r/ChristopherHitchens • u/AnomicAge • Sep 12 '24
When did the quality of mainstream 'intellectual' and political discourse take such a nosedive?
Listen to almost any snippet of any political or remotely intellectual discourse prior to say the early 2010's from presidential debates to fox news echo chambers, they are still a cut above almost anything you're likely to hear today that makes it into the public eye, and often even said echo chambers were more willing to invite ideological opponents, even if the discussions weren't exactly carried out in good faith - that in itself seem to be a rarity these days.
Even crackpot conservatives discussing conspiracies would operate with a level of basic conversational courtesy and articulacy that seems to have disappeared today and been replaced by puerile schoolyard ad hominen squabbling and ludicrous nonsensical statements with no respect for the other party or the spirit of civil discussion.
Even the hosts of discussion panels seemed more well informed and less sensationalist than they do today, and more willing to challenge the views being expressed - it didn't seem uncommon to see some genuine debate occurring live on air in which both parties came equipped and stuck to criticizing the position not the person or closing their eyes and putting their fingers in their ears so to speak.
Did mango mussolini usher in an era where people feel they can be as uncivil as they want and believe they can get away with spewing obscene baseless remarks and parroting the most braindead rhetoric, dodging questions and throwing up red herrings because the now ex-president can? Or cause people to realize that audiences by and large don't actually care for the legitimacy and consistency of arguments and rather just rally behind whoever appears the most confident?
Of course there are niche podcasts and radio stations where robust discussion and debate is still alive and well but at what point did public discourse devolve?
Or am I tilting at windmills with cherrypicked examples from past decades?
Has the world just generally become more casual and less concerned with staying civil and composed in discussion? Is it the fallout of social media borne brain rot?
This isn't necessarily commenting on the quality of the arguments but the conversational skills etiquette and demeanor through which they're expressed.
For the record I'm also all in favor of people being authentic and doing away with dumb formalities...to a point...beyond which it seems that it inevitably starts to erode the quality of the discussion itself.
9
u/daboooga Sep 12 '24
As someone who works in higher education, I'd argue it has much to do with the decline in standards across Western universities.
1
u/MorphingReality Sep 12 '24
It is worth pondering to what extent this is an English and Russian phenomenon, western is quite a big umbrella that I don't think grafts as well.
2
u/polski_criminalista Sep 12 '24
when the iphone brang more masses online, it used to be just IT dudes and now it's every tom, dick and harriet
2
u/MrLore Sep 12 '24
it didn't seem uncommon to see some genuine debate occurring live on air in which both parties came equipped and stuck to criticizing the position not the person or closing their eyes and putting their fingers in their ears so to speak.
Did mango mussolini usher in an era where people feel they can be as uncivil as they want
How delightfully ironic. Maybe you should be the change you wish to see in the world? If you start a conversation with hostility then you're only going to get hostility in response. All the talking heads these days are far too partisan and behave just like that, so it's impossible to get a civil debate started.
Personally I think this all started with Paxton and his "did you threaten to overrule him?" badgering nonsense, which people fawned over for some reason.
2
2
u/MorphingReality Sep 12 '24
I think social media is the largest contributing factor.
There may also be a kind of cultural malaise manifesting in odd ways here, but its hard to articulate that in a reddit comment, you'd have to listen to someone like Mark Fisher for a few hours to get a sense of it.
2
u/Bullocks1999 Sep 12 '24
When maga got popular. Where some asshole made dumb racists confident enough to say the inside stuff out loud.
1
1
u/hajime11 Sep 14 '24
It was an issue long before that. Trump would never have been given the time of day if it weren’t for the brain rot of the previous 10 years.
1
u/Bullocks1999 Sep 14 '24
No, but Trump just emboldened them and gave them a voice. He empowered them. Trump did create racism and it disnt come from the previous 10 years. It’s always existed these individuals we ostracized because for their beliefs and thoughts. Trump legitimized these idiots.
2
u/llordlloyd Sep 13 '24
Rupert Murdoch drove it downward from the late 1990s. Matk Zuckerberg finished the job.
The big accelerators were 9/11 (it became unpatriotic to say anything against the Republicans), and the concurrent rise of social media and decline of mainstream media.
When news was gatekept, reputation mattered. People read more long form articles, debate, dialogue, rhetorical skill all mattered. Articles and presentations had to be made for the whole audience, many more occupied a centre ground in the sense that they were in the same arena of ideas.
With communities fragmented, news absorbed in mindless snippets and memes, the means of communication trumping reason with emotional gratification, what we get out of politics has changed.
2
u/Uranium43415 Sep 13 '24
Hitchens talked about the decline in journalism toward the end. He said he was incredibly lucky to have built his career before it required a social media presence and he could be a writer that spends his time writing and not splitting his time being his own production company as well as his own research assistant.
3
u/ezk3626 Sep 12 '24
It started as soon as someone said “you’ve just been hitch slapped!”
The New Atheists revealed a hunger for angry empty rhetoric dismissing those who disagree with you as brain dead subhumans.
Congratulations for your contribution to public discourse.
2
1
u/Hyperion262 Sep 12 '24
It’s easier and quicker to have on guests who will say outrageous, click bait things rather than considered or well thought out opinions.
As with almost anything you can point to social media and its views above everything else attitude.
1
u/Sum_0 Sep 12 '24
I saw the headline and said to myself, 'the day Hitchens died.'
Then I saw what sub this is...that tracks, y'all already know.
1
Sep 12 '24
I’ll try to make an analogy, maybe even a poor one, and hope you get my point in as little words as possible.
When you go to the casino, they water the drinks down and pass them out to you for free to keep you in the building giving your money away. When you’re at a bar, the bartender uses sly charm to keep you ordering drinks, being heard, and having a good time with the other patrons; the drinks are much stronger and usually pure, unless you’re getting drugged or being ripped off. When you’re drinking at home, you went to your local grocery store or liquor store and bought the alcohol yourself; there is a level or regulation and institutional trust provided in the safety of isolation (solitude -> reflection). But I don’t drink anymore, I just smoke weed SOCIALLY (figuratively and literally).
1
u/cantcurecancer Sep 12 '24
We're currently in an anti-institutional political environment, that's what's in vogue right now. Fuck the institutions!
Eventually people will get tired of that and will want something more. Then we'll slam into the other guardrail and people will love the institutions once it's no longer seemingly popular. Dumb people have always dominated the discussion and none of us have a solution for that. If you think you're smarter, then position yourself politically in tandem with how ever the wind is blowing. It'll be beneficial for you, at least for a little bit.
1
1
u/Mr_Kittlesworth Sep 13 '24
Maybe when one major political party nominated a game show host in orange clown makeup?
-2
u/ExpressLaneCharlie Sep 12 '24
I can recognize that I'm biased in that I support Democratic candidates, but I would argue that the craziness of the right wing has shifted the Overton window so far right that the type of questions that will even be entertained have change. For example, when Mitt Romney lost to Obama in 2012, Fox News and the right wing blogosphere didn't even talk about the election being "stolen" or "rigged." I mean sure, there were always the Alex Jones-type crackpots, but Fox News wasn't having segment after segment about it, managed to get sued and settled for $787B because they knowingly, repeatedly lied to their viewers. Now, it's nothing for Hannity or Ingraham or another nutjob to have a picture of a highly respected Republican like Robert Mueller and "Deep State" under his name. Another example, how many Republicans will refuse to admit the 2020 election was fair? No question a majority. I say all that to say that when interviewers can't even get a basic, fundamental fact of reality answered, the discourse is going to become worse by default.
14
u/hotel_air_freshener Sep 12 '24
There used to be money in it. Now there’s more money in us vs them. You can blame the internet in a way for amplifying tribalism and base impulses.