Intentional Insights

Fighting the Normalization of Post-Truth Politics

Donald Trumps rally speech in Phoenix on August 22 was full of falsehoods.

The lack of outrage over his deceptive statements points to the normalization
of post-truth politics, when appeals to personal beliefs and emotions wins out
over objective facts. To avoid this normalization, we need to borrow the
successful tactics of the environmental movement in dealing with the pollution
of our environment.

During this speech, according to highly credible fact-checking organizations

such as Factcheck.org and Politifact, Trump misled the audience as to his
reaction to the Charlottesville violence, such as by neglecting to mention that
he blamed both sides. He made false claims about the media, for instance
that CNNs ratings went down when they are rising, or that the media failed to
report on Trumps condemnation of racism, when they did. In the economic
arena, he stated that wages havent gone up for a long time, when actually
theyve risen for at least the last three years. Another example of economic
deception: Trump wrongly claimed that the US has become an energy
exporter for the first time ever just recently.
 Where is the outrage over these deceptions? This is our President,
systematically sowing misinformation. Most of his falsehoods such as the
statement about the wages or CNN ratings had been debunked earlier. Yet
he kept repeating them, leaving no other interpretation than a deliberate
intent to deceive, the dictionary definition of lying.

This lying is part of a broader pattern: Trumps Politifact file shows an

astounding 49 percent of his statements, are false. By comparison, his
opponent in the US presidential election Hillary Clintons file shows that only
12 percent of her statements were false, 14 percent for the Republican
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan. Despite Trumps extremely high rate of
deception, many still believe him. As an example, 44 percent of those polled
believed his falsehoods about Obama wiretapping Trump Tower during the
2016 election campaign.

Thus, many will believe his Phoenix rally claims, despite debunking by fact-
checkers. Unfortunately, 29 percent of the public, and only 12 percent of
Trump supporters, trust fact-checkers. This mistrust enables Trump to pollute
our politics with deception, undermining the trust so crucial to the political
health of any democracy.

Recognizing Trumps success, other politicians, such as West Virginia Attorney

General Patrick Morrisey and Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin, are adopting the
post-truth tactics of condemning media as fake news whenever the media
report stories unfavorable to them. As an example, Bevin personally attacked a
journalist who reported on Bevins purchase of a mansion for about a million
dollars under market value from a hedge fund manager, likely a bribe in return
for under-the-table political favors. Such trickle-down of post-truth politics
points to its normalization within our political system, thus enabling corruption
and undermining our democracy.
 How do we stop this pollution of truth by post-truth tactics? The modern
environmental movement is successfully dealing with a somewhat similar
problem, namely addressing the physical pollution of our environment. The
historical consensus is that the launch of the modern environmental
movement came with the publication of Rachel Carsons Silent Spring in 1962.
This and other similar publications brought about an awakening of the public
to the danger posed by environmental pollution to individual and community
health, and led to the coordinated movement of activists Republican and
Democrat fighting for the environment.

As a result, environmental problems drew much wider public attention.

Consider the 1969 fire on the Cuyahoga river in Cleveland. The river has had a
long history of pollution, and in June 1969, oil-covered debris caught fire,
causing $100,000 worth of damage to two railroad bridges. This event drew
national attention and became a major story in Time. Clevelands mayor
testified before Congress to urge greater attention to pollution by the federal
government. Notably, the Cuyahoga river had experienced many other fires
due to industrial pollution, such as one in 1952 that resulted in over $1.3
million in damages ten times that incurred in 1969. However, this much
bigger and more destructive fire inspired little national attention, or efforts to
change the situation, as compared to the fire of 1969.

The marked difference in the reaction to the two fires stemmed from the
launch of the modern environmental movement, combining the coordinated
actions of activists to seek out and highlight these problems with heightened
public attention awareness of the danger of environmental pollution. We can
do the same for the pollution of truth by launching a pro-truth movement.
Such a movement would require a coordinated group of activists holding public
figures accountable for deception as well as publicly highlighting the danger
that post-truth politics poses to the health of our democracy.
 While the 1960s required the publication of books to raise awareness and
launch a movement, our contemporary digital environment provides easier
tools. The Pro-Truth Pledge project at ProTruthPledge.org allows private
citizens and public figures to take a pledge to commit to twelve truth-oriented
behaviors. This site both offers a coordination venue for those determined to
roll back the tide of lies and protect our democracy, and raises awareness of
the dangers of political deception. Hundreds of private citizens across the US
and dozens of public figures have already taken the pledge, including
household names such as Peter Singer and Steven Pinker as well as over
twenty Democratic and Republican politicians.

By launching a nonpartisan pro-truth movement, we can avoid the

normalization of post-truth politics. Doing so will help ensure that the kind of
falsehoods uttered by Trump at the Phoenix rally get a response equivalent to
the 1969 fire on the Cuyahoga river, rather than the 1952 one. Whether the
pro-truth movement takes off depends on how many people choose to take
the pledge and join the effort to protect the health of our democracy from the
pollution of truth and destruction of trust in our political system.

Do You Want To Read More Blogs, Please Visit Our Website:

http://intentionalinsights.org/