anthropological observations

[Prof David West]

I have been in Amsterdam for the past year and had the opportunity to put on my anthropologist's hat and observe cultural differences in reaction to the Covid-19 virus. I returned to the US two weeks ago and just completed a two-day auto journey from Wisconsin to Utah — also in full ethnographic research mode.

My "research methodology" is typical for anthropology, observation, conversations with as many people from as many different backgrounds as possible, reading newspapers — most importantly, small local publications — and, in the US, listening to radio broadcasts — again mostly local stations including lots of country western and even religious stations in addition to NPR, CBS, and Fox radio (I could not find CNN radio).  I was trying to gain insights into the population of those who listen to / read the different sources, as well as attitudes of media to their audience. Both country-western and religious stations reflect the mostly rural populations of Nevada, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah along my route.

Some observations:

1) Covid-19 Numbers. Mainstream media in the US gives you opinion, analysis, and interpretation with just enough numbers to "justify" the conclusions. They are woefully short on "raw" or complete numbers. In contrast, European media and local media in the US provide numbers with no analysis or interpretation. And reasonably complete, e.g. total number tested, number tested negative, number tested positive, hospitalizations, available beds, used beds, available respirators, used respirators, specific outbreak loci, including jails and prisons.

CONCLUSION: mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots incapable of making sense of the data and in need of "guidance" and "leadership" while European and rural US information sources presume a basic level of competence in their audiences.

2) Models, projections and actual. In Europe I encountered almost none of the "the models predict and hence we are doomed unless ..." kind of articles that seem to dominate US mainstream media. Instead, "spreadsheet models" with data were published in tables by date, country, and raw number. European readers were left to make their own conclusions about how Netherlands data compared to Italian (for example) and make projections or draw conclusions as appropriate.

In local newspapers in Nevada, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska I saw articles that compared projected numbers from the models touted by CDC, Fauci, et.al. with actual local numbers. Local numbers varied from national model projections by as much as -50% and never less than -20%. (That is actual was dramatically lower than projected.)

I saw and heard numerous editorial commentaries with regard the discrepancy between what the 'experts" were saying and what was locally observed and questioning why the variance. This leads immediately to questions about "hidden agendas" on the part of the Federal government and the "experts."

CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."

3) Medical science. In the past two months I have seen around a dozen "treatments" advanced that have the potential to alleviate and/or treat Covid. I have seen at least five articles from companies that have developed tests and or testing machines (some of the latter capable of 15,000 tests per day). There have been at least six articles from Universities (including the one Frank shared from Pittsburgh) or companies/organizations that have developed potential vaccines. Oxford University has one that, they say, could be deployed as soon as September.

In Europe you see stories about the use of tests and testing devices, use of treatments along side data about effectiveness and heuristics for use, and optimistic projections of the availability of vaccines.In the US you do not.

CONCLUSION: Science, and in particular medical science, has become Fetishized in the US — that is to say that form and ritual is more important than substance. The use of hydrochloroquine, for example is widespread in Europe and backed by all kinds of information on indications for use, heuristics for determining dosage, contra-indications, and effectiveness numbers. Information is widely shared on all possible treatments along with all the caveats, and physicians are encouraged to use their best personal judgement. In the US, none of the above, because it is not "scientifically proven to be efficacious" mostly because we have not done a six-month double blind study.

4) Cultural ignorance, part one: non-medical masks. The use of ad hoc and home-made masks is an astoundingly bad idea in the U.S., for cultural reasons. In Asian cultures — for the most part — the wearing of a mask invokes non-conscious, but very real, feelings of "social solidarity," "conformance," and "consideration for others." In the U.S., even in medical settings where we know, intellectually, the reason for the mask, invokes non-conscious feelings of "threat," "mistrust," and "alienation." A simple test: ask 100 black males if they would wear a medical mask in public. Ask them is they would wear a home-made mask. Group responses by education and economics. Among those with high education/economic status, maybe 50% would wear a medical mast, but only about 10-15% would wear an informal mask. About 10-15% of those at the lower end of the education/economic ladder would be likely to wear a medical mask and 0-5% a homemade mask. Then ask why.

5) Cultural ignorance, part two: social isolation. Supposedly, social distancing is the best, perhaps only, means for "flattening the curve."  This is nonsense. Ethnographic (and,of course, therefore not "scientific") studies of two previous 'epidemics;" AIDS and STDs show that a far more effective means for controlling conflagration is the establishment of "communities of trust." Communities of Trust were self-organized communities of at-risk individuals, within which behaviors such as promiscuity and needle sharing were allowed, even encouraged and expanded, while such behavior outside the community was strictly forbidden and grounds for permanent banishment if violated.

Within such communities the transmission rate immediately dropped to near zero. Because everyone in the community knew everyone else, contact tracing, if needed, was also immediate and globally shared, leading to effective and temporary isolation. Communities could scale. There were at least two communities that were national in scope, using a kind of federated model with local communities assuming responsibility for local populations but allowing for individuals to participate in non-local communities. Woe to the local community that allowed one of their members to "infect" another community. It was pretty much a one-strike and you are out situation, and that translated into each individual establishing a local, long term, track record before being allowed to participate elsewhere.

I have seen this kind of community of trust in the Netherlands and Europe, with regards psychedelic drug users, BDSM groups, even Naturist groups. In the US is is very evident in the Mormon culture and in most rural communities.

OPINION: this possibility is not pursued because it is self-organizing and not amenable to centralized government control.

6) U.S. Federal Bureaucracy and antipathy to "Medicare For All." Conversations and editorial commentaries exposed a very pragmatic argument for not entrusting health care to the Federal Government. Using FEMA and the current situation as an example, people pointed out that FEMA has failed to deliver because it is implacably bound to "PROCEDURE" and "FORMAL PROCESS" to the extent that it cannot certify vendors and place orders for equipment. Imagine if health care was entrusted to the same kind of "brain dead" "lacking common sense" "exclusively by the lowest common denominator rules" bureaucratic entity.

7) Cultural divide. I won't go into this in detail unless asked at some point, but it is clear, to me, that the red-state / blue-state differentiation is fatally flawed, but underneath is a centralized-command-and-control-grounded-in-liberalism culture versus a local-self-responsible-independent-anti-centrism-anti-authoritarian culture. These cultures are implacably opposed and will be the basis for a "civil war" of some sort within the next decade.

davew


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Frank Wimberly-2]

A different point of view.  Or perhaps David will regard it as confirming data:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/the-preexisting-condition-in-the-oval-office?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_041220&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bea160d24c17c6adf1d90ff&cndid=26657004&hasha=03a68c161f5d16347943cf2195691293&hashb=806a12bf27a999679e133d98a8068fab3b194723&hashc=5a04768fafab49af2104ea98375511d11b19157e125fbac5ef8a7b339af771dd&esrc=CDS_OP&utm_term=TNY_Daily 

 

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:51 PM Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:

I have been in Amsterdam for the past year and had the opportunity to put on my anthropologist's hat and observe cultural differences in reaction to the Covid-19 virus. I returned to the US two weeks ago and just completed a two-day auto journey from Wisconsin to Utah — also in full ethnographic research mode.

My "research methodology" is typical for anthropology, observation, conversations with as many people from as many different backgrounds as possible, reading newspapers — most importantly, small local publications — and, in the US, listening to radio broadcasts — again mostly local stations including lots of country western and even religious stations in addition to NPR, CBS, and Fox radio (I could not find CNN radio).  I was trying to gain insights into the population of those who listen to / read the different sources, as well as attitudes of media to their audience. Both country-western and religious stations reflect the mostly rural populations of Nevada, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah along my route.

Some observations:

1) Covid-19 Numbers. Mainstream media in the US gives you opinion, analysis, and interpretation with just enough numbers to "justify" the conclusions. They are woefully short on "raw" or complete numbers. In contrast, European media and local media in the US provide numbers with no analysis or interpretation. And reasonably complete, e.g. total number tested, number tested negative, number tested positive, hospitalizations, available beds, used beds, available respirators, used respirators, specific outbreak loci, including jails and prisons.

CONCLUSION: mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots incapable of making sense of the data and in need of "guidance" and "leadership" while European and rural US information sources presume a basic level of competence in their audiences.

2) Models, projections and actual. In Europe I encountered almost none of the "the models predict and hence we are doomed unless ..." kind of articles that seem to dominate US mainstream media. Instead, "spreadsheet models" with data were published in tables by date, country, and raw number. European readers were left to make their own conclusions about how Netherlands data compared to Italian (for example) and make projections or draw conclusions as appropriate.

In local newspapers in Nevada, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska I saw articles that compared projected numbers from the models touted by CDC, Fauci, et.al. with actual local numbers. Local numbers varied from national model projections by as much as -50% and never less than -20%. (That is actual was dramatically lower than projected.)

I saw and heard numerous editorial commentaries with regard the discrepancy between what the 'experts" were saying and what was locally observed and questioning why the variance. This leads immediately to questions about "hidden agendas" on the part of the Federal government and the "experts."

CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."

3) Medical science. In the past two months I have seen around a dozen "treatments" advanced that have the potential to alleviate and/or treat Covid. I have seen at least five articles from companies that have developed tests and or testing machines (some of the latter capable of 15,000 tests per day). There have been at least six articles from Universities (including the one Frank shared from Pittsburgh) or companies/organizations that have developed potential vaccines. Oxford University has one that, they say, could be deployed as soon as September.

In Europe you see stories about the use of tests and testing devices, use of treatments along side data about effectiveness and heuristics for use, and optimistic projections of the availability of vaccines.In the US you do not.

CONCLUSION: Science, and in particular medical science, has become Fetishized in the US — that is to say that form and ritual is more important than substance. The use of hydrochloroquine, for example is widespread in Europe and backed by all kinds of information on indications for use, heuristics for determining dosage, contra-indications, and effectiveness numbers. Information is widely shared on all possible treatments along with all the caveats, and physicians are encouraged to use their best personal judgement. In the US, none of the above, because it is not "scientifically proven to be efficacious" mostly because we have not done a six-month double blind study.

4) Cultural ignorance, part one: non-medical masks. The use of ad hoc and home-made masks is an astoundingly bad idea in the U.S., for cultural reasons. In Asian cultures — for the most part — the wearing of a mask invokes non-conscious, but very real, feelings of "social solidarity," "conformance," and "consideration for others." In the U.S., even in medical settings where we know, intellectually, the reason for the mask, invokes non-conscious feelings of "threat," "mistrust," and "alienation." A simple test: ask 100 black males if they would wear a medical mask in public. Ask them is they would wear a home-made mask. Group responses by education and economics. Among those with high education/economic status, maybe 50% would wear a medical mast, but only about 10-15% would wear an informal mask. About 10-15% of those at the lower end of the education/economic ladder would be likely to wear a medical mask and 0-5% a homemade mask. Then ask why.

5) Cultural ignorance, part two: social isolation. Supposedly, social distancing is the best, perhaps only, means for "flattening the curve."  This is nonsense. Ethnographic (and,of course, therefore not "scientific") studies of two previous 'epidemics;" AIDS and STDs show that a far more effective means for controlling conflagration is the establishment of "communities of trust." Communities of Trust were self-organized communities of at-risk individuals, within which behaviors such as promiscuity and needle sharing were allowed, even encouraged and expanded, while such behavior outside the community was strictly forbidden and grounds for permanent banishment if violated.

Within such communities the transmission rate immediately dropped to near zero. Because everyone in the community knew everyone else, contact tracing, if needed, was also immediate and globally shared, leading to effective and temporary isolation. Communities could scale. There were at least two communities that were national in scope, using a kind of federated model with local communities assuming responsibility for local populations but allowing for individuals to participate in non-local communities. Woe to the local community that allowed one of their members to "infect" another community. It was pretty much a one-strike and you are out situation, and that translated into each individual establishing a local, long term, track record before being allowed to participate elsewhere.

I have seen this kind of community of trust in the Netherlands and Europe, with regards psychedelic drug users, BDSM groups, even Naturist groups. In the US is is very evident in the Mormon culture and in most rural communities.

OPINION: this possibility is not pursued because it is self-organizing and not amenable to centralized government control.

6) U.S. Federal Bureaucracy and antipathy to "Medicare For All." Conversations and editorial commentaries exposed a very pragmatic argument for not entrusting health care to the Federal Government. Using FEMA and the current situation as an example, people pointed out that FEMA has failed to deliver because it is implacably bound to "PROCEDURE" and "FORMAL PROCESS" to the extent that it cannot certify vendors and place orders for equipment. Imagine if health care was entrusted to the same kind of "brain dead" "lacking common sense" "exclusively by the lowest common denominator rules" bureaucratic entity.

7) Cultural divide. I won't go into this in detail unless asked at some point, but it is clear, to me, that the red-state / blue-state differentiation is fatally flawed, but underneath is a centralized-command-and-control-grounded-in-liberalism culture versus a local-self-responsible-independent-anti-centrism-anti-authoritarian culture. These cultures are implacably opposed and will be the basis for a "civil war" of some sort within the next decade.

davew


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

--

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Jochen Fromm-5]

I believe the cultural divide between China and the US is bigger than the cultural divide between US and EU. At the moment I'm reading "River Town" from Peter Hessler, an American who spent 2 years for the Peace Corps as an English teacher in Fuling, Sichuan. Sichuan is located in the west of China and it is known for Pandas and spicy food. 

The book is a few years old. Nevertheless Peter reports that many Chinese back then saw both Hitler and Mao as great leaders (!), despite their crimes and their millions of victims. Some even confuse the dictator in Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Great Dictator" with the real Hitler. Of course in the US and in the EU nobody shares this view. 

Peter also reports about the strong effects of lifelong propaganda from the communist party of China. In Europe we have propaganda as well, but it is mostly in form of marketing and advertising for corporations and their products. Advertising for political parties only happens during elections for limited periods of time. We have freedom of speech in EU & US, but there is no freedom of speech in China. I believe that's a major difference between EU & US and China.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Prof David West <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/12/20 20:52 (GMT+01:00)

To: [hidden email]

Subject: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I have been in Amsterdam for the past year and had the opportunity to put on my anthropologist's hat and observe cultural differences in reaction to the Covid-19 virus. I returned to the US two weeks ago and just completed a two-day auto journey from Wisconsin to Utah — also in full ethnographic research mode.

My "research methodology" is typical for anthropology, observation, conversations with as many people from as many different backgrounds as possible, reading newspapers — most importantly, small local publications — and, in the US, listening to radio broadcasts — again mostly local stations including lots of country western and even religious stations in addition to NPR, CBS, and Fox radio (I could not find CNN radio).  I was trying to gain insights into the population of those who listen to / read the different sources, as well as attitudes of media to their audience. Both country-western and religious stations reflect the mostly rural populations of Nevada, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah along my route.

Some observations:

1) Covid-19 Numbers. Mainstream media in the US gives you opinion, analysis, and interpretation with just enough numbers to "justify" the conclusions. They are woefully short on "raw" or complete numbers. In contrast, European media and local media in the US provide numbers with no analysis or interpretation. And reasonably complete, e.g. total number tested, number tested negative, number tested positive, hospitalizations, available beds, used beds, available respirators, used respirators, specific outbreak loci, including jails and prisons.

CONCLUSION: mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots incapable of making sense of the data and in need of "guidance" and "leadership" while European and rural US information sources presume a basic level of competence in their audiences.

2) Models, projections and actual. In Europe I encountered almost none of the "the models predict and hence we are doomed unless ..." kind of articles that seem to dominate US mainstream media. Instead, "spreadsheet models" with data were published in tables by date, country, and raw number. European readers were left to make their own conclusions about how Netherlands data compared to Italian (for example) and make projections or draw conclusions as appropriate.

In local newspapers in Nevada, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska I saw articles that compared projected numbers from the models touted by CDC, Fauci, et.al. with actual local numbers. Local numbers varied from national model projections by as much as -50% and never less than -20%. (That is actual was dramatically lower than projected.)

I saw and heard numerous editorial commentaries with regard the discrepancy between what the 'experts" were saying and what was locally observed and questioning why the variance. This leads immediately to questions about "hidden agendas" on the part of the Federal government and the "experts."

CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."

3) Medical science. In the past two months I have seen around a dozen "treatments" advanced that have the potential to alleviate and/or treat Covid. I have seen at least five articles from companies that have developed tests and or testing machines (some of the latter capable of 15,000 tests per day). There have been at least six articles from Universities (including the one Frank shared from Pittsburgh) or companies/organizations that have developed potential vaccines. Oxford University has one that, they say, could be deployed as soon as September.

In Europe you see stories about the use of tests and testing devices, use of treatments along side data about effectiveness and heuristics for use, and optimistic projections of the availability of vaccines.In the US you do not.

CONCLUSION: Science, and in particular medical science, has become Fetishized in the US — that is to say that form and ritual is more important than substance. The use of hydrochloroquine, for example is widespread in Europe and backed by all kinds of information on indications for use, heuristics for determining dosage, contra-indications, and effectiveness numbers. Information is widely shared on all possible treatments along with all the caveats, and physicians are encouraged to use their best personal judgement. In the US, none of the above, because it is not "scientifically proven to be efficacious" mostly because we have not done a six-month double blind study.

4) Cultural ignorance, part one: non-medical masks. The use of ad hoc and home-made masks is an astoundingly bad idea in the U.S., for cultural reasons. In Asian cultures — for the most part — the wearing of a mask invokes non-conscious, but very real, feelings of "social solidarity," "conformance," and "consideration for others." In the U.S., even in medical settings where we know, intellectually, the reason for the mask, invokes non-conscious feelings of "threat," "mistrust," and "alienation." A simple test: ask 100 black males if they would wear a medical mask in public. Ask them is they would wear a home-made mask. Group responses by education and economics. Among those with high education/economic status, maybe 50% would wear a medical mast, but only about 10-15% would wear an informal mask. About 10-15% of those at the lower end of the education/economic ladder would be likely to wear a medical mask and 0-5% a homemade mask. Then ask why.

5) Cultural ignorance, part two: social isolation. Supposedly, social distancing is the best, perhaps only, means for "flattening the curve."  This is nonsense. Ethnographic (and,of course, therefore not "scientific") studies of two previous 'epidemics;" AIDS and STDs show that a far more effective means for controlling conflagration is the establishment of "communities of trust." Communities of Trust were self-organized communities of at-risk individuals, within which behaviors such as promiscuity and needle sharing were allowed, even encouraged and expanded, while such behavior outside the community was strictly forbidden and grounds for permanent banishment if violated.

Within such communities the transmission rate immediately dropped to near zero. Because everyone in the community knew everyone else, contact tracing, if needed, was also immediate and globally shared, leading to effective and temporary isolation. Communities could scale. There were at least two communities that were national in scope, using a kind of federated model with local communities assuming responsibility for local populations but allowing for individuals to participate in non-local communities. Woe to the local community that allowed one of their members to "infect" another community. It was pretty much a one-strike and you are out situation, and that translated into each individual establishing a local, long term, track record before being allowed to participate elsewhere.

I have seen this kind of community of trust in the Netherlands and Europe, with regards psychedelic drug users, BDSM groups, even Naturist groups. In the US is is very evident in the Mormon culture and in most rural communities.

OPINION: this possibility is not pursued because it is self-organizing and not amenable to centralized government control.

6) U.S. Federal Bureaucracy and antipathy to "Medicare For All." Conversations and editorial commentaries exposed a very pragmatic argument for not entrusting health care to the Federal Government. Using FEMA and the current situation as an example, people pointed out that FEMA has failed to deliver because it is implacably bound to "PROCEDURE" and "FORMAL PROCESS" to the extent that it cannot certify vendors and place orders for equipment. Imagine if health care was entrusted to the same kind of "brain dead" "lacking common sense" "exclusively by the lowest common denominator rules" bureaucratic entity.

7) Cultural divide. I won't go into this in detail unless asked at some point, but it is clear, to me, that the red-state / blue-state differentiation is fatally flawed, but underneath is a centralized-command-and-control-grounded-in-liberalism culture versus a local-self-responsible-independent-anti-centrism-anti-authoritarian culture. These cultures are implacably opposed and will be the basis for a "civil war" of some sort within the next decade.

davew


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

I've often wondered about accusations that corporatism and fascism are fundamentally linked. Umberto Eco's essay on Ur-Fascism always seemed to be the best circumscription, to me. But I've seen many others talk about the breakdown of the boundary between government and corporations as a hallmark of fascist regimes (e.g. the current situation where Trump blocked money for the USPS in the covid19 stimulus). Eco's main attributes go something like the below (mostly my own summary phrases). How does corporatism fit in?

1) traditionalism
2) rejection of modernism/irrationalism
3) action for action's sake
4) dissent is treason
5) xenophobia
6) appeal to frustrated middle class
7) conspiracy theories
8) the (elite) enemy is both too strong and too weak
9) permanent warfare
10) exceptionalism
11) hero worship
12) machismo and fixed gender roles
13) delegitimizing elections
14) minimized vocabulary and Newspeak


On 4/13/20 8:35 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The book is a few years old. Nevertheless Peter reports that many Chinese back then saw both Hitler and Mao as great leaders (!), despite their crimes and their millions of victims. Some even confuse the dictator in Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Great Dictator" with the real Hitler. Of course in the US and in the EU nobody shares this view. 
>
> Peter also reports about the strong effects of lifelong propaganda from the communist party of China. In Europe we have propaganda as well, but it is mostly in form of marketing and advertising for corporations and their products. Advertising for political parties only happens during elections for limited periods of time. We have freedom of speech in EU & US, but there is no freedom of speech in China. I believe that's a major difference between EU & US and China.

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Glen writes:

< But I've seen many others talk about the breakdown of the boundary between government and corporations as a hallmark of fascist regimes >

Any sort of drive toward engineering a group shared purpose is a drive toward fascism.  Some apparently benign community organizers are undeveloped fascists.  As soon as there is a group identity, run.

Marcus

---

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 9:56 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

I've often wondered about accusations that corporatism and fascism are fundamentally linked. Umberto Eco's essay on Ur-Fascism always seemed to be the best circumscription, to me. But I've seen many others talk about the breakdown of the boundary between government and corporations as a hallmark of fascist regimes (e.g. the current situation where Trump blocked money for the USPS in the covid19 stimulus). Eco's main attributes go something like the below (mostly my own summary phrases). How does corporatism fit in?

1) traditionalism
2) rejection of modernism/irrationalism
3) action for action's sake
4) dissent is treason
5) xenophobia
6) appeal to frustrated middle class
7) conspiracy theories
8) the (elite) enemy is both too strong and too weak
9) permanent warfare
10) exceptionalism
11) hero worship
12) machismo and fixed gender roles
13) delegitimizing elections
14) minimized vocabulary and Newspeak


On 4/13/20 8:35 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The book is a few years old. Nevertheless Peter reports that many Chinese back then saw both Hitler and Mao as great leaders (!), despite their crimes and their millions of victims. Some even confuse the dictator in Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Great Dictator" with the real Hitler. Of course in the US and in the EU nobody shares this view. 
>
> Peter also reports about the strong effects of lifelong propaganda from the communist party of China. In Europe we have propaganda as well, but it is mostly in form of marketing and advertising for corporations and their products. Advertising for political parties only happens during elections for limited periods of time. We have freedom of speech in EU & US, but there is no freedom of speech in China. I believe that's a major difference between EU & US and China.

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

That's a good point. I suppose there are a number of Eco's bullets that ride alongside shared purpose: (3-5), (7), (9), (10), (12), & (14). But shared purpose is only dangerous, I think, if it's *unified* or reduced to a single dimension. Multi-objective optimization would (then) be less fascist because the objectives compete. So, if "purpose" is reduced to "short-term for-profit" -- reduction in time and space, then it would be more fascist than "long-term for-profit" -- reduction in space but not time -- or "short-term socially-responsible" -- reduction in time but not space.

I've been trying to support B corporations lately: https://bcorporation.net/
But it's not clear to me if it's like astroturf ... a simulation of good intent.

Number (7) was interesting because it talks about deprivation of _social_ identity and appeals to the least common denominator, which is what I worry about the "anyone but Trump" perspective:

"7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only
privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of
nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its
enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot,
possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve
the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews
are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time
inside and outside. In the U.S., a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found
in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many
others."

On 4/13/20 10:06 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Any sort of drive toward engineering a group shared purpose is a drive toward fascism.  Some apparently benign community organizers are undeveloped fascists.  As soon as there is a group identity, run.

> On 4/13/20 8:56 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
>>
>> 1) traditionalism
>> 2) rejection of modernism/irrationalism
>> 3) action for action's sake
>> 4) dissent is treason
>> 5) xenophobia
>> 6) appeal to frustrated middle class
>> 7) conspiracy theories
>> 8) the (elite) enemy is both too strong and too weak
>> 9) permanent warfare
>> 10) exceptionalism
>> 11) hero worship
>> 12) machismo and fixed gender roles
>> 13) delegitimizing elections
>> 14) minimized vocabulary and Newspeak

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Glen writes:

< Multi-objective optimization would (then) be less fascist because the objectives compete. >

When Trump is out in the rose garden with Wal Mart and Target, CVS, etc. to address COVID-19 that's fascism in America.  Sure there are different agents with different objectives, and they compete to some extent, but it is still a common belief system that views harnessing people as good, and harnessing them more as better.   Harnessing like a horse.   Rarely does anyone ask if it is the kind of personality that would do that to people is the real problem.  It's usually called leadership and not just an indication of being a psychopath.

Marcus

---

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:24 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

That's a good point. I suppose there are a number of Eco's bullets that ride alongside shared purpose: (3-5), (7), (9), (10), (12), & (14). But shared purpose is only dangerous, I think, if it's *unified* or reduced to a single dimension. Multi-objective optimization would (then) be less fascist because the objectives compete. So, if "purpose" is reduced to "short-term for-profit" -- reduction in time and space, then it would be more fascist than "long-term for-profit" -- reduction in space but not time -- or "short-term socially-responsible" -- reduction in time but not space.

I've been trying to support B corporations lately: https://bcorporation.net/
But it's not clear to me if it's like astroturf ... a simulation of good intent.

Number (7) was interesting because it talks about deprivation of _social_ identity and appeals to the least common denominator, which is what I worry about the "anyone but Trump" perspective:

"7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only
privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of
nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its
enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot,
possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve
the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews
are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time
inside and outside. In the U.S., a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found
in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many
others."

On 4/13/20 10:06 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Any sort of drive toward engineering a group shared purpose is a drive toward fascism.  Some apparently benign community organizers are undeveloped fascists.  As soon as there is a group identity, run.

> On 4/13/20 8:56 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
>>
>> 1) traditionalism
>> 2) rejection of modernism/irrationalism
>> 3) action for action's sake
>> 4) dissent is treason
>> 5) xenophobia
>> 6) appeal to frustrated middle class
>> 7) conspiracy theories
>> 8) the (elite) enemy is both too strong and too weak
>> 9) permanent warfare
>> 10) exceptionalism
>> 11) hero worship
>> 12) machismo and fixed gender roles
>> 13) delegitimizing elections
>> 14) minimized vocabulary and Newspeak

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Jochen Fromm-5]

America under Trump moves clearly towards an authoritarian system. When she was a graduate student in Anthropology, Sarah Kendzior studied authoritarianism in Uzbekistan. As she describes in her book "Hiding in plain sight", what she saw when Trump emerged was oddly familiar with the things she saw in the states of the former Soviet Union - nepotism, corruption, etc. 

In my opinion fascism is always about merging different evolutionary systems, a move backwards towards a lesser degree of differentiation. The deeper we go back, the worse it becomes, from authoritarianism to communism and totalitarianism. It is a fascinating topic. I describe it in detail in my book which I published last year in German. I use the free time to translate it to English now.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/13/20 19:37 (GMT+01:00)

To: FriAM <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Glen writes:

< Multi-objective optimization would (then) be less fascist because the objectives compete. >

When Trump is out in the rose garden with Wal Mart and Target, CVS, etc. to address COVID-19 that's fascism in America.  Sure there are different agents with different objectives, and they compete to some extent, but it is still a common belief system that views harnessing people as good, and harnessing them more as better.   Harnessing like a horse.   Rarely does anyone ask if it is the kind of personality that would do that to people is the real problem.  It's usually called leadership and not just an indication of being a psychopath.

Marcus

---

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:24 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

That's a good point. I suppose there are a number of Eco's bullets that ride alongside shared purpose: (3-5), (7), (9), (10), (12), & (14). But shared purpose is only dangerous, I think, if it's *unified* or reduced to a single dimension. Multi-objective optimization would (then) be less fascist because the objectives compete. So, if "purpose" is reduced to "short-term for-profit" -- reduction in time and space, then it would be more fascist than "long-term for-profit" -- reduction in space but not time -- or "short-term socially-responsible" -- reduction in time but not space.

I've been trying to support B corporations lately: https://bcorporation.net/
But it's not clear to me if it's like astroturf ... a simulation of good intent.

Number (7) was interesting because it talks about deprivation of _social_ identity and appeals to the least common denominator, which is what I worry about the "anyone but Trump" perspective:

"7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only
privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of
nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its
enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot,
possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve
the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews
are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time
inside and outside. In the U.S., a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found
in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many
others."

On 4/13/20 10:06 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Any sort of drive toward engineering a group shared purpose is a drive toward fascism.  Some apparently benign community organizers are undeveloped fascists.  As soon as there is a group identity, run.

> On 4/13/20 8:56 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
>>
>> 1) traditionalism
>> 2) rejection of modernism/irrationalism
>> 3) action for action's sake
>> 4) dissent is treason
>> 5) xenophobia
>> 6) appeal to frustrated middle class
>> 7) conspiracy theories
>> 8) the (elite) enemy is both too strong and too weak
>> 9) permanent warfare
>> 10) exceptionalism
>> 11) hero worship
>> 12) machismo and fixed gender roles
>> 13) delegitimizing elections
>> 14) minimized vocabulary and Newspeak

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

Hm. The only reason it's wrong to harness people is because there's no credible alternative. If we had a well-connected safety net so that a harnessed person could doff one harness, survive without a harness for awhile, then don a different harness, then harnessing would be a good thing.

Its not the harnessing that's bad, it's the lack of inter-harness or non-harnessed options that's bad.

And the only reason I feel this point tacitly is in trying to "describe" the Tempus Dictum (TDI) harness in a coherent way. Several people have flowed through my tiny business. But *most* of those people wander elsewhere because they *want* a harness. And TDI's either doesn't make sense to them ... or it's really just a loosely tied rope that falls off all the time, merely hinting at a direction one might go, but never really canalizing anyone's behavior.

Said another way, there is a "tyranny of choice" (or "paradox of choice"). Too much freedom limits one's freedom. So, e.g., when the Rotary guys adopted the purpose to eradicate polio, one might say they were/are *fascist* in their common purpose. But Eco's got 14 points for a reason, because no single attribute really defines the quality.

On 4/13/20 10:36 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> When Trump is out in the rose garden with Wal Mart and Target, CVS, etc. to address COVID-19 that's fascism in America.  Sure there are different agents with different objectives, and they compete to some extent, but it is still a common belief system that views harnessing people as good, and harnessing them more as better.   Harnessing like a horse.   Rarely does anyone ask if it is the kind of personality that would do that to people is the real problem.  It's usually called leadership and not just an indication of being a psychopath.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

Link! I should buy the German version and see if I can read some of it. The last time I tried that was with Faust after my German II semester in college ... terrible failure.

On 4/13/20 10:58 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> America under Trump moves clearly towards an authoritarian system. When she was a graduate student in Anthropology, Sarah Kendzior studied authoritarianism in Uzbekistan. As she describes in her book "Hiding in plain sight", what she saw when Trump emerged was oddly familiar with the things she saw in the states of the former Soviet Union - nepotism, corruption, etc. 
>
> In my opinion fascism is always about merging different evolutionary systems, a move backwards towards a lesser degree of differentiation. The deeper we go back, the worse it becomes, from authoritarianism to communism and totalitarianism. It is a fascinating topic. I describe it in detail in my book which I published last year in German. I use the free time to translate it to English now.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Glen writes:

< Its not the harnessing that's bad, it's the lack of inter-harness or non-harnessed options that's bad .>

Sure, and that being part of the gig economy now is increasingly similar to sleeping under a bridge.   Take the Wal Mart pledge or else..

Marcus

---

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:59 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

Hm. The only reason it's wrong to harness people is because there's no credible alternative. If we had a well-connected safety net so that a harnessed person could doff one harness, survive without a harness for awhile, then don a different harness, then harnessing would be a good thing.

Its not the harnessing that's bad, it's the lack of inter-harness or non-harnessed options that's bad.

And the only reason I feel this point tacitly is in trying to "describe" the Tempus Dictum (TDI) harness in a coherent way. Several people have flowed through my tiny business. But *most* of those people wander elsewhere because they *want* a harness. And TDI's either doesn't make sense to them ... or it's really just a loosely tied rope that falls off all the time, merely hinting at a direction one might go, but never really canalizing anyone's behavior.

Said another way, there is a "tyranny of choice" (or "paradox of choice"). Too much freedom limits one's freedom. So, e.g., when the Rotary guys adopted the purpose to eradicate polio, one might say they were/are *fascist* in their common purpose. But Eco's got 14 points for a reason, because no single attribute really defines the quality.

On 4/13/20 10:36 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> When Trump is out in the rose garden with Wal Mart and Target, CVS, etc. to address COVID-19 that's fascism in America.  Sure there are different agents with different objectives, and they compete to some extent, but it is still a common belief system that views harnessing people as good, and harnessing them more as better.   Harnessing like a horse.   Rarely does anyone ask if it is the kind of personality that would do that to people is the real problem.  It's usually called leadership and not just an indication of being a psychopath.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

I presume it's this one:

Die geheimen Gene: Das Geheimnis der Kirche und die soziale DNA
https://books.google.com/books?id=lpqUDwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Jochen+Fromm%22&hl=en&source=newbks_fb

No copies seem to be available. I also assume propaganda plays a prominent role in your explanation. I keep wondering why Trump's sycophants like Navarro keep claiming the Spanish Flue happened in 1917 instead of 1918. E.g. in this clip: https://youtu.be/nSx704KK_Ik

#5 and #6 from this list seem plausible to me:
https://theweek.com/articles/832990/6-theories-trumps-pointless-lies

When Trump hears Navarro say "1917", it's a signal of loyalty, even if everyone knows it's the wrong year, that he uses that year, helps confirm his loyalty. Knowing to use "1917" instead will help me code-switch if I find myself in a conversation with these people. If you use "1918", they'll know you're out-group. Hypothesis #6 is only plausible if you think Trump is an idiot. But I buy the argument put forth here:

Tony Norman: Who are you going to believe — POTUS or an actual expert?
https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/tony-norman/2020/04/07/1917-Donald-Trump-truth-George-Orwell-Anthony-Fauci-Peter-Navarro-hydroxychloroquine/stories/202004070017

Maybe it's a perverse mix of the expression of power, loyalty, and getting the audience used to fudging the details ... encouraging the cult members to impute the nomothetic even though it fails to fit the idiographic.


On 4/13/20 11:04 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
> Link! I should buy the German version and see if I can read some of it. The last time I tried that was with Faust after my German II semester in college ... terrible failure.


--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[thompnickson2]

Friammers,

 

Allow me some ill-informed maunderings about the chlor-whatitsface controversy:  It seems to me the controversy has to do with our ambivalence with respect to the law.  Do we wait for a green light on a deserted street at 3 am or do we drive right through because we KNOW that basic purpose of that light system is to prevent accidents and that  there is NO possibility of an accident under present circumstances.  When do we take the law into our own hands?

 

Now the Health Expert Community Knowledge (hereafter, HECK) tells us that chlor-whatitsface might help some people and might harm some others, and so we should not use it on a single patient until we can guarantee to that patient that it will do more good than harm.  Meanwhile we hear of doctors writing themselves prescriptions for themselves and their families, just in case.  "Aw, HECK, let's just try it."

 

So to what extent, I am wondering, is not pushing out chlor-whatitsface to every hospital in the country a case of stopping at the red light at the wilderness intersection in the middle of the night? 

 

And why DO we do that?  I think we do it because respect for the law is a thing itself and has benefits.  Socrates did have a reason to drink the hemlock.  Well-designed laws have benefits for the vast majority of citizens in the vast majority of circumstances, and laws, even well designed ones, do not survive long in a society of citizens who pick and choose among them.   But Socrates also had reasons not to drink  the hemlock.  And it's quite possible that, contrary to his final reasoning, we would all be better off, now, if he hadn't. 

 

Nick

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:53 PM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

I presume it's this one:

 

Die geheimen Gene: Das Geheimnis der Kirche und die soziale DNA https://books.google.com/books?id=lpqUDwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Jochen+Fromm%22&hl=en&source=newbks_fb

 

No copies seem to be available. I also assume propaganda plays a prominent role in your explanation. I keep wondering why Trump's sycophants like Navarro keep claiming the Spanish Flue happened in 1917 instead of 1918. E.g. in this clip: https://youtu.be/nSx704KK_Ik

 

#5 and #6 from this list seem plausible to me:

https://theweek.com/articles/832990/6-theories-trumps-pointless-lies

 

When Trump hears Navarro say "1917", it's a signal of loyalty, even if everyone knows it's the wrong year, that he uses that year, helps confirm his loyalty. Knowing to use "1917" instead will help me code-switch if I find myself in a conversation with these people. If you use "1918", they'll know you're out-group. Hypothesis #6 is only plausible if you think Trump is an idiot. But I buy the argument put forth here:

 

Tony Norman: Who are you going to believe — POTUS or an actual expert?

https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/tony-norman/2020/04/07/1917-Donald-Trump-truth-George-Orwell-Anthony-Fauci-Peter-Navarro-hydroxychloroquine/stories/202004070017

 

Maybe it's a perverse mix of the expression of power, loyalty, and getting the audience used to fudging the details ... encouraging the cult members to impute the nomothetic even though it fails to fit the idiographic.

 

 

On 4/13/20 11:04 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:

> Link! I should buy the German version and see if I can read some of it. The last time I tried that was with Faust after my German II semester in college ... terrible failure.

 

 

--

☣ uǝlƃ

 

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

How much do you push? How many patients does it help? Would it be like the current shelves at Target a month ago ... where Renee' noticed that even though hydrogen peroxide sterilizes, the shelves were FULL of it, but there were no isopropyl alcohol bottles anywhere in the store. How much good does it do to have fridge shelves full of hydroxychloroquine when it only helps a tiny percentage of patients (if that)?  ... and what percentage of patients would it help again?

The point of the _science_ is unrelated to "the law", despite Dave's paranoia about the establishment. The point of the science is that we don't know what we're doing. It's not like stopping or not stopping at a red light. It's like adding chemical X to solution Y when we don't know what X or Y is in the first place. Once the science gives us high confidence about how much, when, who, etc, *then* it'll become more like running a red light.

On 4/13/20 1:24 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
> So to what extent, I am wondering, is not pushing out chlor-whatitsface to every hospital in the country a case of stopping at the red light at the wilderness intersection in the middle of the night? 


--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[David Eric Smith]

I think in the caes of doctors there are additional traditions, working over or alongside those that attend generic public actors or advisors.

Specifically: the Hippocratic oath.  I probably don’t know the true wording, but the version I always hear is “First, do no harm”.  That is an uncommonly strong version of the precautionary principle, kind of like Popper’s dictum of falsifiability is a a limiting form of the asymmetry between support and dissent that both exist in Bayes’s theorem.

There are probably also considerations of the asymmetric dynamics of reputation.  Hard to earn, easy to lose, then even harder to restore.  Enough cases are known of heart irregularities within responsibly-performed trials of hydroxychloroquine, as I understand newspaper articles I read (I think there was one in NYT thisAM), that if a public agency gave positive approval for its use on people who are high-risk anyway, there would with probability approaching one be some people who died as a consequence of that authorization.  Even if they were fewer than those who might have been saved by the treatment and who otherwise would have died (a harder statistic to estimate), the loss of a reputation for guarding safety is probably believed to do more harm than a marginal gain in efficacy.  (I probably agree with that belief.)

The term “off-label” seems to be common enough among medical practitioners that I guess there is a fairly conventional cohort of “compassionate care” cases (if I remember the right term) for which either death or misery are believed to be certain, and deviating from label exclusions can’t be very much worse, so it happens with some frequency and doesn’t get sued out of existence.  But there probably is a real question about whether one wants to shift that from an informal filter of litigation risk (is this dire enough that I am unlikely to get sued?) to an institutionalized or statutory filter (the agency will encode such-and-such compassionate-care exceptions).  There is probably more room for nuance in case-by-case litigation than in the coarser grain of statute or institutional bylaws.  For medicine even moreso because of the Hippocratic tradition.

In addition to the attitudes about the legitimacy of law that you mention below, which I also tend to agree are active.

Eric

On Apr 14, 2020, at 5:24 AM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:

Friammers,

 

Allow me some ill-informed maunderings about the chlor-whatitsface controversy:  It seems to me the controversy has to do with our ambivalence with respect to the law.  Do we wait for a green light on a deserted street at 3 am or do we drive right through because we KNOW that basic purpose of that light system is to prevent accidents and that  there is NO possibility of an accident under present circumstances.  When do we take the law into our own hands?

 

Now the Health Expert Community Knowledge (hereafter, HECK) tells us that chlor-whatitsface might help some people and might harm some others, and so we should not use it on a single patient until we can guarantee to that patient that it will do more good than harm.  Meanwhile we hear of doctors writing themselves prescriptions for themselves and their families, just in case.  "Aw, HECK, let's just try it."

 

So to what extent, I am wondering, is not pushing out chlor-whatitsface to every hospital in the country a case of stopping at the red light at the wilderness intersection in the middle of the night?  

 

And why DO we do that?  I think we do it because respect for the law is a thing itself and has benefits.  Socrates did have a reason to drink the hemlock.  Well-designed laws have benefits for the vast majority of citizens in the vast majority of circumstances, and laws, even well designed ones, do not survive long in a society of citizens who pick and choose among them.   But Socrates also had reasons not to drink  the hemlock.  And it's quite possible that, contrary to his final reasoning, we would all be better off, now, if he hadn't.  

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:53 PM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

I presume it's this one: 

 

Die geheimen Gene: Das Geheimnis der Kirche und die soziale DNA https://books.google.com/books?id=lpqUDwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Jochen+Fromm%22&hl=en&source=newbks_fb

 

No copies seem to be available. I also assume propaganda plays a prominent role in your explanation. I keep wondering why Trump's sycophants like Navarro keep claiming the Spanish Flue happened in 1917 instead of 1918. E.g. in this clip: https://youtu.be/nSx704KK_Ik

 

#5 and #6 from this list seem plausible to me:

https://theweek.com/articles/832990/6-theories-trumps-pointless-lies

 

When Trump hears Navarro say "1917", it's a signal of loyalty, even if everyone knows it's the wrong year, that he uses that year, helps confirm his loyalty. Knowing to use "1917" instead will help me code-switch if I find myself in a conversation with these people. If you use "1918", they'll know you're out-group. Hypothesis #6 is only plausible if you think Trump is an idiot. But I buy the argument put forth here:

 

Tony Norman: Who are you going to believe — POTUS or an actual expert?

https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/tony-norman/2020/04/07/1917-Donald-Trump-truth-George-Orwell-Anthony-Fauci-Peter-Navarro-hydroxychloroquine/stories/202004070017

 

Maybe it's a perverse mix of the expression of power, loyalty, and getting the audience used to fudging the details ... encouraging the cult members to impute the nomothetic even though it fails to fit the idiographic.

 

 

On 4/13/20 11:04 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:

> Link! I should buy the German version and see if I can read some of it. The last time I tried that was with Faust after my German II semester in college ... terrible failure.

 

 

--

☣ uǝlƃ

 

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Owen Densmore]

Nicely done David.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 9:35 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

I believe the cultural divide between China and the US is bigger than the cultural divide between US and EU. At the moment I'm reading "River Town" from Peter Hessler, an American who spent 2 years for the Peace Corps as an English teacher in Fuling, Sichuan. Sichuan is located in the west of China and it is known for Pandas and spicy food. 

The book is a few years old. Nevertheless Peter reports that many Chinese back then saw both Hitler and Mao as great leaders (!), despite their crimes and their millions of victims. Some even confuse the dictator in Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Great Dictator" with the real Hitler. Of course in the US and in the EU nobody shares this view. 

Peter also reports about the strong effects of lifelong propaganda from the communist party of China. In Europe we have propaganda as well, but it is mostly in form of marketing and advertising for corporations and their products. Advertising for political parties only happens during elections for limited periods of time. We have freedom of speech in EU & US, but there is no freedom of speech in China. I believe that's a major difference between EU & US and China.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Prof David West <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/12/20 20:52 (GMT+01:00)

To: [hidden email]

Subject: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I have been in Amsterdam for the past year and had the opportunity to put on my anthropologist's hat and observe cultural differences in reaction to the Covid-19 virus. I returned to the US two weeks ago and just completed a two-day auto journey from Wisconsin to Utah — also in full ethnographic research mode.

My "research methodology" is typical for anthropology, observation, conversations with as many people from as many different backgrounds as possible, reading newspapers — most importantly, small local publications — and, in the US, listening to radio broadcasts — again mostly local stations including lots of country western and even religious stations in addition to NPR, CBS, and Fox radio (I could not find CNN radio).  I was trying to gain insights into the population of those who listen to / read the different sources, as well as attitudes of media to their audience. Both country-western and religious stations reflect the mostly rural populations of Nevada, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah along my route.

Some observations:

1) Covid-19 Numbers. Mainstream media in the US gives you opinion, analysis, and interpretation with just enough numbers to "justify" the conclusions. They are woefully short on "raw" or complete numbers. In contrast, European media and local media in the US provide numbers with no analysis or interpretation. And reasonably complete, e.g. total number tested, number tested negative, number tested positive, hospitalizations, available beds, used beds, available respirators, used respirators, specific outbreak loci, including jails and prisons.

CONCLUSION: mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots incapable of making sense of the data and in need of "guidance" and "leadership" while European and rural US information sources presume a basic level of competence in their audiences.

2) Models, projections and actual. In Europe I encountered almost none of the "the models predict and hence we are doomed unless ..." kind of articles that seem to dominate US mainstream media. Instead, "spreadsheet models" with data were published in tables by date, country, and raw number. European readers were left to make their own conclusions about how Netherlands data compared to Italian (for example) and make projections or draw conclusions as appropriate.

In local newspapers in Nevada, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska I saw articles that compared projected numbers from the models touted by CDC, Fauci, et.al. with actual local numbers. Local numbers varied from national model projections by as much as -50% and never less than -20%. (That is actual was dramatically lower than projected.)

I saw and heard numerous editorial commentaries with regard the discrepancy between what the 'experts" were saying and what was locally observed and questioning why the variance. This leads immediately to questions about "hidden agendas" on the part of the Federal government and the "experts."

CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."

3) Medical science. In the past two months I have seen around a dozen "treatments" advanced that have the potential to alleviate and/or treat Covid. I have seen at least five articles from companies that have developed tests and or testing machines (some of the latter capable of 15,000 tests per day). There have been at least six articles from Universities (including the one Frank shared from Pittsburgh) or companies/organizations that have developed potential vaccines. Oxford University has one that, they say, could be deployed as soon as September.

In Europe you see stories about the use of tests and testing devices, use of treatments along side data about effectiveness and heuristics for use, and optimistic projections of the availability of vaccines.In the US you do not.

CONCLUSION: Science, and in particular medical science, has become Fetishized in the US — that is to say that form and ritual is more important than substance. The use of hydrochloroquine, for example is widespread in Europe and backed by all kinds of information on indications for use, heuristics for determining dosage, contra-indications, and effectiveness numbers. Information is widely shared on all possible treatments along with all the caveats, and physicians are encouraged to use their best personal judgement. In the US, none of the above, because it is not "scientifically proven to be efficacious" mostly because we have not done a six-month double blind study.

4) Cultural ignorance, part one: non-medical masks. The use of ad hoc and home-made masks is an astoundingly bad idea in the U.S., for cultural reasons. In Asian cultures — for the most part — the wearing of a mask invokes non-conscious, but very real, feelings of "social solidarity," "conformance," and "consideration for others." In the U.S., even in medical settings where we know, intellectually, the reason for the mask, invokes non-conscious feelings of "threat," "mistrust," and "alienation." A simple test: ask 100 black males if they would wear a medical mask in public. Ask them is they would wear a home-made mask. Group responses by education and economics. Among those with high education/economic status, maybe 50% would wear a medical mast, but only about 10-15% would wear an informal mask. About 10-15% of those at the lower end of the education/economic ladder would be likely to wear a medical mask and 0-5% a homemade mask. Then ask why.

5) Cultural ignorance, part two: social isolation. Supposedly, social distancing is the best, perhaps only, means for "flattening the curve."  This is nonsense. Ethnographic (and,of course, therefore not "scientific") studies of two previous 'epidemics;" AIDS and STDs show that a far more effective means for controlling conflagration is the establishment of "communities of trust." Communities of Trust were self-organized communities of at-risk individuals, within which behaviors such as promiscuity and needle sharing were allowed, even encouraged and expanded, while such behavior outside the community was strictly forbidden and grounds for permanent banishment if violated.

Within such communities the transmission rate immediately dropped to near zero. Because everyone in the community knew everyone else, contact tracing, if needed, was also immediate and globally shared, leading to effective and temporary isolation. Communities could scale. There were at least two communities that were national in scope, using a kind of federated model with local communities assuming responsibility for local populations but allowing for individuals to participate in non-local communities. Woe to the local community that allowed one of their members to "infect" another community. It was pretty much a one-strike and you are out situation, and that translated into each individual establishing a local, long term, track record before being allowed to participate elsewhere.

I have seen this kind of community of trust in the Netherlands and Europe, with regards psychedelic drug users, BDSM groups, even Naturist groups. In the US is is very evident in the Mormon culture and in most rural communities.

OPINION: this possibility is not pursued because it is self-organizing and not amenable to centralized government control.

6) U.S. Federal Bureaucracy and antipathy to "Medicare For All." Conversations and editorial commentaries exposed a very pragmatic argument for not entrusting health care to the Federal Government. Using FEMA and the current situation as an example, people pointed out that FEMA has failed to deliver because it is implacably bound to "PROCEDURE" and "FORMAL PROCESS" to the extent that it cannot certify vendors and place orders for equipment. Imagine if health care was entrusted to the same kind of "brain dead" "lacking common sense" "exclusively by the lowest common denominator rules" bureaucratic entity.

7) Cultural divide. I won't go into this in detail unless asked at some point, but it is clear, to me, that the red-state / blue-state differentiation is fatally flawed, but underneath is a centralized-command-and-control-grounded-in-liberalism culture versus a local-self-responsible-independent-anti-centrism-anti-authoritarian culture. These cultures are implacably opposed and will be the basis for a "civil war" of some sort within the next decade.

davew


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Among Dave's odd remarks,

< CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."  >

Here's one of those pieces that talks down to its viewers.  Really?

https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/researchers-hopeful-a-coronavirus-vaccine-will-be-available-next-year-82004037679

---

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of Owen Densmore <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 9:44 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

 

Nicely done David.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 9:35 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

I believe the cultural divide between China and the US is bigger than the cultural divide between US and EU. At the moment I'm reading "River Town" from Peter Hessler, an American who spent 2 years for the Peace Corps as an English teacher in Fuling, Sichuan. Sichuan is located in the west of China and it is known for Pandas and spicy food. 

The book is a few years old. Nevertheless Peter reports that many Chinese back then saw both Hitler and Mao as great leaders (!), despite their crimes and their millions of victims. Some even confuse the dictator in Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Great Dictator" with the real Hitler. Of course in the US and in the EU nobody shares this view. 

Peter also reports about the strong effects of lifelong propaganda from the communist party of China. In Europe we have propaganda as well, but it is mostly in form of marketing and advertising for corporations and their products. Advertising for political parties only happens during elections for limited periods of time. We have freedom of speech in EU & US, but there is no freedom of speech in China. I believe that's a major difference between EU & US and China.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Prof David West <[hidden email]>

Date: 4/12/20 20:52 (GMT+01:00)

To: [hidden email]

Subject: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I have been in Amsterdam for the past year and had the opportunity to put on my anthropologist's hat and observe cultural differences in reaction to the Covid-19 virus. I returned to the US two weeks ago and just completed a two-day auto journey from Wisconsin to Utah — also in full ethnographic research mode.

My "research methodology" is typical for anthropology, observation, conversations with as many people from as many different backgrounds as possible, reading newspapers — most importantly, small local publications — and, in the US, listening to radio broadcasts — again mostly local stations including lots of country western and even religious stations in addition to NPR, CBS, and Fox radio (I could not find CNN radio).  I was trying to gain insights into the population of those who listen to / read the different sources, as well as attitudes of media to their audience. Both country-western and religious stations reflect the mostly rural populations of Nevada, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah along my route.

Some observations:

1) Covid-19 Numbers. Mainstream media in the US gives you opinion, analysis, and interpretation with just enough numbers to "justify" the conclusions. They are woefully short on "raw" or complete numbers. In contrast, European media and local media in the US provide numbers with no analysis or interpretation. And reasonably complete, e.g. total number tested, number tested negative, number tested positive, hospitalizations, available beds, used beds, available respirators, used respirators, specific outbreak loci, including jails and prisons.

CONCLUSION: mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots incapable of making sense of the data and in need of "guidance" and "leadership" while European and rural US information sources presume a basic level of competence in their audiences.

2) Models, projections and actual. In Europe I encountered almost none of the "the models predict and hence we are doomed unless ..." kind of articles that seem to dominate US mainstream media. Instead, "spreadsheet models" with data were published in tables by date, country, and raw number. European readers were left to make their own conclusions about how Netherlands data compared to Italian (for example) and make projections or draw conclusions as appropriate.

In local newspapers in Nevada, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska I saw articles that compared projected numbers from the models touted by CDC, Fauci, et.al. with actual local numbers. Local numbers varied from national model projections by as much as -50% and never less than -20%. (That is actual was dramatically lower than projected.)

I saw and heard numerous editorial commentaries with regard the discrepancy between what the 'experts" were saying and what was locally observed and questioning why the variance. This leads immediately to questions about "hidden agendas" on the part of the Federal government and the "experts."

CONCLUSION: A population that already mistrusts the Federal government and the"intelligentsia" is given one more reason, backed by hard data, for that mistrust. Also very clear — the population is NOT anti-science but IS very mistrustful of "authoritarian scientists" — those prone to saying "you wouldn't understand, but I do and you should trust me."

3) Medical science. In the past two months I have seen around a dozen "treatments" advanced that have the potential to alleviate and/or treat Covid. I have seen at least five articles from companies that have developed tests and or testing machines (some of the latter capable of 15,000 tests per day). There have been at least six articles from Universities (including the one Frank shared from Pittsburgh) or companies/organizations that have developed potential vaccines. Oxford University has one that, they say, could be deployed as soon as September.

In Europe you see stories about the use of tests and testing devices, use of treatments along side data about effectiveness and heuristics for use, and optimistic projections of the availability of vaccines.In the US you do not.

CONCLUSION: Science, and in particular medical science, has become Fetishized in the US — that is to say that form and ritual is more important than substance. The use of hydrochloroquine, for example is widespread in Europe and backed by all kinds of information on indications for use, heuristics for determining dosage, contra-indications, and effectiveness numbers. Information is widely shared on all possible treatments along with all the caveats, and physicians are encouraged to use their best personal judgement. In the US, none of the above, because it is not "scientifically proven to be efficacious" mostly because we have not done a six-month double blind study.

4) Cultural ignorance, part one: non-medical masks. The use of ad hoc and home-made masks is an astoundingly bad idea in the U.S., for cultural reasons. In Asian cultures — for the most part — the wearing of a mask invokes non-conscious, but very real, feelings of "social solidarity," "conformance," and "consideration for others." In the U.S., even in medical settings where we know, intellectually, the reason for the mask, invokes non-conscious feelings of "threat," "mistrust," and "alienation." A simple test: ask 100 black males if they would wear a medical mask in public. Ask them is they would wear a home-made mask. Group responses by education and economics. Among those with high education/economic status, maybe 50% would wear a medical mast, but only about 10-15% would wear an informal mask. About 10-15% of those at the lower end of the education/economic ladder would be likely to wear a medical mask and 0-5% a homemade mask. Then ask why.

5) Cultural ignorance, part two: social isolation. Supposedly, social distancing is the best, perhaps only, means for "flattening the curve."  This is nonsense. Ethnographic (and,of course, therefore not "scientific") studies of two previous 'epidemics;" AIDS and STDs show that a far more effective means for controlling conflagration is the establishment of "communities of trust." Communities of Trust were self-organized communities of at-risk individuals, within which behaviors such as promiscuity and needle sharing were allowed, even encouraged and expanded, while such behavior outside the community was strictly forbidden and grounds for permanent banishment if violated.

Within such communities the transmission rate immediately dropped to near zero. Because everyone in the community knew everyone else, contact tracing, if needed, was also immediate and globally shared, leading to effective and temporary isolation. Communities could scale. There were at least two communities that were national in scope, using a kind of federated model with local communities assuming responsibility for local populations but allowing for individuals to participate in non-local communities. Woe to the local community that allowed one of their members to "infect" another community. It was pretty much a one-strike and you are out situation, and that translated into each individual establishing a local, long term, track record before being allowed to participate elsewhere.

I have seen this kind of community of trust in the Netherlands and Europe, with regards psychedelic drug users, BDSM groups, even Naturist groups. In the US is is very evident in the Mormon culture and in most rural communities.

OPINION: this possibility is not pursued because it is self-organizing and not amenable to centralized government control.

6) U.S. Federal Bureaucracy and antipathy to "Medicare For All." Conversations and editorial commentaries exposed a very pragmatic argument for not entrusting health care to the Federal Government. Using FEMA and the current situation as an example, people pointed out that FEMA has failed to deliver because it is implacably bound to "PROCEDURE" and "FORMAL PROCESS" to the extent that it cannot certify vendors and place orders for equipment. Imagine if health care was entrusted to the same kind of "brain dead" "lacking common sense" "exclusively by the lowest common denominator rules" bureaucratic entity.

7) Cultural divide. I won't go into this in detail unless asked at some point, but it is clear, to me, that the red-state / blue-state differentiation is fatally flawed, but underneath is a centralized-command-and-control-grounded-in-liberalism culture versus a local-self-responsible-independent-anti-centrism-anti-authoritarian culture. These cultures are implacably opposed and will be the basis for a "civil war" of some sort within the next decade.

davew


.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[gepr]

The problem doesn't lie with any one of Dave's questionable assertions. The problem lies with his narrative arc. That arc argues that *others* (not Dave) claim non-credible expertise. Yet Dave implies over and over again that he has such credibility. Each list item and conclusion are replete with subjective perspective, but are stated with absolute authority.

For example: "mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots ..."

Never mind the unjustified generalization in lumping, say, MSNBC with Fox News. The idea that there even is such a thing as "mainstream media" given that many people get their news from Facebook or Twitter (for whatever that's worth) is just nonsense.

One of the signals for "fake news" is whether or not it tweaks you, triggers you. Dave's post is chock full of trigger phrases intended to pluck at the tiny little drawstrings that evoke one's prejudices. It could have been submitted as an authentic *rant*. Had Dave peppered the post with qualifiers like "I think", "It seems to me", or "In my opinion", it would be easier to read as such an authentic rant. Instead, Dave is authoritatively presenting his beliefs as if they are facts, either rigorously established during a 2 day road trip or patently obvious to those in the know.

To be clear, I'm not claiming any of Dave's questionable beliefs are false, only committing a bit of tu quoque. Dave's rant is as guilty of authoritarianism as his targets.

On 4/13/20 9:59 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Among Dave's odd remarks,

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Frank Wimberly-2]

👌

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:27 AM uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]> wrote:

The problem doesn't lie with any one of Dave's questionable assertions. The problem lies with his narrative arc. That arc argues that *others* (not Dave) claim non-credible expertise. Yet Dave implies over and over again that he has such credibility. Each list item and conclusion are replete with subjective perspective, but are stated with absolute authority.

For example: "mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience is composed of idiots ..."

Never mind the unjustified generalization in lumping, say, MSNBC with Fox News. The idea that there even is such a thing as "mainstream media" given that many people get their news from Facebook or Twitter (for whatever that's worth) is just nonsense.

One of the signals for "fake news" is whether or not it tweaks you, triggers you. Dave's post is chock full of trigger phrases intended to pluck at the tiny little drawstrings that evoke one's prejudices. It could have been submitted as an authentic *rant*. Had Dave peppered the post with qualifiers like "I think", "It seems to me", or "In my opinion", it would be easier to read as such an authentic rant. Instead, Dave is authoritatively presenting his beliefs as if they are facts, either rigorously established during a 2 day road trip or patently obvious to those in the know.

To be clear, I'm not claiming any of Dave's questionable beliefs are false, only committing a bit of tu quoque. Dave's rant is as guilty of authoritarianism as his targets.

On 4/13/20 9:59 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Among Dave's odd remarks,

--
☣ uǝlƃ

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

--

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

[Prof David West]

It was not my intent to make any assertions, or claims. merely to offer completely subjective observations - "anecdotal data" as it were. Yes, there is a not-so-subliminal editorial slant behind the observations. But that slant is pretty obvious and quite familiar to those on the list:

 - I do not trust, and actually fear, government, especially the Federal Government
- I believe the danger of a 'dictatorship-of-the left' to be far greater than from the right, and that the clown in office is a trivial to non-existent threat.
- nothing posted, tweeted, published, aired — regardless of source — can be accepted at face value but must be deconstructed (including "scientific" material)
I have no expertise,, certainly no authority, but do fancy an aptitude for careful observation that may or may not be of value to anyone.

davew

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, at 9:27 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:

> The problem doesn't lie with any one of Dave's questionable assertions.
> The problem lies with his narrative arc. That arc argues that *others*
> (not Dave) claim non-credible expertise. Yet Dave implies over and over
> again that he has such credibility. Each list item and conclusion are
> replete with subjective perspective, but are stated with absolute
> authority.
>
> For example: "mainstream media outlets in the US assume their audience
> is composed of idiots ..."
>
> Never mind the unjustified generalization in lumping, say, MSNBC with
> Fox News. The idea that there even is such a thing as "mainstream
> media" given that many people get their news from Facebook or Twitter
> (for whatever that's worth) is just nonsense.
>
> One of the signals for "fake news" is whether or not it tweaks you,
> triggers you. Dave's post is chock full of trigger phrases intended to
> pluck at the tiny little drawstrings that evoke one's prejudices. It
> could have been submitted as an authentic *rant*. Had Dave peppered the
> post with qualifiers like "I think", "It seems to me", or "In my
> opinion", it would be easier to read as such an authentic rant.
> Instead, Dave is authoritatively presenting his beliefs as if they are
> facts, either rigorously established during a 2 day road trip or
> patently obvious to those in the know.
>
> To be clear, I'm not claiming any of Dave's questionable beliefs are
> false, only committing a bit of tu quoque. Dave's rant is as guilty of
> authoritarianism as his targets.
>
> On 4/13/20 9:59 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Among Dave's odd remarks,
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .-
> ... .... . ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
>

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/