The "Debate" and the "Firehose of Falsehood"; Video of June 28 Q&A
My exchanges with Nicolle Wallace and Ali Velshi on MSNBC
Welcome back to Lucid, and hello to all new subscribers! On Friday after our Lucid gathering I appeared on Nicolle Wallace’s show and we had a really good conversation about the “debate” seen through the lens of authoritarianism and the usefulness of such analyses for our moment. Here is the clip.
Then on Saturday morning I was on Ali Velshi’s program, and I talked about the “debate” as a democratic political form that authoritarians such as Trump can turn into a “propaganda show.” Here is that clip.
Some of you will be glad to see that I mentioned the “firehose of falsehood” concept on air. That’s a stream of lies, half-truths, and insinuations, all delivered at high volume (thus the firehose). It’s a Kremlin tactic but practiced by authoritarians around the world. Trump’s one of world’s most skilled practitioners of this dark art, as is the Murdoch family, who deliver a tsunami of lies and smears daily.
The ultimate aim is to destroy the idea that we can know the truth, creating situations of dependence on leaders’ fake versions of reality, and ultimately encouraging nihilism —if you distrust everything, you believe in nothing. Then you are far less likely to engage in resistance to uphold ideals like justice and freedom.
Trump deployed it to transform the debate into a spectacle that served authoritarian ends. In a democracy, the purpose of a debate is to provide voters with accurate information on both candidates’ platforms and views. When an authoritarian like Trump is involved, he turns it into an occasion to air poisonous lies. This puts the other person on the defensive, forcing them (if there is no live fact-checking by the moderators, as in this case) to spend all their time refuting the lies.
The aggressor controls the narrative by preventing his adversary from making the case for their achievements and their positive goals for the future. This is especially important when the adversary has accomplished so much that benefits the American people in their everyday lives, as is the case with Biden’s presidency.
Biden was decidedly out of it, but a different person, perhaps much sharper and quicker, would have been in the same situation. Ironically (given the Greek choir proclaiming him not just old but incompetent) Biden demonstrated better than anyone that he understood the situation, commenting after the event that “It’s hard to debate a liar.”
The big-picture takeaway from this prime-time spectacle is that when two parties are no longer in the same political frame, the old political rituals are disrupted. One person showed up to have an exchange of views; the other showed up to indoctrinate people with lies. The outward forms persist —the podiums, the moderators—but the content has changed.
Studying the rise and fall of authoritarian states has made me attentive to these “transition” moments. We are living through one now. This introduces an essay I will publish next week. It discusses how the study of the past has allowed me to see the patterns of history, where we stand now, and how things may develop in the future. You’ll see a prediction about Trump’s coup, and a 2017 warning about an intention to refashion government that is now Project 2025.
Lucid is designed to help us cultivate a clarity of mind that’s essential for understanding that what we do now matters to help the future we want come into being. So as always, stay well and stay lucid. Enjoy the video, which you’ll find below.