It’s always valid to say that everyone is susceptible to propaganda. That said, republican voters tend to be worse educated, more religious, and more likely to spread fake news than democrat voters. It seems reasonable to say that they’re more susceptible to propaganda, no?
I don’t think they’re better people, but I do think it’s generally possible for people to be more or less susceptible to propaganda than others. If I wanted to gauge that, I think education level, religiosity, and likelihood of sharing fake news would be pretty good data points.
The problem is this is all secondhand information. People have to trust something, which makes them susceptible to being manipulated. Some people choose to trust noone and others try to take in all sides and assume the truth is in the middle. Everyones acting on faith.
The point I’m making is that both sides seem to spend a lot of time arguing over each others propaganda, which is a huge waste of time. No understanding is furthered and no problem is identified or solved.
It sounds like you think that everyone is informed near exclusively through propaganda, which is reasonable- by some definitions all information shared between people is propaganda. In that case everyone would be equally influenced by propaganda. I wasn’t using that definition, but I also don’t disagree under it.
I think the larger the scale of something or the farther away from someone it happened, the more susceptible that person is to propaganda about it. Its why we think china is a third world country, and that america is a peace keeping force in the world.
Its a lot harder to put out propaganda about my extended family, because I’m actually a better source for information in that case due to proximity.
I guess I just mainly dont like the overconfidence people display, we still know so little about human limitations on a societal scale it seems.
It’s always valid to say that everyone is susceptible to propaganda. That said, republican voters tend to be worse educated, more religious, and more likely to spread fake news than democrat voters. It seems reasonable to say that they’re more susceptible to propaganda, no?
Each group is susceptible to different types of propaganda. I dont think liberals are better because they are deceived in a different way.
I don’t think they’re better people, but I do think it’s generally possible for people to be more or less susceptible to propaganda than others. If I wanted to gauge that, I think education level, religiosity, and likelihood of sharing fake news would be pretty good data points.
The problem is this is all secondhand information. People have to trust something, which makes them susceptible to being manipulated. Some people choose to trust noone and others try to take in all sides and assume the truth is in the middle. Everyones acting on faith.
The point I’m making is that both sides seem to spend a lot of time arguing over each others propaganda, which is a huge waste of time. No understanding is furthered and no problem is identified or solved.
It sounds like you think that everyone is informed near exclusively through propaganda, which is reasonable- by some definitions all information shared between people is propaganda. In that case everyone would be equally influenced by propaganda. I wasn’t using that definition, but I also don’t disagree under it.
I think the larger the scale of something or the farther away from someone it happened, the more susceptible that person is to propaganda about it. Its why we think china is a third world country, and that america is a peace keeping force in the world.
Its a lot harder to put out propaganda about my extended family, because I’m actually a better source for information in that case due to proximity.
I guess I just mainly dont like the overconfidence people display, we still know so little about human limitations on a societal scale it seems.