← Back to context

Comment by michaelt

1 month ago

Even when communicating ideas, there's a simplicity/nuance trade-off to be made.

I could say "Trump's unpredictable, seemingly irrational policy choices have alienated our allies, undermined trust in public institutions, and harmed the US economy"

Or I could "The economy sucks and it's Trump's fault because he's dumb and an asshole"

They both communicate the same broad idea - but which communicates it better? It depends on the audience.

> They both communicate the same broad idea - but which communicates it better? It depends on the audience.

Ugh. They say different things. The first describes the policy mechanisms and impacts. The second says nothing about those things; it describes your emotions.

The biggest communication problem I see now is people, especially on the Internet, including on HN, use the latter for the former purpose and say nothing.

I don't think they communicate the same broad idea at all. Making "unpredictable, seemingly irrational" choices is far from equivalent to being a dumb asshole. Your second version assumes the equivalence, which, hypothetically speaking, could provide a nice cover for purposeful malfeasance, could it not?

I will choose the second one because it packs more wrongs that he has done which are not addressed by the first choice of words :)

Eric Weinstein made a good point about Trump and his use of language:

Trump was much closer to saying “The immigrants are taking your jobs.” Well, to a labor market analyst, that’s not remotely the same thing at all as saying “US employers and political donors are colluding to confiscate your most valuable rights without market-based compensation, while denigrating you as lazy and stupid, and hiding behind a veneer of excellence and xenophilia as they economically undermine your families.” But it’s much easier, isn’t it?