Let’s put stupid out of it because saying someone is stupid is not explanatory. Saying they are stupid means you write off understanding their reasoning.
– Sarah CM Paine

I recently returned from visiting family in country NSW. Aside from destroying a brand new tyre on a pothole that you could hide in, I also discovered that the only time I can listen to a podcast or audiobook is while driving. It’s because my hands have something to do that doesn’t require conscious thought - the mechanics of driving become habit loops with practice.
As I drove, I was listening to an interview on the Dwarkesh Patel podcast with Sarah C. M. Paine of the Naval War College. I recommend listening to the entire episode. However, there was one idea in particular that changed the way I viewed and consumed political media - the idea that authority figures always tell you what they’re going to do1. Paine was talking about dictators and other authoritarian leaders. But the concept holds for government leaders regardless of their stripe. Regardless of position on the spectrum, leaders must communicate their plans to their supporters in the general populace to get support for it. Ordinarily, it’s so they get re-elected. For a dictator, it’s to stave off being hanged by a mob after being pulled from a storm drain when the people revolt.

The mainstream media isn’t lying. They’re just telling you the truth from the viewpoint that best suits those in power. The distinction is important - objective, absolute, and durable truth is extremely rare, especially in the political arena. Complex issues such as housing affordability, cost of living, and inflation have multiple drivers, and multiple possible solutions. The solutions are never clear cut in black and white - viewpoints on the issues are presenting the same thing from different perspectives.

Instead of dismissing the messaging of those in power as lies, there is more value to be had in listening to what the mainstream media says, from both ends of the political spectrum. Not with blind acceptance, but so that you can examine the invisible frame that’s been put around it. Only by moving back, and seeing beyond and around the message, can you begin to understand the greater implications.

For large scale efforts, those that affect a broad base of the population, the government is going to tell everyone what they’re doing, as loudly as possible. Examining a list of conspiracy theories that turned out to be true, and there emerges a common thread.
It’s almost always the American government committing authoritarian evils. Remember, the purpose of the system is what it does, not what it says it is - for a country that espouses freedom and democracy, the US has a long history of using extrajudicial violence to decrease the amount of both in the world.
Each of the proven conspiracies were always being done to a small group, or just an individual. From the long list of American classics, such as the overthrow of democratically elected leaders (Iran in 1953, and Chile in 1973 among others), to the FBI surveilling John Lennon, it’s a handful of people doing something to an individual or a handful of people.

Three may keep a secret, if two are dead
– Benjamin Franklin

It is not possible to maintain a lie about large scale things (such as the purported chemtrails or covid vaccine conspiracies). It becomes too easy to prove falsity. Those in power need support from a broad base of the population in order to effect whatever widespread change they intend. The only way to get that support is if the people trust what they’re saying, and the only way to get that is to not constantly lie.

By way of examples, Putin made it clear he was going to invade Ukraine 2. Xi Jinping has been quite vocal about invading Taiwan 3 (which is concerning, since he hasn’t made good on it yet).
The effects of a government broadcasting its plans is not always something that takes years to bear fruit. Between April 7 and July 19, 1994, more than half a million Rwandans were systematically killed while the world stood by and watched. RTLM, a key media outlet for the then Hutu government, was responsible for driving 10% of the participation in the killings (Maximino, 2014)4. The effect of their messaging resulted in both direct action and spillover violence.

The truth is almost never absolute, especially in politics. It requires a perspective from which to stand when viewing it. The messaging of those in power tells us more than just the content. The frame around each message is itself a powerful piece of information. The consequences of ignoring the message behind the message are not always light. But all it requires is that we step back and ask why this frame?, and how does this serve its advocates?.

References

  1. Patel, D. (2023). Sarah C. M. Paine - How Xi & Putin Think: Maritime vs Continental Powers & The Wars of Asia. [online] Dwarkeshpatel.com. Available at: https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/sarah-paine [Accessed 28 Nov. 2024]. ↩

  2. Roth, A. (2021). Putin’s Ukraine rhetoric driven by distorted view of neighbour. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/07/putins-ukraine-rhetoric-driven-by-distorted-view-of-neighbour. ↩

  3. Gan, N. (2024). Xi vows ‘reunification’ with Taiwan on eve of Communist China’s 75th birthday. [online] CNN. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/01/china/china-xi-reunification-taiwan-national-day-intl-hnk/index.html. ↩

  4. Maximino, M. (2014). Propaganda, media effects and conflict: Evidence from the Rwandan genocide. [online] The Journalist’s Resource. Available at: https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/propaganda-conflict-evidence-rwandan-genocide/. ↩