I have mixed feelings about this. I think it's very well argued and I read Dan Williams' linked piece which I thought was right to include the specific examples when people really are being insincere.
I also think that on an individual level, the best way to change minds is to first build relationships with people. Only once you have a certain level of trust can you have productive disagreements that may change deeply held beliefs.
On the other hand, at least in the U.S., the context I know most about. My understanding is that the political right (I'm talking power brokers/politicians) has been insincere as a political strategy for at least decades. The Powell Memo and the Southern Strategy are two perfect examples of this and I think both efforts largely succeeded in completely changing American society and politics while knowingly claiming to want different end goals than what they are actively pursuing and achieving. I noted on another post of yours that the book Dark Money details how Koch-funded political consultants recognized how unpopular their ideas were and did focus groups to workshop insincere ways of presenting their ideas so they would get the most traction, and explicitly recognized this in a room of wealthy donors.
I think people also rightly criticize Democrat politicians/leaders for being insincere as they co-opt the language of progressive movements, but continue the same neoliberal reforms the right was pushing for that have the opposite effect.
All this to say, I think these pieces hold broadly true for individuals, and it's important to understand how we can approach others with a goal toward understanding others. However, I think the problem of insincerity is much, much bigger at the top of the power structure than is hinted at here and I think that besides the actual I sincerity, the next biggest issue is the ease with which we assign insincere motives to someone following an insincere leader.
My interpretation suggests one fix could be a focus on small-scale/local democracy and organizing and reduce the power of those at the top to polarize the nation.
I have mixed feelings about this. I think it's very well argued and I read Dan Williams' linked piece which I thought was right to include the specific examples when people really are being insincere.
I also think that on an individual level, the best way to change minds is to first build relationships with people. Only once you have a certain level of trust can you have productive disagreements that may change deeply held beliefs.
On the other hand, at least in the U.S., the context I know most about. My understanding is that the political right (I'm talking power brokers/politicians) has been insincere as a political strategy for at least decades. The Powell Memo and the Southern Strategy are two perfect examples of this and I think both efforts largely succeeded in completely changing American society and politics while knowingly claiming to want different end goals than what they are actively pursuing and achieving. I noted on another post of yours that the book Dark Money details how Koch-funded political consultants recognized how unpopular their ideas were and did focus groups to workshop insincere ways of presenting their ideas so they would get the most traction, and explicitly recognized this in a room of wealthy donors.
I think people also rightly criticize Democrat politicians/leaders for being insincere as they co-opt the language of progressive movements, but continue the same neoliberal reforms the right was pushing for that have the opposite effect.
All this to say, I think these pieces hold broadly true for individuals, and it's important to understand how we can approach others with a goal toward understanding others. However, I think the problem of insincerity is much, much bigger at the top of the power structure than is hinted at here and I think that besides the actual I sincerity, the next biggest issue is the ease with which we assign insincere motives to someone following an insincere leader.
My interpretation suggests one fix could be a focus on small-scale/local democracy and organizing and reduce the power of those at the top to polarize the nation.