"And the core of this, the core of what bothers me about Trump, is the vacuousness of his speech. He will literally say the same thing three times in a row - and it was meaningless the first time. The problem is that the caricatures of him are true. He'll say "It's going to be amazing. You won't believe how amazing it will be. It will be very, very amazing". This is an intellectual problem. Smart people don't talk this way. When people are speaking, they are thinking out loud. I am thinking out loud at this moment. If you listen to my podcast for a few hours you know how I think. So when people don't make sense, it's not like they are thinking brilliant incisive thoughts in the privacy of their minds, and then just sound like dummies when they open their mouths. Generally speaking, what you hear is what they've got. Yes, it's true that not every smart person is a great public speaker. And you can find greater public speakers who are essentially just reading what some smarter person wrote. But it is significant, that Trump never manages to utter a single extemporaneous string of sentences that is deep, insightful or even interesting. This reveals something about him.
Imagine you have an urn, and every time you reach into it you pull out another piece of junk - you just got broken glass, and zip-ties, and bits of bone - nothing of value. It might seem unlikely, but it's not impossible that something of tremendous value is also in there. You could pull the Hope Diamond out of there, if you just keep fishing around long enough. That's possible, because what you pull at each round out doesn't really indicate what else is in there. Minds are not like that. Ideas are connected. The ability to reason well is transferable from one domain to another - and so is inability to reason. A desire not to seem incoherent is something that intelligent, well-informed people tend to have. When you hear someone speak at length on topics that are crucial to the most important enterprise they are engaging and all they've got is bluster, and bombast, and banality, strewn with factual errors, it is quite irrational to believe that there is a brilliant mind behind all of that just waiting to get out. Trump is not hiding his light under a bushel - he is all bushel."
2. Скотт Ааронсон о Трампе: Daddy, Why Didn't You Blog About Trump?
Особенно интересны рассуждения Ааронсона о косвенной ответственности, за восхождение Трампа, агрессивных кампаний "социальной справедливости" последних лет (вспомним: Брендан Эйх, Мэтт Тейлор, Тим Хант...). Я согласен с ним и в том, что эти кампании по нетерпимости, эта вакханалия призывов наказать, уволить, запретить за неправильное мышление или узор на рубашке подготовили почву для привлекательности Трампа; и в том, что основная ответственность тем не менее лежит на самих избирателях.
"So yes, I do think (as Bill Maher also said, before summarily reversing himself) that the bullying wing of the social-justice left bears at least some minor, indirect responsibility for the rise of Trump. If you demonstrate enough times that even people who are trying to be decent will still get fired, jeered at, and publicly shamed over the tiniest ideological misstep, then eventually some of those who you’ve frightened might turn toward a demagogue who’s incapable of shame."
Есть также следующая запись на ту же тему: Leonard Susskind’s Open Letter on “The Lunatic”. К обоим записям есть по несколько сотен комментариев, которые, тем не менее, содержат много интересного и рекомендуются к прочтению.
3. Лингвистический анализ речи Трампа, с разбитием на интонационные группы. Любопытно читать его, помня и сверяясь а процитированным выше из Харриса.