The Money Mustache Community
General Discussion => Welcome and General Discussion => Topic started by: ijingle on November 24, 2014, 07:46:30 PM
-
My Twitter feed, and The News is all on fire tonight with this Ferguson trial decision. Does the Mustache community concern themselves with this? Or is this something we should ignore as part of a Low Information Diet? http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-information-diet/ (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-information-diet/)
-
I've been doing the low information diet idea since I read 4 hour work week about a year ago. I wouldn't turn back on that idea for anything. 99% of the news isn't going to make any impact on your life and the 1% that will is going to have your peers talking.
I have no idea what happened in Ferguson but I'm sure the people I work with will fill me in on it tomorrow. They always look surprised that I don't know what the news is and fill me in. I'm guessing they spend hours on it like I used to.
-
99% of the news isn't going to make any impact on your life
Yep...
-
So not only is the news irrelevant, it's also largely a work of fiction with only a loose connection to reality.
I love this!
-
The low information diet saved my marriage.
I read that post when it came out and applied it to my life. Since then I've been willfully ignorant of most news and a much happier person. Probably physically healthier too due to lower blood pressure from being pissed off all the time about national stupidity. Wife says I'm less irritable and more pleasant to be around.
-
I think its pretty important to have a general idea of what's going on.
A 12 year old kid in Cleveland got shot dead yesterday. He put his hands in his pockets which black people aren't allowed to do. I don't go crazy reading the news but I think its important to know these things in order to understand our culture and the consequences of it.
-
I'm typically a low-information diet kind of guy, but one of my best friends lives in Ferguson, so I was paying attention last night.
-
This is one of my major disagreements with MMM philosophy. An informed populace is necessary for a true democracy, and I think that a lot of people use the MMM "low-information" diet idea to feel complacent in their own ignorance.
I get screening out current events or other bullshit that has no impact on your everyday life, but I think that some news stories and sources are worth spending time on in order to broaden your perspective and world view, and I don't really think promoting an ignorant populace is going to make the world a better place. Instead of ignoring the news because it is bad, we should be making news or consuming news that is good quality. Like it or not, we are in a global world now, and news that is not in your backyard does a have a relevance to your everyday life whether you believe it or not.
-
The whole Ferguson thing seems kind of like a sideshow compared to all the other terrible problems going on in the world today. You don't see the President giving a speech about the genocide going down between the Muslims and Christians in the Central African Republic, but you see him chiming in about a murder case in some backwater Missouri town. People's priorities are all messed up these days.
-
Sometimes a given news station will hit an urgent, important topic. Most of the time, they won't. News outlets (papers, online subscription news, television, radio, etc.) are profit-driven enterprises. They will write or report on what sells, either so you purchase it or so that they gain enough readership to warrant selling ads. They are essentially slaves to the whims of viewers/readers/listeners and the almighty dollar from sponsors. Informing you in an objective, reasonable manner is not what they aim to do. Avoid all that stuff and take on a low-information diet.
Find certain topics or blogs you like and subscribe to those via RSS or email. That'll do you just fine.
-
The whole Ferguson thing seems kind of like a sideshow compared to all the other terrible problems going on in the world today. You don't see the President giving a speech about the genocide going down between the Muslims and Christians in the Central African Republic, but you see him chiming in about a murder case in some backwater Missouri town. People's priorities are all messed up these days.
Hmm, have to disagree with you there. Ferguson brought to light the stunning militarization of police forces nationwide, and to me, that's a pretty serious issue. It's one thing to consume a low-information diet, and quite another to just put one's head in the sand. And really, no slight to Africa, but it's Africa -- what happens in Africa is so far removed from what happens in America as to be generally meaningless from the standpoint of affecting the average American's life (ebola being the obvious, yet still fairly trivial, exception). What is happening in Ferguson, however, is pretty relevant to most Americans. Race still matters in this country, and the militarization of our police forces can have very real consequences for our democracy. So I'm trying to keep some tabs on the story, without getting too caught up in it.
-
The whole Ferguson thing seems kind of like a sideshow compared to all the other terrible problems going on in the world today. You don't see the President giving a speech about the genocide going down between the Muslims and Christians in the Central African Republic, but you see him chiming in about a murder case in some backwater Missouri town. People's priorities are all messed up these days.
Many people seem confused about the fact that Obama is president of the US and not the world. But I suppose that's a matter of opinion. In general, I find the 'other people have it worse' attitude helpful in adjusting my own, but I don't want to see that in a leader who's supposed to be taking care of his own backyard. Call me isolationist. But it's more that I feel problems don't stop being problems just because there are bigger problems.
I do take the point about its being a sideshow. I had a history teacher in highschool who pointed out that the flag burning debate was mostly drummed up as a distraction from the Iran-Contra scandal. So now whenever some seemingly vital issue or incident is huge in the news, I ask myself what it's distracting us from.
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
-
I live in the STL metro area. Heck, I was raised in Ferguson until my parents moved when I was in college. And I didn't watch any of that last night. I couldn't do anything about i, so why get worked up about it. I glanced at my Facebook feed a few times and felt bad for those that still live there. It was a great town. It is unfortunately now going to decline at a great rate.
I'm puzzled by the local and state plan for handling all of this. Why make the announcement at night? What happened to the original 48 hour plan of delaying the announcement? Why did leadership allow the domestic terrorists to carry out their plan of destroying the sales tax base of the municipality? What happened to the National Guard? Social media had been warning everyone for months that Ferguson was going to burn if they didn't get their way (facts be damned). Why was any of this a surprise to the leadership?
-
I was about to ask who Ferguson is, but skimmed this thread enough to realize it is a place, so I guess you know which camp I fall in.
-
This is one of my major disagreements with MMM philosophy. An informed populace is necessary for a true democracy, and I think that a lot of people use the MMM "low-information" diet idea to feel complacent in their own ignorance.
I get screening out current events or other bullshit that has no impact on your everyday life, but I think that some news stories and sources are worth spending time on in order to broaden your perspective and world view, and I don't really think promoting an ignorant populace is going to make the world a better place. Instead of ignoring the news because it is bad, we should be making news or consuming news that is good quality. Like it or not, we are in a global world now, and news that is not in your backyard does a have a relevance to your everyday life whether you believe it or not.
Here's the thing though. The vast majority (99%+) of what qualifies as news or current events is entirely forgettable. It's almost all bullshit that has no impact on everyday life. You can claim it's ignorance that drives us to ignore it, but that's really the only way to not be perpetually wasting your own time. It's not ignorance but rather efficiency that drives this.
That said, I personally think the Ferguson riots and subsequent focus on increased militarization of police will have some sticking power. Because of that, I think Ferguson and whatever fallout happens is an important event that people need to know. However, that still doesn't mean that you need to watch people rioting or read stories about injustice every night for the next week or two. Instead, take the broad lessons and find a good overview after the fact. That's where the value is. Even with important issues like this, there still seems to be little value in following all of the daily happenings.
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
Yeah, St. Louis County. In Missouri.
You were kidding, right?
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
Yeah, St. Louis County. In Missouri.
You were kidding, right?
No, it's a city-ception.
-
I was actually just thinking about this. I enjoy the "low information" diet, but I sometimes think there is a fine line between low information and apathy. For instance, at work today, people were all talking about Ferguson. I just sort of said "meh. This will all blow over, and be replaced by some other issue". While I do believe that to be true, should I actually care more?
Of course, I believe there are lots of things about Ferguson that need to be examined and discussed. However, I feel that some of the dust needs to settle before we can objectively learn from this.
-
However, I feel that some of the dust needs to settle before we can objectively learn from this.
And that really sums it up.
Watching the news in real time is a very emotional experience. However, it doesn't aid one to rationally comprehend the issues.
-
I'll go against the grain and say I don't see much point in the Low Information diet, assuming information doesn't cause you stress/concern. My boyfriend and I follow the national and international news out of personal interest, and we enjoy discussing politics and global issues. Following the news doesn't cause us stress, arguments, or affect our lives in any way, it's just a personal interest and hobby we share and enjoy.
A 12 year old kid in Cleveland got shot dead yesterday. He put his hands in his pockets which black people aren't allowed to do. I don't go crazy reading the news but I think its important to know these things in order to understand our culture and the consequences of it.
Well, that and the fact that he was waving around a fake gun that had the orange markings removed, making it look the same as a real gun, which is why the police were called in the first place. Tragic case to be sure, but lets represent it somewhat accurately.
-
I don't watch the news and haven't for the past 3 or 4 years...right or wrong, I'm much happier!
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
Yeah, St. Louis County. In Missouri.
You were kidding, right?
I wasn't kidding. I was reacting to the implication that st. Louis is somehow a "backwater" town (and not one of the 20 largest metropolitan areas in the country).
-
For everyone claiming that the Ferguson issue is something we should be paying attention to RE: police militarization or black culture, may I ask why?
After I keep up with the issues, educate myself on all the intricacies, discuss it with coworkers and friends....then what? Then what do I do? How does it affect me? It doesn't. I don't live in Ferguson.
-
I'll go against the grain and say I don't see much point in the Low Information diet, assuming information doesn't cause you stress/concern. My boyfriend and I follow the national and international news out of personal interest, and we enjoy discussing politics and global issues. Following the news doesn't cause us stress, arguments, or affect our lives in any way, it's just a personal interest and hobby we share and enjoy.
A 12 year old kid in Cleveland got shot dead yesterday. He put his hands in his pockets which black people aren't allowed to do. I don't go crazy reading the news but I think its important to know these things in order to understand our culture and the consequences of it.
Well, that and the fact that he was waving around a fake gun that had the orange markings removed, making it look the same as a real gun, which is why the police were called in the first place. Tragic case to be sure, but lets represent it somewhat accurately.
Well said, Zikoris!
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
Yeah, St. Louis County. In Missouri.
You were kidding, right?
I wasn't kidding. I was reacting to the implication that st. Louis is somehow a "backwater" town (and not one of the 20 largest metropolitan areas in the country).
I see. To many people I know, anything between California and D.C. Is considered backwater. An educated woman I know yesterday referred to it as "the south" yesterday.
-
It's not so much the news that bothers me--I glance at headlines on the net and click what interests me and avoid TV news like the plague--but the endless whining on Facebook by privileged white people about this sort of thing. This was not about race. This was about a kid who was stupid enough to advance on a cop and a cop who reacted in the heat of the moment. Period. End of story.
-
... some backwater Missouri town. ...
You realize that Ferguson is in St. Louis right?
Yeah, St. Louis County. In Missouri.
You were kidding, right?
I wasn't kidding. I was reacting to the implication that st. Louis is somehow a "backwater" town (and not one of the 20 largest metropolitan areas in the country).
I see. To many people I know, anything between California and D.C. Is considered backwater. An educated woman I know yesterday referred to it as "the south" yesterday.
To be fair to that woman, I suspect many Missourians would also consider it "the south". My mother-in-law, who has lived most of her life in Missouri, remarked to someone that her daughter (my wife) was soon to be married to "a Yankee".
-
For everyone claiming that the Ferguson issue is something we should be paying attention to RE: police militarization or black culture, may I ask why?
After I keep up with the issues, educate myself on all the intricacies, discuss it with coworkers and friends....then what? Then what do I do? How does it affect me? It doesn't. I don't live in Ferguson.
Why? Because it hasn't just happened in Ferguson -- it's happened all over the country, including in real "back water" areas. 9/11 resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) flooding into localities everywhere for vehicle, equipment and technology upgrades for police forces everywhere, and the money that poured into the defense department for two wars resulted in a shitload of excess military hardware being handed out to these same police forces. If you aren't concerned about the creeping police state in this country, then you are being willfully ignorant of history. There are very real pitfalls, some of which could fundamentally alter life in America as we know it. That may sound a little hyperbolic, but really, I don't think it is. The more we get conditioned to this, the more restrictions on our freedoms and assaults on our liberties we're likely to see and accept, until they've all been stripped away and we're East Germany. Think it can't happen? Then you just don't know much about human beings/human nature. Everything can all go to shit very quickly here as it has elsewhere (e.g., Germany, Yugoslavia). We aren't immune simply because it hasn't happened before in our still very young democracy.
-
For everyone claiming that the Ferguson issue is something we should be paying attention to RE: police militarization or black culture, may I ask why?
After I keep up with the issues, educate myself on all the intricacies, discuss it with coworkers and friends....then what? Then what do I do? How does it affect me? It doesn't. I don't live in Ferguson.
Why? Because it hasn't just happened in Ferguson -- it's happened all over the country, including in real "back water" areas. 9/11 resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) flooding into localities everywhere for vehicle, equipment and technology upgrades for police forces everywhere, and the money that poured into the defense department for two wars resulted in a shitload of excess military hardware being handed out to these same police forces. If you aren't concerned about the creeping police state in this country, then you are being willfully ignorant of history. There are very real pitfalls, some of which could fundamentally alter life in America as we know it. That may sound a little hyperbolic, but really, I don't think it is. The more we get conditioned to this, the more restrictions on our freedoms and assaults on our liberties we're likely to see and accept, until they've all been stripped away and we're East Germany. Think it can't happen? Then you just don't know much about human beings/human nature. Everything can all go to shit very quickly here as it has elsewhere (e.g., Germany, Yugoslavia). We aren't immune simply because it hasn't happened before in our still very young democracy.
This is what I would be concerned about from all of this Ferguson shit... But the majority of people are blind to that and are paying attention to a "racism" issue.
-
Two people were telling me about all this yesterday with me and were shocked that it was the first I'd heard of it.
Low information diet wins again. No TV news, as little advertising as humanly possible (still get junk mail...), very little online news, no radio news.
-
I'm somewhere in the middle -- I don't watch the news, but I do listen to Tom Ashbrook's On Point (which covers news in-depth and intelligently) and I see posts about big new stories on facebook.
I think not knowing about Michael Brown's death & Ferguson is nothing to be proud of. It makes me sick how many previous commenters posted about 'racism' (in quotes). There are legitimate topics of concerns - racism (which is real), militarization of police. I think I'm a much better person for thinking about those things, than if I just stayed in my upper middle class white bubble and didn't concern myself with anything that didn't directly affect me. Michael Brown's body was left on the street for four hours. I don't think a low information diet is the same as being ignorant -- and seems to me that some people are the latter, not the former (unfortunately).
-
Michael Brown's body was left on the street for four hours. I don't think a low information diet is the same as being ignorant -- and seems to me that some people are the latter, not the former (unfortunately).
And you think that was because he was black?
-
I think not knowing about Michael Brown's death & Ferguson is nothing to be proud of. It makes me sick how many previous commenters posted about 'racism' (in quotes).
To clarify, though, those are not necessarily the same group. People could be well-informed on Ferguson and still disagree over interpretation of facts.
However, I feel that some of the dust needs to settle before we can objectively learn from this.
And that really sums it up.
Watching the news in real time is a very emotional experience. However, it doesn't aid one to rationally comprehend the issues.
I don't disagree, but I'm aware that waiting gives history the chance to do the interpretation for us. It's easy to end up with the consensus view. For example see the Ferguson discussion about whether racism or the police state is the issue. Reading about it even a year later we may hear people saying it was a turning point for one or the other, ignoring for the sake of bias or brevity that there were other issues at all.
There are definite downsides to being a news junkie, but I feel a certain dose of real-time news is a good exercise in both interpreting events as they happen (leisurely hindsight not always being an option) and also distancing oneself precisely so that the effect isn't so emotional.
-
A 12 year old kid in Cleveland got shot dead yesterday. He put his hands in his pockets which black people aren't allowed to do. I don't go crazy reading the news but I think its important to know these things in order to understand our culture and the consequences of it.
Well, that and the fact that he was waving around a fake gun that had the orange markings removed, making it look the same as a real gun, which is why the police were called in the first place. Tragic case to be sure, but lets represent it somewhat accurately.
There are always at least two sides to any issue, and usually more than two. That's why it is dangerous to get news from a single outlet, or worse, from twitter and facebook. E.G. "White officer kills unarmed black teen" While this is true, it ignores a whole lot of stuff that drastically changes the story.
The alternative is to spend a lot of time reading, researching, digging, questioning, and thinking, to come up with a well-rounded informed opinion. But this is a lot of work. If I can't spend the time to create an informed opinion, I'll go with the low-information diet, in order to avoid creating a dangerous opinion.
-
I'm puzzled by the local and state plan for handling all of this. Why make the announcement at night?
That's a good point! They should've announced the verdict in the morning. Only the very dedicated are going to riot at 8 am.
-
In other stories . .
Sometimes a story does need to be followed:
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572 (http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572)
-
For those who may be very interested in discussion about how the news media plays on emotions and directs our thoughts, consider reading this:
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
by Neil Postman et al.
Link: http://smile.amazon.com/dp/014303653X
-
A 12 year old kid in Cleveland got shot dead yesterday. He put his hands in his pockets which black people aren't allowed to do. I don't go crazy reading the news but I think its important to know these things in order to understand our culture and the consequences of it.
Well, that and the fact that he was waving around a fake gun that had the orange markings removed, making it look the same as a real gun, which is why the police were called in the first place. Tragic case to be sure, but lets represent it somewhat accurately.
Perhaps he was an open carry advocate.
-
For those who may be very interested in discussion about how the news media plays on emotions and directs our thoughts, consider reading this:
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
by Neil Postman et al.
Link: http://smile.amazon.com/dp/014303653X
Funny, I was just thinking about that book reading this topic. I read it when it first came out and it immediately and permanently changed how I consumed news (mainly by making a concerted effort to always avoid television "news"). I don't think the point is to be ignorant, rather to limit one's information consumption to high-quality stuff rather than OD on junk.
-
There are always at least two sides to any issue, and usually more than two. That's why it is dangerous to get news from a single outlet, or worse, from twitter and facebook. E.G. "White officer kills unarmed black teen" While this is true, it ignores a whole lot of stuff that drastically changes the story.
The alternative is to spend a lot of time reading, researching, digging, questioning, and thinking, to come up with a well-rounded informed opinion. But this is a lot of work. If I can't spend the time to create an informed opinion, I'll go with the low-information diet, in order to avoid creating a dangerous opinion.
As someone who has been following this closely (lots of reading, researching, questioning, thinking, and discussing), there appears to have developed three distinct, but occasionally overlapping viewpoints (obviously I'm missing a lot of details here, I'm just trying to summarize)...
Liberal Democrats - seem to be focusing on the social injustice aspect
Libertarian Republicans - seem to be focusing on the abuse of government authority aspect
Vanilla Republicans - if you respect those with authority none of this would be a problem
My personal observation is that while there is certainly a racial aspect of this, care must be taken to ensure that we don't lump all police officers into the same "racist" bucket as those who are actually racist. This is where I think a straight up liberal approach to the solution will fail.
The libertarian point about abuse of authority is good, but it can not be denied that race does actually play a pretty big factor here.
The vanilla Republicans are irritating because their contribution to the discussion seems to basically amount to "nothing to see here, please move along...." It's frustrating because there are real problems to solve here and ignoring them or throwing stones at those who highlight those issues is not helpful in any way.
My view of the state of the police forces across the United States is that it is absurd that we ask an organization, with a dangerous job, who literally needs to live and breath the motto of "take care of our own" and charge them with the responsibility of "policing their own." If you are an officer of the mindset that you *need* to care for the officer next to you to the best of your abilities, if you see that person do something flat out illegal it creates a huge moral dilemma. The system as it stands does not allow for good officers to hold bad officers accountable for illegal actions. As I understand, attempts to "police their own" typically ends in being ostracized and thrown out of the club.
As far as the right way to go forward, I think New York State Attorney general Eric Schneiderman has a good idea... his proposal is that any use of force by a police officer that results in death to an unarmed civilian is to be dealt with by his office. In my mind, that seems reasonable, because it removes any conflict of interest between the local prosecutor and the officers who directly work with them.
Regarding racism..... I really don't know how that can be addressed. I think most people agree that racism is bad, and if they don't agree I don't really care what they think. The problem is determining intent. It's borderline impossible to prove that someone's intentions were racist if they don't just come out and say it. So I think working the procedural issues in the justice system that are causing the lack of accountability among police officers is the best way to curb that.
*edit* -> I accidentally omitted a critical detail to Eric Schneiderman proposal in the state of New York; fixed.
-
I think we all have a civic duty to be informed of important current events and to be aware of what's happening in our country.
But, you can do that on a low information diet. The trick is to be selective and to separate news from the noise.
This means seeking out real journalism, real experts, and reliable sources. This also means ignoring 95% of what is broadcast out there, which is hearsay, unaccountable quasi-news sites, nearly all of cable news, celebrity nonsense, partisan propaganda, "think" tank talking heads, etc. The same applies to financial news, although the noise level is probably closer to 99%.
-
Mykl, I think that's a great summary and appreciate that you wrote it up.
I was really fascinated hearing about an experiment they did with cops playing a video game where, keeping all other variables in a situation the same, the cops were more likely to shoot a black suspect than a white one. Many of the cops were upset and genuinely didn't feel that they were racist. But their personal context and portrayals in the media seemed to have created an unconscious programming so that they felt more afraid in situations with black suspects. More adrenaline, hands sweating, etc., and therefore more likely to jump the trigger. What they also found was that the game could be used as a therapeutic tool as well. If the cops saw more violent white suspects or more peaceful black suspects, etc., the numbers seemed to affect their reactions. So, yeah, interesting ideas about what we can do once we admit the problem exists.
-
Mykl, I think that's a great summary and appreciate that you wrote it up.
I was really fascinated hearing about an experiment they did with cops playing a video game where, keeping all other variables in a situation the same, the cops were more likely to shoot a black suspect than a white one. Many of the cops were upset and genuinely didn't feel that they were racist. But their personal context and portrayals in the media seemed to have created an unconscious programming so that they felt more afraid in situations with black suspects. More adrenaline, hands sweating, etc., and therefore more likely to jump the trigger. What they also found was that the game could be used as a therapeutic tool as well. If the cops saw more violent white suspects or more peaceful black suspects, etc., the numbers seemed to affect their reactions. So, yeah, interesting ideas about what we can do once we admit the problem exists.
No problem. I've been diving into a lot of conversations on the subject so I thought I'd share what I've learned. The challenge here is that emotions are running high right now so it takes some care to get to the core of the issue for each particular outlook.
That sounds like a pretty interesting study. If I had to wager, I would say that the cops who were upset by the results really, truly were not overtly racist, but perhaps were tainted by experiences they've had in the real world to the degree that impacts their decision making on a subconscious level.
Consider the impact it would have on a genuinely good human being to put them in an environment that was predominantly of one specific ethnicity and then made them deal with criminals all day. Then on top of that, let's mix in with some lingering racial tensions and misconceptions about that particular ethnicity. With that I don't believe it is genuinely surprising that someone could come to be that way even if they make a concerted effort to fight those pressures.
That doesn't make it right though, but trying to understand how an individual might develop to be that way could be useful in determining what actions to take to stop it.
The overtly racist people though.... I have zero love for them. Even if I understand "why" they come to be that way doesn't change that I do not feel that they have any place in positions of authority.
I think this is why procedural changes combined with openly addressing the racial aspect is the best way to at least get the libertarians and liberals talking on the same page is the right direction to go in. This would give those who feel like they're the target of abuses of authority the assurance that we understand they are in pain and want to help them heal, while also tweaking some of the mechanics of how things work to mitigate the problem in the future.
All said here is just my opinion, of course.
-
I think we all have a civic duty to be informed of important current events and to be aware of what's happening in our country.
But, you can do that on a low information diet. The trick is to be selective and to separate news from the noise.
This means seeking out real journalism, real experts, and reliable sources. This also means ignoring 95% of what is broadcast out there, which is hearsay, unaccountable quasi-news sites, nearly all of cable news, celebrity nonsense, partisan propaganda, "think" tank talking heads, etc. The same applies to financial news, although the noise level is probably closer to 99%.
+1 - I would say I have a High Information Diet, and spend 2-3 hours a day skimming or reading national and international news articles. I love the news, and think it's important to stay aware and connected to what is going on day to day in the entire world.
But, I have a Low Panic Policy. Just because Ferguson is a disaster that should never have happened, it's unlikely to effect me.
-
As someone who has been following this closely (lots of reading, researching, questioning, thinking, and discussing), there appears to have developed three distinct, but occasionally overlapping viewpoints (obviously I'm missing a lot of details here, I'm just trying to summarize)...
Liberal Democrats - seem to be focusing on the social injustice aspect
Libertarian Republicans - seem to be focusing on the abuse of government authority aspect
Vanilla Republicans - if you respect those with authority none of this would be a problem
You're absolutely right about this, and what I find interesting (and disturbing) is that people are polarized along political lines...even though this isn't really a political issue. It makes me wonder how many liberals argue the social injustice just because they think they're supposed to...and how many republicans are just parroting the "company line" that you shouldn't resist arrest. Can nobody think for him/herself anymore?
-
I think we all have a civic duty to be informed of important current events and to be aware of what's happening in our country.
But, you can do that on a low information diet. The trick is to be selective and to separate news from the noise.
This means seeking out real journalism, real experts, and reliable sources. This also means ignoring 95% of what is broadcast out there, which is hearsay, unaccountable quasi-news sites, nearly all of cable news, celebrity nonsense, partisan propaganda, "think" tank talking heads, etc. The same applies to financial news, although the noise level is probably closer to 99%.
I agree. You can still be informed about the world and have a low information diet. But not knowing about Ferguson at least in some capacity? That's crossing the line into uneducated apathy IMO. The nationwide protests and social change movement is historic in nature. People are angry, and they are organizing and pressing for change. This hasn't occurred to this level since the 1960s. Perhaps Michael Brown wasn't the ideal candidate to motivate this degree of reaction, but it is what it is. And at this point it isn't about Michael Brown or Ferguson anymore but about an overall pattern of mistreatment.
I live in St. Louis, and while I'm not happy that this boy was killed or that it has put my city under an uncomfortable microscope, I am excited to be so close to the epicenter of a movement that will be in the history books.
And anyone who would describe Ferguson as "backwater" clearly has fully embraced the Low Information Diet to his or her detriment. That's one of the other problems with this MMM-sanctioned plan. You really have the potential of looking like an ignoramus or Rip van Winkle.
-
Another topic worth having a look at right now is the CIA "enhanced interrogation technique" report, AKA the "torture" report.
It's um.... big news, and sad news.
In fact, if the current domestic social issues and the CIA thing are the only two stories you follow right now, you're on the money if you want to cut out the useless noise that isn't worth paying much attention to.
-
Another topic worth having a look at right now is the CIA "enhanced interrogation technique" report, AKA the "torture" report.
It's um.... big news, and sad news.
In fact, if the current domestic social issues and the CIA thing are the only two stories you follow right now, you're on the money if you want to cut out the useless noise that isn't worth paying much attention to.
Agreed. The list of employed tactics is disturbing to the extreme.
-
Another topic worth having a look at right now is the CIA "enhanced interrogation technique" report, AKA the "torture" report.
It's um.... big news, and sad news.
In fact, if the current domestic social issues and the CIA thing are the only two stories you follow right now, you're on the money if you want to cut out the useless noise that isn't worth paying much attention to.
Agreed. The list of employed tactics is disturbing to the extreme.
I was going to say.
This is something you (I'm assuming you're American) should know about. The past decade+ radically changed the US. Before 9/11 we probably lived the best lives of anyone in the world. After 9/11 some things really took off. We gave up civil liberties (and we knew it). We accepted it. We endured images on our TV screens that we were inextricably bound to. We invested in two big wars in the middle east. We had a "terror alert meter" and a giant recession. We never dealt with climate change. We also found out that our government began to spy on us which we really wish we never found out.
And now we find out that we elected leaders that committed acts that we ought to be ashamed of. There's no excuse for torture. We can't support that as a country. This isn't who we are. We are people who come clean about these kinds of things though (see: turkey for an example of a country that is not as great as the united states where they cannot own up to something).
Sorry to have to inject politics into this discussion but this is an example of extremely important news that everyone should know about. Because it really involves mistakes and values that americans need to examine. Who we elect really matters. Hopefully we will learn from this.
Now, all that racial/rape/etc news...I beg to differ on how important of a "national issue" those things are and I think it's safe to tune those out. But some things you should pay attention to.
-
You're absolutely right about this, and what I find interesting (and disturbing) is that people are polarized along political lines...even though this isn't really a political issue. It makes me wonder how many liberals argue the social injustice just because they think they're supposed to...and how many republicans are just parroting the "company line" that you shouldn't resist arrest. Can nobody think for him/herself anymore?
Perhaps we are all thinking for ourselves yet still arriving at similar conclusions.
If most of us agree that 2 + 2 = 4, are we no longer thinking for ourselves?
-
Now, all that racial/rape/etc news...I beg to differ on how important of a "national issue" those things are and I think it's safe to tune those out. But some things you should pay attention to.
Was the civil rights movement of the sixties something that you think it would have been okay to tune out? Because that's what this is shaping up to resemble. 130 mile marches, civil disobedience, coordinated protests.....sounds familiar doesn't it?
-
Now, all that racial/rape/etc news...I beg to differ on how important of a "national issue" those things are and I think it's safe to tune those out. But some things you should pay attention to.
Was the civil rights movement of the sixties something that you think it would have been okay to tune out? Because that's what this is shaping up to resemble. 130 mile marches, civil disobedience, coordinated protests.....sounds familiar doesn't it?
Ok so I confess, I have been following those things. But I don't think they're noteworthy. The Michael Brown dude assaulted a police officer. He did a strong arm robbery of a store. If he was in California he would have been on his third strike already. He was no saint, absolutely not close to it. It's a tragedy that he died. But I think he was just being an idiot that day. I don't know what that has to do with race. That 12 year old kid who was shot. I remember vividly in elementary school when a cop came to our school and lectured us on many things, among them was a stern warning not to ever saw off the tip of an airsoft gun (I had one at the time so I listened). Whoever let that kid have that gun is completely culpable and we need to make sure we educate our kids of the dangers of waving around a gun in a public area. If I did that in a public park with my airsoft gun I had the knowledge of what to expect (and I fully expect to be shot if I did such a thing). Finally, that guy in New York that died when he was tackled. He wasn't innocent. He resisted arrest. He was lying to the cops right there. He probably was going to die soon judging by the looks of his health. Horrible combination of risk factors, horrible death, but I don't think shoddy police work warrants nationwide protests. We should be protesting bad habits (fast food, cigarettes) more because way more life is lost because of them. I know I'm making an assumption about that guy there but I don't think anyone would doubt the chances that this guy didn't take care of his health. A completely colorless issue. The Trayvon Martin case? I think that case should be getting more attention than these ones. George Zimmerman was a joe schmo, not a cop, tracking someone with a gun. That was so messed up. I can't believe the law protected him.
Were the cops at fault in each of these incidents? I think legally, no (and it's backed up by the grand juries), but I think it's not just cops that need to change. Whenever I see those videos of people recording cops it's apparent they are trying to find something to post to youtube and it's apparent that they don't like police from the start. It's just as much of a problem when cops have to deal with populations that discriminate against cops. That's up to those people to change.
The reason I think these stories are irrelevant is, in the big picture, the civil rights era has already happened. Legally, on paper, you can't discriminate. Some people want to stick to a historical narrative and take to the streets and protest. I look around (I live in an area that has a good population of middle-class African-Americans) and I don't see the need for anything else, reparations, etc. The people around me sometimes drive nicer cars than I do. So I consider it a non-issue and I'm fully tuned out so I can focus on my own life.
I'm not black so maybe I don't have the perspective of a black person but I think the people most at arms over this issue should consider an alternative perspective because as far as I can see, a lot of black people share my perspective and live just fine, happy lives.
-
This thread just reinforces my view that one should be informed. However, whatever you do, stay far, far away from the comments section. :P
-
The whole Ferguson thing seems kind of like a sideshow compared to all the other terrible problems going on in the world today. You don't see the President giving a speech about the genocide going down between the Muslims and Christians in the Central African Republic, but you see him chiming in about a murder case in some backwater Missouri town. People's priorities are all messed up these days.
Totally agree with you except the backwater Missouri town part. I'm kinda biased about Missouri as it is my home state and I consider it my "nation state." Lord! It's not as if we're California! Now Ferguson is a blight upon our state and reputation. But its not as if it were Chicago!
-
The reason I think these stories are irrelevant is, in the big picture, the civil rights era has already happened. Legally, on paper, you can't discriminate. Some people want to stick to a historical narrative and take to the streets and protest. I look around (I live in an area that has a good population of middle-class African-Americans) and I don't see the need for anything else, reparations, etc. The people around me sometimes drive nicer cars than I do. So I consider it a non-issue and I'm fully tuned out so I can focus on my own life.
I'm not black so maybe I don't have the perspective of a black person but I think the people most at arms over this issue should consider an alternative perspective because as far as I can see, a lot of black people share my perspective and live just fine, happy lives.
In Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment, the "guards" (and even Zimbardo himself) didn't realize what was happening to them. And that took place over the course of just a few days. There is still a great deal of institutional and cultural racial imbalance.
And just because it's on paper doesn't make it so; if it did, we would have no use whatsoever for law enforcement.
It's insanely easy to fool ourselves. Just sayin'.
-
The reason I think these stories are irrelevant is, in the big picture, the civil rights era has already happened. Legally, on paper, you can't discriminate. Some people want to stick to a historical narrative and take to the streets and protest. I look around (I live in an area that has a good population of middle-class African-Americans) and I don't see the need for anything else, reparations, etc. The people around me sometimes drive nicer cars than I do. So I consider it a non-issue and I'm fully tuned out so I can focus on my own life.
I'm not black so maybe I don't have the perspective of a black person but I think the people most at arms over this issue should consider an alternative perspective because as far as I can see, a lot of black people share my perspective and live just fine, happy lives.
In Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment, the "guards" (and even Zimbardo himself) didn't realize what was happening to them. And that took place over the course of just a few days. There is still a great deal of institutional and cultural racial imbalance.
And just because it's on paper doesn't make it so; if it did, we would have no use whatsoever for law enforcement.
It's insanely easy to fool ourselves. Just sayin'.
I'm not saying stuff doesn't happen I'm just saying it's out of my circle of control. So I'm not concerned about it. It's part of the low information diet. It's not my plan to subjugate black people, but my plan to focus on mustachian principles so I can have a better life...
What does "cultural racial imbalance" mean?
-
Now, all that racial/rape/etc news...I beg to differ on how important of a "national issue" those things are and I think it's safe to tune those out. But some things you should pay attention to.
Was the civil rights movement of the sixties something that you think it would have been okay to tune out? Because that's what this is shaping up to resemble. 130 mile marches, civil disobedience, coordinated protests.....sounds familiar doesn't it?
I dunno, I could buy that this is bread and circuses and that the public has just been demanding more serious-minded bread and circuses lately. So that it doesn't feel so much like bread and circuses. Sure they're important issues, but because of the historical precedent the response also has an easy-to-follow pattern that doesn't take too much effort.
I had a history teacher in highschool point out that the flag-burning scandal was big news during the iran-contra scandal, which was what people should have really been upset about. Even though the whole flag-burning thing is an important discussion about rights. So whenever something is in focus in the news, I ask myself, "What could this be a distraction from?"
Update: seeing your follow-up comment, Morfas, I realize I was not interpreting "non-issue" as you meant it. You mean you don't think racism is a thing anymore, so that's a disagreement about the interpretation of the events.
As someone who has been following this closely (lots of reading, researching, questioning, thinking, and discussing), there appears to have developed three distinct, but occasionally overlapping viewpoints (obviously I'm missing a lot of details here, I'm just trying to summarize)...
Liberal Democrats - seem to be focusing on the social injustice aspect
Libertarian Republicans - seem to be focusing on the abuse of government authority aspect
Vanilla Republicans - if you respect those with authority none of this would be a problem
You're absolutely right about this, and what I find interesting (and disturbing) is that people are polarized along political lines...even though this isn't really a political issue. It makes me wonder how many liberals argue the social injustice just because they think they're supposed to...and how many republicans are just parroting the "company line" that you shouldn't resist arrest. Can nobody think for him/herself anymore?
In addition to the 'flag-burning' mental test, I have the 'do I agree with all of my facebook friends about an issue' test. And if so, it might be time to question my thinking. Unfortunately that also brings up the, 'do all of my facebook friends agree with each other' test, which in many cases, except for that one aunt who hates Obama, I fail. It's an indication that I need to broaden my range of friends. But in this case it could also be a case of regional political correctness in that no one disagreeing with the social justice angle (except for that one aunt) wants to post about it. Indeed, my first conversation on Monday was with a co-worker who immediately pulled out the 'ALL lives matter' and 'it's not a race issue it's a class issue' arguments.
Anyway so maybe in this anonymous venue I can finally confess: I buy that racism is a thing, both from experimental evidence and statistics, and that confronting racism is really important, I just don't think Eric Garner is a good example to rally behind. The rule of law, as opposed to military, requires that people submit to police. That is not the same thing as submitting to the state. You can fight in the courts; you can not fight the police. The moment of arrest is not the time to argue your rights. He was resisting arrest. Yes, he wasn't being threatening and yes the chokehold is not a sanctioned move, but cops do not yet have the technology to subdue people by enveloping them in harmless rainbow-flavored jell-o or whatever. A physical altercation always carries risks so when you resist arrest you are taking your life in your hands for no possible benefit. No cop has ever said, "Oh, gosh, I didn't realize how much this person didn't want to be arrested. I guess they have a good point and I'll be on my way."
Someone on my facebook feed is a music teacher in an elementary school and had the kids writing protest songs because, 'a police officer killed a man.' And of course because he's a bleeding heart liberal, he's teaching in the impoverished inner-city so he's influencing the very kids who most need to learn effective, positive ways to interact with cops and are most at risk from having an adversarial attitude towards them. Kids who grew up where I did, middle-class whitebred suburbs where the adults don't care quite so fiercely about social justice, are still learning the respectful model of interacting with cops which will save their lives when they decide in college to join protest rallies.
-
Now, all that racial/rape/etc news...I beg to differ on how important of a "national issue" those things are and I think it's safe to tune those out. But some things you should pay attention to.
Was the civil rights movement of the sixties something that you think it would have been okay to tune out? Because that's what this is shaping up to resemble. 130 mile marches, civil disobedience, coordinated protests.....sounds familiar doesn't it?
I dunno, I could buy that this is bread and circuses and that the public has just been demanding more serious-minded bread and circuses lately. So that it doesn't feel so much like bread and circuses. Sure they're important issues, but because of the historical precedent the response also has an easy-to-follow pattern that doesn't take too much effort.
I had a history teacher in highschool point out that the flag-burning scandal was big news during the iran-contra scandal, which was what people should have really been upset about. Even though the whole flag-burning thing is an important discussion about rights. So whenever something is in focus in the news, I ask myself, "What could this be a distraction from?"
Update: seeing your follow-up comment, Morfas, I realize I was not interpreting "non-issue" as you meant it. You mean you don't think racism is a thing anymore, so that's a disagreement about the interpretation of the events.
As someone who has been following this closely (lots of reading, researching, questioning, thinking, and discussing), there appears to have developed three distinct, but occasionally overlapping viewpoints (obviously I'm missing a lot of details here, I'm just trying to summarize)...
Liberal Democrats - seem to be focusing on the social injustice aspect
Libertarian Republicans - seem to be focusing on the abuse of government authority aspect
Vanilla Republicans - if you respect those with authority none of this would be a problem
You're absolutely right about this, and what I find interesting (and disturbing) is that people are polarized along political lines...even though this isn't really a political issue. It makes me wonder how many liberals argue the social injustice just because they think they're supposed to...and how many republicans are just parroting the "company line" that you shouldn't resist arrest. Can nobody think for him/herself anymore?
In addition to the 'flag-burning' mental test, I have the 'do I agree with all of my facebook friends about an issue' test. And if so, it might be time to question my thinking. Unfortunately that also brings up the, 'do all of my facebook friends agree with each other' test, which in many cases, except for that one aunt who hates Obama, I fail. It's an indication that I need to broaden my range of friends. But in this case it could also be a case of regional political correctness in that no one disagreeing with the social justice angle (except for that one aunt) wants to post about it. Indeed, my first conversation on Monday was with a co-worker who immediately pulled out the 'ALL lives matter' and 'it's not a race issue it's a class issue' arguments.
Anyway so maybe in this anonymous venue I can finally confess: I buy that racism is a thing, both from experimental evidence and statistics, and that confronting racism is really important, I just don't think Eric Garner is a good example to rally behind. The rule of law, as opposed to military, requires that people submit to police. That is not the same thing as submitting to the state. You can fight in the courts; you can not fight the police. The moment of arrest is not the time to argue your rights. He was resisting arrest. Yes, he wasn't being threatening and yes the chokehold is not a sanctioned move, but cops do not yet have the technology to subdue people by enveloping them in harmless rainbow-flavored jell-o or whatever. A physical altercation always carries risks so when you resist arrest you are taking your life in your hands for no possible benefit. No cop has ever said, "Oh, gosh, I didn't realize how much this person didn't want to be arrested. I guess they have a good point and I'll be on my way."
Someone on my facebook feed is a music teacher in an elementary school and had the kids writing protest songs because, 'a police officer killed a man.' And of course because he's a bleeding heart liberal, he's teaching in the impoverished inner-city so he's influencing the very kids who most need to learn effective, positive ways to interact with cops and are most at risk from having an adversarial attitude towards them. Kids who grew up where I did, middle-class whitebred suburbs where the adults don't care quite so fiercely about social justice, are still learning the respectful model of interacting with cops which will save their lives when they decide in college to join protest rallies.
Unfortunately we have media corporations that generate hits and revenue "selling" an idea of how someone is treated in society (cough, CNN, cough). Stuff that you never see in public. Ew.
-
The "low information diet" has always struck me as one of MRM's stupider ideas. Yes, I can understand not obsessing over tabloid or entertainment news, and not watching CNN 20 hours a day, but to actually pride yourself on not understanding or even being aware of what important things are going on in the world is anti-intellectual makes you sound like more of a rube than someone who follows celebrity drama.
There is a reason "low information voter" is a pejorative.
edit. Particularly, it sounds like claiming that your "low information diet" forces you to ignore racial injustice sounds like something that primarily white people are going to be able to do.
-
It's called low information, not no information.
-
It's called low information, not no information.
Being somewhat knowledgeable about major stories? Important. Knowing who was performing at the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show? Not so much. Guess what my Twitter feed was full of.
-
It's called low information, not no information.
Being somewhat knowledgeable about major stories? Important. Knowing who was performing at the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show? Not so much. Guess what my Twitter feed was full of.
Sure, taken to the extreme, a "low informaton diet" is probably a negative. But I do agree with the concept that too much information actually makes it tougher to stay grounded, focused and relatively stress free. I used to pay attention to politics pretty closely in years passed, but no longer give a shit because, quite frankly, it doesn't contribute to my goal to retire early.
And I think that is the key. Ignore the information (perhaps I should say "data") that doesn't contribute to your goals in life. Sometimes, the less you know the better.
-
Unless the news has an impact on the economy (and therefore my investments/savings), I don't really give a damn what's on the news. I'm what most people would call a single-issue voter.
-
I've just made a renewed commitment to the LID, and that includes limiting fb post to one day per week (starting today)
I've been following the events in Ferguson since they happened and I have to say it wasn't worth it.
First, 90% or so of people made up their minds sometime around 8/10/14 what "really happened". They did this not on the basis of actual information but on their world view/political view. Those on the left decided it was a murder and those on the right decided it was a cop trying to survive an attack.
Second, it wasn't until the GJ decision and the release of many of the documents that anyone had any real info and could make an informed decision. So all the talk from early August to late November was just hot air.
Third, now that the decision is made we could have a useful discussion of how GJs work (or how they should work) the role of the GJ in our legal system, what kinds of evidence should/should not be presented, and so on. Instead, Ferguson is no longer part of the nightly news cycle, though it remains a "reference" to be mentioned in other police shooting cases, and those other shooting incidents need to be looked at on a case by case basis . The shooting of Tamir Rice may not have anything to do with the events in Ferguson.
What people don't seem to realize is that watching the news every night is also a low information diet, but one that takes up a lot of time and energy.
-
What do you do when the media blatantly lies to you, like they did with the Ferguson case?
-
Since a couple of weeks I don't visit any kind of news website, and I go to the main page of Wikipedia once a day:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
there is a news sector on the right and there is maybe one new item every day, sometimes less. I can read the linked article, and then visit a couple of interlink and really have a deeper grasp of what's happening in this single, "more important" news that has gained the privilege to apppear in this news section. Is like I'm reading a single news per day, but with some depth.
I know wikipedia could be easily manipolated, but I kind of trust it more then normal media. And I'm really enjoing it, and I can avoid all the people/tabloid/filler news sections.
Obviously I still idly watch/read local/regional newspaper and local results of sports, but that's more like a civic duty since we have to vote so. many. times. a year.
-
I must admit my mindset has significantly improved since I began adopting the Low Information Diet. My obsession with politics/movies/new music and my wife's lack thereof used to be a cause of some tension in our relationship -- now I realize she kinda had it right all along. I canceled my newspaper subscription, listen to podcasts or music instead of NPR (mostly), hardly ever check Twitter or Facebook, and no longer feel the nagging need to read up on my Pitchfork and Stereogum every morning. My mind feels much more fit and free because of these changes.
BUT, taken to an extreme, the LID can result in a certain harmful type of ignorance. And since one of my main goals for my time here on Earth (along with spreading love and beauty and stuff) is working against injustice, I feel it's important to be aware of issues like the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases. Seriously, Mustachian folks, if you "care" enough to denounce consumerism as an evil, but not racism, then I don't wanna associate with y'all. I'd rather be broke for life but be working towards justice than financially prosperous with a blind eye towards injustice.
-
^ those two cases aren't necessarily about racism. To me, the two cases you mentioned have much more to do with excessive use of force than they do with racism.
-
OK, I know this isn't the forum to get into a political debate here, but the simple fact is that if 99% of black people in America think it's about racism, it has become about racism, whether you want it to or not.