‘Stupidity is the only endlessly renewable resource we have’

Your say on social media, political twits and the new stupid, and whether it’s all been a terrible mistake.

The new stupid: Boxes of rocks all over the world rose up in anger.

Welcome to the column where you provide the content. The election campaign got dumb and dumber as social media’s cup ran over with astounding examples of the new stoopid. Skeletons rattled out of closets and unwise posts came back to haunt political aspirants of all political stripes. Jack the Insider wondered if we’d reached peak stupid. David had doubts:

“We are not at peak stupid yet, but will be after the election.”

Jason was powering, and gets comment of the week:

“Stupidity is the only endlessly renewable resource we have. If we could figure out how to turn it into electricity we’d be set!”

Mr Natural noted:

“Natural stupidity will always trump artificial intelligence.”

Raymond C red-lined:

“The stupidity indexed remained stuck in the red zone today with Labor candidate in the Greens-held seat of Melbourne, Luke Creasey, facing questions over a raft of appalling posts that include rape jokes.

“How strange — the ABC has been all over the Jeremy Hearn story — “it is derailing Morrison’s campaign” — but not a word about Creasey derailing Shorten’s campaign.”

RA rebutted:

“Your claim is untrue. Go to the ABC news site and you’ll readily find reporting on Creasey’s obnoxious behaviour and attitudes.”

Face it, said Janis:

“Shorten … hasn`t worked it out that this has stuck to the guy like super glue and will forever be brought up as a political score point by someone …

“The Labor candidate must resign immediately, rape jokes are not funny. He would say that he doesn`t hold those views today. Too late, he has a past that is bad for Labor’s image, he must go.”

Strippergate: Steve Dickson demonstrates the quickest way to reduce Pauline Hanson to tears. Picture: AAP/NINE

Robin reasoned:

“Everyone has made a politically incorrect joke at some point in their lives, can we please stop with this insanity?

“The real scandal is that someone obviously paid for all these hit stories (including the Al Jazeera one on PHON). Having foreign agencies spying on our government officials for years was only topped by the fact that the propaganda they produced was aired on our public broadcaster paid by taxpayers.

“That’s the level we have sunk to. And we are losing our minds over bad jokes made years ago. Please.”

Arlys argued:

“Trouble (is) finding someone who stayed with mummy and daddy till they were 30ish, had never been on a ‘friendly’ holiday to Thailand, Bali or The Philippines, only ever went to Police Boys’ Clubs for social outings, had never been to Oxford Street or Brunswick, West End or The Cross, and did community work on the weaken … is very difficult.

“The reality being they are as boring as bat’s droppings, have little idea of real life in the burbs, need to lose their virginity/whatever, before they can represent us.

“I prefer my MP had a rollicking life, is not remotely blameless … at least we know, they are as bad as us, in life experience. No prudes thanks, they haven’t a clue.”

A was amused:

“You had me at ‘cardboard box full of scrota’. I’m just wiping down the coffee I sprayed.”

John not so much:

“I just wonder why anyone anywhere would want a cardboard box full of scrota. Surely another amusing metaphor could have been found.”

The Paul principle:

“It seems axiomatic that anyone who seeks political office is almost invariably unfit for it.”

—

Loss of face: Mark Zuckerberg uses mind control on his army of zombies. Picture: AFP

As our pollies pondered the symbiotic relationship between stupidity and social media, Alan Kohler wondered if the whole social media experiment was a big mistake foisted upon us by young men in a hurry. Robert’s rationale:

“Simply stated men do what they have done since time immemorial — go to their version of war.

“It is the essence of humankind that drives us forward. Trying to drive the ambition and urge to challenge out of men and replace it in a softer version in women is a fruitless exercise.”

Alan opined:

“We all fall for this whine that there is too much content to check on these platforms. Forget that, it is not the responsibility of the regulators to come up with the solution. Just make the platforms responsible and institute severe penalties if they fail that responsibility, just as we do with other media.

“This will focus their attention on the problem. I suspect that there will be a lot less content if it needs to be vetted, which won’t be such a bad thing.”

Mal was content:

“This is an interesting article. It is not about Left vs Right or men vs women. The idea that a concept can grow so quickly and basically unregulated could have only happened since the World Wide Web became ubiquitous.

“As Alan states, it is without precedent and trying to predict the end point is fraught. Does it mean that any form of regulation of media is now effectively impossible. And if so, what does that mean for consumers?”

David was disgusted:

“Facebook gives revolting people a platform to say what they like. It’s impossible to defend yourself from a slur by a nasty and disaffected person on Facebook.”

Shurely some mistake — Ed.

No likes from Lawrie:

“Anti-social media is a more fitting nomenclature.”

Charles was caustic:

“Young ambitious privileged Western men … see what happens! The lefty luvvies must hate it but all that tech is their favourite weapon against privileged Western men. The irony is wonderful indeed.”

Rachel’s reaction:

“In the US, the left are calling for more control over social media, largely in reaction to Trump and his ability to use it effectively. Beware the heavy hand of regulation. It tends to point to nationalisation and socialism (and more taxes for me). I prefer to rely on the capacity of the individual to choose to make what they will of social media.”

Mike T (WA) was mad:

“What should be monitored and stopped is the electronic bullying of companies and people to adhere to the views of other groups and identities.”

Aaron added:

“I am all for technological developments, but sadly, social media has given the stupid and easily led crowd a platform to influence.”

R’s riposte:

“If they can out-influence you, your story is not good enough.”

Shake it off, said Sophie:

“Aaron is right. How can any story compete with the media power of Taylor Swift? She could voice a political opinion and have access to 60 million people to influence.”

John saw a net benefit:

“Social media is pernicious in many ways, but it also has broken the stranglehold on information that the large media organisations had had for many decades, feeding us a diet of news that they thought would grow our world-views into the kinds they want.

“We can now find out things that we would never have known, such as how the deep state in the US fraudulently spied on the presidential campaign of the opposing party in a general election.

“Another good example is the case of Emmanuel Aranda, also in the US, a black man who picked up a five-year-old white boy in a mall and threw him down three stories. Aranda told police afterwards that he was ‘looking for someone to kill’. Look it up — you can, thanks to YouTube and other media.

“Now of course, if it had been a white man who picked up a black boy and threw him down three stories, the news media would have wallpapered their shows and sites with it for days. There would have been demonstrations and probably rioting against that ‘hate’.

“We are getting a much more realistic view of the world now that the MSM’s monopoly on information is finished. Even considering the vituperative viper-pit that is Twitter, there is a net benefit of social media.”

—

Hell is other people: Israel Folau makes a rod for his back on Instagram.

Chris Mitchell also had social media in his sights, saying the mainstream media must ignore its polarising effect on issues like religious freedom. IbJab agreed:

“Well argued Chris Mitchell and a great read. I live in the expectation (and hope) that the truth will finally win out in societal conflicts. Am I a hopeless optimistic?

“Surely the fake news and fake emotional crises of the politically correct will give way to reality when push comes to shove and survival is a real risk.”

Ross let rip:

“A white supremacist shoots up a mosque in Christchurch and the vitrue signalling media and political class instantly denounce all Western white men. A squad of Islamic terrorists conduct multiple bombings that kills 6 times that number of Christians in Colombo and the media hardly dares mention the “M” word and the political class spends its time clearing their throats and issuing platitudes.”

Paul proclaimed:

“As a proud atheist I deplore the contribution that organised religion has made in terms of violence and social atomisation.

“But Islam stands alone at this point in history for its consistent adherence to terrorism whilst simultaneously maintaining a perverted sense of victimhood. Our collective failure to call out this behaviour is mainly down to cowardice. And they know it.”

Emma said:

“When 2 million Australians watch Married at First Sight you know there is little hope for reasoned debate and analysis.”

Carla compared:

“Particularly troubling if recent analysis (advised by Fox USA) suggesting over 80pc of social media use and commentary is posted by a core group of only 10pc of users of that medium, is replicated in Australia. Is it?”

Matt mused:

“Chris writes: ‘Few bothered to check the facts, which show more French desecrations were committed by teenage vandals than terrorists.’ Don’t underestimate vandals; they did sack Rome.”

Catherine was curious:

“Chris, after Christchurch, you said the authorities advised you — as then editor in chief — not to discuss Muslim immigration as it could precipitate radicalisation/jihad (March 24).

Does that fact — about the propensity for violence in this group — not concern you? And how are politicians and journalists supposed to honestly and openly discuss this serious issue if that is the case?”

Chris Mitchell’s comeback:

“So all of the terrorism reporting on this paper after 2002 and before the end of 2015 was under my explicit direction. And it was fulsome. In fact a cartoonist and a reporter were threatened with death by Isis because of our forthright work.”

Bleak view: The late Bill Leak’s work drew death threats.

Jeffrey’s message:

“Much of the western media is on a race to the bottom. It’s also pretty clear the current escalation in the media’s PC and the decline in support for western culture is to be laid at the feet of post-modernist academics and the political left that are cynically using these theories to disrupt and change our society.

“The fact it is coinciding with terrorists that have the same objectives but different means of changing our cultures, is often missed in the analysis. So the degree of too much caution and a desire not to offend, by western elites, is leading us to shy away from any informed analysis or solution. Take Chris’ point about blaming the victims; it’s now easier than trying to understand the causes.

“There is little doubt that vandalism has increased against Christian and Jewish buildings and symbols, across Europe of late. There has also been an increase in anti-social behaviour, sexual attacks and general disobedience since the waves of recent economic migrants from the Middle East and North Africa arrived in Europe.

“But it’s also worth noting that the race or religion of the perpetrators is not always published in the PC media, but is often known. But its only known when the authorities actually follow up; which is not always guaranteed.

“Western symbols are likewise being vandalised or defaced at a far greater rate than in the past; as well. That anti-western, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, anti-conservative and anti-social shift in our own politics and our willingness to sweep it under the carpet, is the elephant in the room. The reality is there is more than one root cause of the social and cultural change that is being forced on us by recent events and politics alike.

“We emote about one, but are not prepared to admit to the danger of the other; so we are meekly submitting to both rather than finding solutions. Because the solutions mean we have to change our minds first.”

—

Each Friday the cream of your views on the news rises and we honour the voices that made the debate great. To boost your chances of being featured, please be pertinent, pithy and preferably make a point. Solid arguments, original ideas, sparkling prose, rapier wit and rhetorical flourishes may count in your favour. Civility is essential. Comments may be edited for length.