

Fifty Shades of Manipulation - 1337biz
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=2565892

======
Torgo
Here's another paper by the same author arguing that people who believe wrong
things should be covertly manipulated by government agents to induce them to
not believe wrong things.

[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585)

~~~
meowface
At first I thought you were editorializing a little bit; I expected to see
conspiracy theories discussed objectively, with theoretical solutions. But
you're right, it does seem like they are seriously arguing in favor of
eliminating conspiracy theories as a way of protecting society.

Some of the suggestions seem reasonable and beneficial, but they seem to have
missed the grand irony in suggesting things like "cognitive infiltration of
conspiracy theorist communities by government agents" as a way of somehow
making conspiracy theorists trust the government before... Nor did they
discuss what would happen to their debunking effort if the scheme was somehow
leaked or discovered.

edit: I am definitely not the first person to notice this irony:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein#.22Conspiracy_The...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein#.22Conspiracy_Theories.22_and_government_infiltration)

------
JoeAltmaier
Silly article, written deliberately in an ivory-tower manner. Of course people
manipulate others. Its the purpose of language. Of course the law allows it;
its called salesmanship and is at the core of a free market.

~~~
jsmcgd
Personally I would argue that the purpose of language is communication without
any particular prominence placed on manipulation. The laws expressly forbids
deception so I would also argue that manipulation is at the core of fraudulent
behaviour and that mutual benefit is at the core of a free market.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
The 'free' part of the free market means each actor is allowed to work for
their own best interest. To convince others to act in a way that's beneficial
to oneself is at least an important purpose of language. Mutual benefit is an
accidental result of SOME forms of market.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
Do you realise you've just said that _no one_ can trust anything you say to
them, because they can never be sure if you're misleading them for your
personal benefit?

~~~
JoeAltmaier
No, I've said that folks communicate AT ALL because it helps them. "Where do
you want to go for lunch?" is a loaded question, designed to get food and
company. The point is, the OP was making foolish claims that there's something
wrong with this.

------
arca_vorago
Cass Sunstein is a borderline seditious man, and I don't think he should be
given nearly the amount of respect he is. His _papers_ , from his younger days
up until today, are rife with unconstitutional and blatantly globalist views.
I will admit his views are not drivel, and should be evaluated on their own
merits, but they are the same views largely held by the supranational
oligarchical aristocracy, which is exactly the reason I find him to be so
dangerous.

This is a man that has, amongst other things:

1\. Advocated the use of sock-puppets (aka persona mangement) to conduct
cognitive infiltration of dissent groups, primarily targeting "conspiracy
theorists".

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OIiOztc52g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OIiOztc52g)

[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585)

2\. Encouraged the censorship of the internet via changes to libel laws.

[http://www.amazon.com/On-Rumors-Falsehoods-Spread-
Believe/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/On-Rumors-Falsehoods-Spread-
Believe/dp/0809094738)

[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-
bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1966](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-
bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1966):

3\. Has argued (very subtly) against the founders vision of the Constitution,
seeking to reinterpret it outside the setup mechanisms.

"Now, it is alarming to people who want to believe in the unitary executive,
like me, that the 19th-century writers thought this was self-evident. [The
unitary executive theory holds that a powerful president controls the entire
executive branch.] That's the policy recommendation and the conclusion that
the Constitution is largely, not entirely, but largely irrelevant. Now, I say
what I've said about the Constitutional matter with considerable regret. I
wish it weren't so. The executive department's vision of the Constitution,
with the president on top and the administration below, has elegance and
simplicity and tremendous appeal. It would make much more sense, I submit,
given our current situation, to have a Constitution in which the president is
on top of administration is below. But that was not the founder's original
conception. The Constitution does not speak in those terms…. Because the
conclusion that I've reached seems to me so unfortunate, I'm trying hard to
figure out what can be done about it…. One thing that perhaps can be done
about it is to say, well, we shouldn't really be originalists about the
meaning of the Constitution. Maybe Judge Bork had wrong. Maybe we should think
that the Constitution has a high degree of flexibility. Maybe it's a changing
and living document. Now, under that conception of Constitutional
interpretation, maybe we can have the ingredients of a new unitary executive
idea."

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Partial-Constitution-Cass-
Sunstein...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Partial-Constitution-Cass-
Sunstein/dp/067465479X)

4\. Has proposed that conspiracy theories be banned outright, taxed, censored,
and subverted.

"Our main policy claim here is the government should engage in cognitive
infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories."

[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585)

4\. Actively interfered with various regulatory proposals.

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/cass-sunsteins-
resi...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/cass-sunsteins-
resignation_n_1738438.html)?

5\. Was appointed as one of the people to the "independent" NSA review panel,
which then prepared a report to James Clapper (who should be tried for
blatantly lying to congress), who then would report about the report to the
president about his own organization...

Not exactly the kind of guy I want everyone taking cues on for policy
decisions, and definitely not the kind of guy I would expect HN readers to
support, particularly given his involvement in "cognitive infiltration"
groups.

~~~
A_COMPUTER
He also wrote the book "Nudge", that was more or less how government
policymakers can convince people to do things by shaping the environment so
that they still feel they made free choices (through constrained options and
psychological manipulation.)

