When is authoritarianism appropriate and when is it not?

  • howrar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    If the specialist cannot explain to the common population in a concise way the implications of carrying out a project of that size so that they can make a sensible choice in a vote,

    There’s no concise way to explain something complicated to a layperson that doesn’t end with “trust me, I’m the expert”.

    then the problem lies with the specialist, not the population. Giving that kind of explanation is education.

    Shifting the blame doesn’t make the problem disappear. Whether the population is uneducated because of a lack of qualified specialists, or simply due to being incapable of understanding the information, the outcome is the same. You still have uninformed people making decisions.

    • NONE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 minutes ago
      (Goddamn, are we still discussing this? Ok…)

      There’s no concise way to explain something complicated to a layperson that doesn’t end with “trust me, I’m the expert”.

      … So? At least with the explanation the layperson can decide if he trusts the work of the specialist, not so much on whether or not he knows how to do what he does but on how what he does will affect them. Explaining is taking the specialist’s field to the common ground, not the layperson to the specialist’s field.


      Shifting the blame doesn’t make the problem disappear.

      I’m not shifting the blame, I’m highlighting what I think is the real crux of the problem, of which I think you would also agree: there are far more ignorant people than wise ones. The point is that I advocate educating the ignorant, while others prefer not to allow the ignorant to do anything on their own or make decisions.


      Whether the population is uneducated because of a lack of qualified specialists, or simply due to being incapable of understanding the information.

      Why do you assume from the outset that there are people who “simply don’t understand”? In what sense “don’t understand”? Because they don’t want to understand or because they are idiots? And if you say that bullshit that “They don’t understand because they don’t understand!” then I’m going to assume that you are one of those who just “Don’t understand” things. I am sick and tired of such a reductionist response.


      You still have uninformed people making decisions.

      Ok, and what should be done about it? Leave that ignorant population and let others, supposedly more qualified, decide how they should live? Should we go back to feudalism? Let the king and the nobles decide for the commoners? Fortunately (or unfortunately) it seems that we are heading that way! with the nobles of Sillicon Valley taking control of the Technofeudos of the Internet, and the new totalitarian kings taking control in the United States, Russia, China, Turkey, Venezuela, El Salvador, etc, etc…