2019, and was responsible for 90% of attacks in the first half of 2020 alone. [21] Since 2013, Far-Right extremism has been responsible for more terror attacks/plots than the Left-Wing, ethnonationalism, or religiously motivated attacks/plots. [21]
I really think it's a question of the sheer amount that is aimed at them through propaganda foreign and domestic. There's definitely a huge, deliberate push to destabilize the US.
Low educated people are more prone to being superstitious. End of conversation.
E: Oh, right, it also gets much worse if you hardcore propagandize it.
Educated people are harder to control. It's why Republicans attack education at every opportunity.
Yes we are! It’s a result of all the subliminal messaging we receive from our kitchen appliances.
IDK if it's that or just the fact that there's both a lot of us and a great sense of nationalism instilled in us from a very young age. I've been to Mt. Rushmore twice. Only recently did I learn about how it was a sacred site to the native people that we promised to leave alone, before stealing it and blowing it to hell.
What I'm getting at is that we're taught that America is the greatest nation on the planet, and we're encouraged to be loud about that statement. So when a certain group of people in the government who are also very loud about their beliefs start saying some things that might sound completely bonkers to a foreigner, a lot of people find themselves agreeing purely because they like the attitude of the people talking.
Visiting Rushmore as a non-American is even weirder than you imagine.
The levels of over the top blatantly performative "patriotism" is quite bizarre to be surrounded by.
And the suspicious looks we got for not participating enthusiastically was discomforting (no, I'm not going to recite a pledge of allegiance to your country. Why would you expect me to?)
Now imagine a Confederate version with more racism and you have Stone Mountain.
Yeah sorry about that. They’re similarly awful to live near.
And the reality is Mt Rushmore is mostly going to be visited by people like that and foreigners. Mt Rushmore is one of the principal sacred sites of the American civil religion. Treat them like religious pilgrims because they kinda were, but they don’t even realize it. The pledge of allegiance is a prayer to adherents.
You can read "The Paranoid Style In American Politics" from 1964 for some insight: https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/
American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind. In using the expression “paranoid style” I am not speaking in a clinical sense, but borrowing a clinical term for other purposes. I have neither the competence nor the desire to classify any figures of the past or present as certifiable lunatics. In fact, the idea of the paranoid style as a force in politics would have little contemporary relevance or historical value if it were applied only to men with profoundly disturbed minds. It is the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant.
It's written at a higher than 6th grade target, so it might be a challenge for anyone who's not used to that. Please give it a good faith effort to read.
Thinking about it, the low literacy rate in the US might be an aggravating factor. Something like half of US adults cannot read at a 6th grade level. That's going to hurt their ability to deal with complex topics.
I think there may be a factor of sample size; There's something like 40 million Canadians, 40 million Australians, 60 million British, and 340 million Americans. So if you take a random sample of English speech on any topic, it's statistically most likely to be from an American.
I would also add things we consider conspiracy like UFO's have been seen all over the world just other countries usually have a religious or spiritual reason for the sightings and thus they don't become a conspiracy just part of their everyday life. Look up Jacques Vallee he does great research into this.
The rates in the US and UK are pretty far ahead of anywhere else.
I am kinda surprised that the UK is ahead.
The anti-vax movement is alot bigger in the US than any other western country, so yeah.
That's basically the answer.
No. An old colleague of mine is on LinkedIn non-stop posting crazy QAnon shit and RT headlines. Anti-vax more-or-less started in the UK with the Andrew Wakefield affair and it seems to be super-popular in Australia too. Conspiracy Theory kind of helps people rationalise the absolute chaotic mess of the world we live in by reducing it to simple narratives where a defined enemy is out to get us.
I wouldn't say individuals are more susceptible to it, but the US's history is intertwined with conspiracy theories from the start. The founding "father" Sam Adams had tracts printed claiming the British had a secret plan to enslave white colonists ahead of the American war of independence.
The Spanish American war was stoked by a conspiracy that Spain had sabotaged our warship "Maine". If you've ever wondered why the US Navy has a base in Cuba.
The "corrupt bargain" of 1824 was a supposed deal between JQ Adams and Clay to exclude Jackson from the presidency despite his electoral victory. Jackson too, was the subject of a theory that he and congressmen disgruntled over tariffs would dissolve the union and install Jackson as a military dictator should he loose in 1828.
There are plenty of crazies believing in conspiracy theories all over the world. Not just US or even the western world.
I think that the distrust of governments and generally those in power is a world-wide phenomenon. But I personally don't think that it is unwarranted. Corruption, abuses of power, and conspiracies are widespread.
We see a lot of efforts to convince suckers of absurdities in the US because there's a lot of economic value in swinging American votes.
In other countries that either don't have voting, or don't have a lot of economic power, there's less to be gained by befuddling morons.
Absolutely not. People might give you reasons Americans are but that’s because they don’t know about the crazy shit people believe elsewhere but there’s nowhere that’s immune to conspiracy theories.
The thing that differentiates America is that it’s a major country (so on TV a lot, in English) and a low-trust society. But Italy and Uganda and Japan all have wild ass conspiracy theories. (Italy has some actual conspiracies like Propaganda Due.)
I have met several people who moved into Usa during the last years, and they all said Yes very much.
I feel like Americans generally "know better". The bottle says to take two, we know better than to follow the label, we take four. The button says to hold until three quarters full, we know better than to fall for that coffee stealing scheme, we crank that baby till it spills over and then try to add 10 creamers with a name we can't pronounce. So when we hear that someone died under a bizarre circumstance, we know better.
As a non-American:
I feel like hyper-capitalism and America's borderline corporatocracy is responsible for this. So many Americans feel like they're being lied or taken advantage of in order for corporations to profit.
The suspicions about "Big Pharma", for instance, almost make sense to me if I try to consider it from an American perspective. Healthcare is insanely expensive there, and being told you need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars "for your own good" is enough to make anyone suspicious. Especially when you see men posting their itemised hospital bills online where they were billed $300 for "women's sanitary products" - it's very clear these companies and healthcare providers are willing to be dishonest in order to profit. So American people start to distrust the entire industry/field.
Of course, when you look at it from a global perspective, or especially from a perspective of a country with nationalised healthcare where the same profit motives don't exist, it seems absurd. Just because the American companies are scummy doesn't mean the science behind medicine is wrong or a lie.
And it's the same across so many other industries. American companies take advantage of consumers, consumers start to distrust them. American people have been conditioned to distrust or be sceptical of so many things at this point that a lot of people feel like their own judgement is the only thing they can trust. Of course, not everyone has the critical thinking skills for that to actually be true, nor does everyone have the education in every single area for it to be true. And for those people with weaker critical thinking skills, having some charlatan come along and say, "well we all know you can't trust X, Y and Z, so what if A is a lie as well? And trust me, you can trust B" makes them think, "oh wow, they're right about not being able to trust X, Y and Z, maybe they're right about A and B too".
And so your Donald Trumps, your Alex Jones, etc, gain power and influence, and the people who follow them feel smart because they can "see through the systemic lies". It doesn't matter that half of what they say isn't provably true because (to their followers, at least) it could be true.
So I don't think it's just American exceptionalism that's responsible. I think the whole system's so broken that it's conditioned people to be sceptical and distrustful about everything, and to try to take advantage of the broken system when they can.
American culture, and I'm generalising, there are a million sub cultures obviously... Emphasises the individual. The American dream of you working hard to get some payoff, is an example. As such there is a lot of cultural pressure to not correct people when you are in conversation, it's more polite and acceptable to play along. Their stupid ideas, their problem.
And that's where Americans (again I'm generalising) are weakest here. Because stupid ideas are everybody's problem. Because once people go off-the-deep-end there is no easy way of getting them back. And a large amount of people involved in conspiracy fantasy is legitimising it.
So no Americans are not more prone to conspiracy fantasy, but American culture does permit fast growth of ideas. MLMs are another example of this. You can use cultural taboos and cultural elements to sell bullshit.
I think they're exposed to more crazy, therefore. Not more susceptible, but wildly more exposed.
Conspiracy theory, why can't Americans differentiate loose and lose?
It's they're poor education system that they have their. There need for an /s when their reading sarcasm shows they're lack of comprehension