Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

edge.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 144 posts

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#41

Post by lhorie »

sushisource wrote: post #35
PaulHoule wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be specific. This applies to the Democratic and Republican parties in the US.

I think that's partly why some commenters think the article isn't all that valuable. IMO, it really does not at all apply to the Dems/Republicans fight. If you've spent any amount of time with people who actually work in politics, it's readily apparent there's no kind of mutual collusion between the parties. They can barely even "collude" internally to advance their agendas. The whole thing is just a contest for who…

I think one can view things through kayfabe lenses even if the parties are not consciously working together to achieve something: for example, in a wrestling match, the visuals are of "which of the two is strongest" but the reality is that the conflict is artificially created for the purpose of your entertainment. In politics the visuals are of "which policy is better" for a given topic, but the reality is more one of politicians acting in self-interest in a highly tribal environment.

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#43

Post by cmgxyz »

qznc wrote: post #31
alexpetralia wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put simply, one might think of kayfabe as a consensus on the agreement of illusion; a suspension of reality. Why would anyone do this? For one, suspended reality allows us to be creative and simulate outcomes that otherwise would not occur in real life. But also, it can occur under information asymmetry. If something seems fake to me, but I am not sure if _you_ believe it is fake or not (and vice versa), we both migh…

We have much bigger illusions than wrestling. Ironically, a piece of fiction made the point much clearer to me: “All right," said Susan. "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need... fantasies to make life bearable." REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE. "Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little—" YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU…

> TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE

This has always stuck with me. I’m not well enough read to know if he borrowed it from somewhere, but I’m not sure Terry Pratchett ever wrote finer words than those. Beautifully concise and apt summary of the human condition.

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#45

Post by jessaustin »

sushisource wrote: post #35
PaulHoule wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be specific. This applies to the Democratic and Republican parties in the US.

I think that's partly why some commenters think the article isn't all that valuable. IMO, it really does not at all apply to the Dems/Republicans fight. If you've spent any amount of time with people who actually work in politics, it's readily apparent there's no kind of mutual collusion between the parties. They can barely even "collude" internally to advance their agendas. The whole thing is just a contest for who…

...people who actually work in politics...

On its face, this could be hundreds of thousands of people. All manner of legislative staffing, bureaucracy, public relations, media content production, etc. could be considered "in politics", when viewed through a hazy enough lens. As you say, none of these people admit knowledge of the kayfabe. OTOH, the lobbyists who actually write the bills and pull the strings? That's a much smaller group and yeah, they know it's largely kayfabe.

As a relatively recent example, much has been made of the current president's suitability as "commander-in-chief" (or lack thereof). One might have had the impression that there was a disagreement over how much military power he should command. Yet, somehow both parties in both houses of Congress agreed that he should get $740B in military spending rather than the $600B he requested.

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#46

Post by themgt »

sushisource wrote: post #35
PaulHoule wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be specific. This applies to the Democratic and Republican parties in the US.

I think that's partly why some commenters think the article isn't all that valuable. IMO, it really does not at all apply to the Dems/Republicans fight. If you've spent any amount of time with people who actually work in politics, it's readily apparent there's no kind of mutual collusion between the parties. They can barely even "collude" internally to advance their agendas. The whole thing is just a contest for who…

There are often "symbolic votes" on issues, especially taken by the opposition party in a situation they know the bill could never become law. To take just one example, many Republicans ran for years on opposition to Obamacare and a promise to repeal it, even voting for repeal in the House and passing with wide margins. When finally Trump won the White House and the GOP controlled all 3 branches of gov't, they ultimately balked at voting to repeal[1].

In the reverse situation, it's understood that leadership in Congress often head counts up to the number of votes needed and then give a pass to members to symbolically vote against as long as it doesn't affect the outcome - e.g. the GOP impeachment votes.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_repeal_the_Patient_...

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#48

Post by roenxi »

tryitnow wrote: post #14
vearwhershuh wrote: post #6

I suppose it's a worthwhile concept. You can certainly look at professional politics, corporate messaging and the financial crises, basically all elite-preservation systems, through a kayfabe lens. On the other hand, I think everyone would be better off reading Propaganda, by Bernays. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book) It's short.

I don't know. I just don't see it. Unlike in professional wrestling politicians, corporations, etc have real conflicts over zero sum games. Of course, there are situations where there's are incentives to cooperate. As for his critique of neoclassical economics' reliance on perfect information - that's already been addressed by many economists, Stiglitz, etc. It's frankly banal to even bring it up any longer. I just d…

The subtlety is that kayfabe has elements of gradient to it.

In some sense, everything competes with everything else. I could claim the gravity of Jupiter competes with my sense of justice and I can probably invent some convoluted chain of nonsense that justifies it. But to give some meaning to the word, there has to be some threshold of sustained competition before we call two things 'competitors'.

Kayfabe is a state of entities presenting as competitors when they are really cooperators.

In many senses politicians aren't competitors. They only compete on things that they think will win election - that isn't most things that pass through the political realm.

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#49

Post by narag »

remarkEon wrote: post #38
narag wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This applies to gossip shows more than anything else.

Which means it's definitely not limited to US politics then.

Not at all. Actually, observing how it works for realities or the gossipverse, you can spot the same patterns in politics: multiple (in USA "both") sides on some topic cluster their statements around some event, like passing of some act or relevant news.

Setting the conversation agenda is specially useful to hide inconvenient topics from public scrutiny. Sex regulation, religion and other "social" controversial discussions are very effective to create noise and put in the background the economic problems, that have often more direct and severe consequences for most people.

Re: What concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit? Kayfabe (2011)

#50

Post by alexandercrohde »

machinelearning wrote: post #23

Does this mean Tiger King was all a Kayfabe?

Maybe you mean this as a joke but it absolutely was. At one point Joe mentions he and Carole made a lot of money off each other. He ran a whole internet show on the premise of vilifying her, and her whole "Cat Rescue" zoo couldn't exist without the likes of him.

They both denounce each-other but depend on each-other. Though I suppose Kayfabe would maybe imply some mutual understanding of this interdependence and some agreed-upon boundaries.

Post reply on HN