Sunstein: The conspiracy of conspiracy theories

[proverbialwisdom]

http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/sunstein-the-conspiracy-of-conspiracy-theories-1.7427515

Originally published: March 18, 2014 1:10 PM
Updated: March 18, 2014 1:37 PM
By CASS R. SUNSTEIN, Bloomberg

Link from comments: http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/03/from-the-editor.html

[Wilms]

1. About the author:

Husband of Samantha Powers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein

[kristopher]

6. He makes a good point

After reviewing the findings in the established literature on how people make sense of the unknown, he offers a warning and a suggestion; I think both are helpful.
The warning:

Unfortunately, beliefs in false conspiracy theories are also peculiarly resistant to correction. Recent research suggests that in the context of the alleged autism-vaccination link, current public health communications are unhelpful, even when they enlist facts to set the record straight.
Efforts to establish the truth might even be self- defeating, because they can increase suspicion and thus strengthen the very beliefs that they were meant to correct.

The suggestion:

Such efforts are far more likely to succeed if they begin by affirming, rather than attacking, the basic values and commitments of those who are inclined to accept the theory.

I like his closing sentence also:

Conspiracists like to say that the truth is out there. They're right. The challenge is to persuade them to find their way toward it.

[Democracyinkind]

2. Someone send the bat signal! Time to cognitively infiltrate the internets!!1!!

What will the world come to if we don't stop people from speculating on the web??? WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!1!!1!!!

[bemildred]

3. I've read that twice now, and I still have no idea what he is trying to say.

A slop of generalities and platitudes with a vague patina of snot.

[cprise]

4. Greenwald did a profile on him, called him a Bush-ite

Though not in so many words:

http://www.salon.com/2010/03/26/court_3/

In 2008, Sunstein became the leading proponent of the Bush/Cheney-sponsored bill to legalize Bush’s warrantless eavesdropping program and to immunize lawbreaking telecoms, a bill which Obama — advised by Sunstein — ended up voting for in violation of his pledge to filibuster. The same year, Sunstein provoked widespread anger among progressives by insisting (again) that investigations and prosecutions of Bush officials would be inappropriate and harmful. As summarized by Talk Left’s Armando, a long-time lawyer: ”Cass Sunstein has been defending the Bush Administration’s illegal actions and the Bush Administration’s preposterous claims for many many years now. This is who he is.” Hey, Left: doesn’t the thought of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein make you tingle with “excitement,” just as Peter Baker said?

Even in domestic policy, Sunstein is far away from “the Left.” As Matt Yglesias put it last April after Obama nominated him to be head of White House regulatory policy: his “views on regulation are, if anything, somewhat more conservative than those of most Democrats.” In reviewing Sunstein’s domestic policy book, Nudge, Matt Stoller pointed out that several of his ideas are “exactly 100% out of the conventional wisdom from the 1960s conservative movement,” that he steadfastly exempts the Pentagon and the Surveillance State from claims that the Government is too large, and even holds up Rahm Emanuel as a “liberal,” just to give a sense of how Sunstein views the political spectrum. As I discussed earlier this year, Sunstein also proposed a consummately creepy plan for the government to “cognitively infiltrate” online discussions which spout views that Sunstein deems false.

[bemildred]

5. I know who he is, but I expected some degree of literacy and coherence.

This is like Maureen Dowd in one of her more pensive moods. Like Tom Friedman when he's on a roll about "the future" or "where we are now". I suppose it's difficult to argue for gullibility directly, but it's easy to argue for critical thinking, which would seem to fit his agenda here. There is none of that, it's just "conspiracies are bad, unless they are true, trust me". It's a deceptive sort of FUD, is what it is.