The Post-Hoc Bullshiters Of The Presidential Election

I worked in a newspaper for a while. Whenever we had a major event like elections or a big sports game, my publisher made sure to have two stories prepared so that we would publish any outcome right on time. The stories were well crafted with deep analysis, statistical correlations, interviews and quotes. It felt like I was living inside an agency that had passage to two alternate realities. Once the outcome aired we would send for print the appropriate story. It almost looked like we already knew the future. Working there was my first red pill about how the real world works and what "news" really are.

Every time there is an election or a big game the gambling junkies, the “experts”, the “intellectuals”, the “statisticians” make sure to boast their success by making their analysis public. Of course they only make sure to post their narrative after the event has taken place and only if they got it right. Celebrities of all kinds (that usually herd sheeple followers), make sure to sell a generic story beforehand so they can play the narrative both ways afterwards.

The whole thing plays out because most people are willingly idiots in regards to two overplayed mind hacks:

The Gambler's Mistress: Post-Hoc Fallacy

A Post-Hoc is a logical fallacy that has the following logical form: A occurs before B → therefore A is the cause of B. In a simpler form it is explained with "After this, therefore because of this." People who commit this fallacy conclude that one event causes the other only after the last one took place.

Ofcourse for this to play out the bullshiter has to prepare his sheeple audience accordingly. Before the outcome of an event rolls out, a variety of information is thrown around so that it can be interpreted either way to sell the narrative as an actual prediction.

Enter The Forer effect

Humans have the tendency to fill in the gaps in regards to any information supplied. The brain is not such an elaborate machine as we think it is. It often makes sure to fill bits and pieces where they seem to be needed. Seeing faces in clouds, interpreting numbers based on cultural symbolism and using generic statements that seem to satisfy most situations work perfectly with most people’s perception. Usually the Forer Effect makes people feel smart enough to believe that “they got it” where nobody else did. Effects of patternicity and various confirmation biases combine together to make the person completely delusional.

Post-hoc bullshiters sell this very well since they make their followers feel smart. If you have noticed, many so called “experts” and “analysts” landed on our screens today and took advantage of their past open-ended suggestive statements to sell their final story as a prediction.

For example I could have writen before the election:

“The establishment has long trivialised the minds of the citizens but it now faces a real challenge from a man that has upset many with his stance. Trump seems to hold strong, giving hope to those who wish to see something different in American politics and it wouldn’t be surprising if he wins. Hilary on the other hand holds all the major players on her side and she can control the outcome of the elections if she so wishes. The markets are sure to take a downturn because America....yada yada yada....and the world is heading to chaos….yada yada yada”

People forget that even when Obama was elected the markets took a 5% dive. This happens almost always with any major world event that can affect the markets. The future brings uncertainty whoever or whatever is elected for a given event. Whether Brexit had turned out the other way, uncertainty would still loom. If Clinton had won the markets would still be shaken.

If Clinton had won people would say that the establishment controls everything and much like with Bush, everything was rigged. The major banks and corporations supported her thus it was inevitable. If Trump had won then the narrative would be more about major players who placed a fool politician puppet on the throne so they can control the world much easier, while we get distracted with the charlatanism.

People would pay attention to the narrative rather than what stares them in the eyes. For example if Clinton had won she would excuse her military actions with a politically correct social justice, non-violent statement along the lines of; “We are defending liberty for those who suffer under terrorism”. Now that Trump has won it will be more like “Murica fuck yeah, let’s tear the goatfuckers’ another arse hole”. People forget that in both cases thousands will be blown off to pieces so that the U.S can control what it wants. The narrative or structure of language is pointless.

Bullshiters Are Everywhere And Ready To Cash Out

The Fiat world much like the Crypto has its bullshiters and scammers. In fact the crypto world due to the nature of short-term investing and quick profit is packed with compulsive gamblers. Although most of them will boast about how they got Bitcoin and Gold right, they will never mention to you the times they lost money in every single shitcoin they bought into. Major wins often skew the gambler's' perspective about future events, making them think that they are experts or that they can foresee something better than everyone else.

In the Fiat world people are not that much better off since the average guy will buy any normative narrative that makes sense to them. News outlets are structured in such a way to sell anything. People will often digest information without question since thinking for oneself is hard. The “terrorism” narrative is a perfect example where one can combine a post-hoc fallacy and the forer effect to create an undeniably credible story that people will buy into without question. Take a look at today's headlines and you will understand what I mean.

What can you do?

Call them out. Point out their tactics. Usually people who do that are the ones who have some public influence. In other words they are the ones who got a few idiots trailing them already and they continue with the same manipulative tactics to retain them. The more we call out these people the more we create a world that is focused on individual responsibility and an autonomous thought process that is free from common biases. We should learn to be comfortable with being agnostic about the future. Nobody can foresee anything. Those who claim they do are merely trying to take advantage of other people's insecurities.