The main way I've seen people turn ideologically crazy (2025)
Online commenters probe how people slide into ideological extremism, arguing that bad arguments from opponents, social-media outrage loops, and insular communities all reinforce the sense that “everyone else is crazy.” Many endorse seeking out well-informed critics and being willing to change one’s mind, while warning that crude filters like basic civics tests can become elitist ways of dismissing large groups of people. The thread also interrogates the author’s example of Marxism and labor theory of value, using it to highlight how labeling certain views as “extreme” can obscure historical context and shut down substantive debate.
How People “Go Ideologically Crazy”
- Many agree that a common failure mode is: “People make bad arguments against my view, therefore my view is right.”
- Several note that most people don’t see their own beliefs as “extremist,” so warnings framed that way may not register.
- Others argue that once you accept “the mainstream can be totally wrong,” it’s easy to slide from one fringe belief to others.
Social Media and Conversation Quality
- Strong consensus that engagement-optimized feeds surface the dumbest, angriest arguments on all sides.
- This creates a bubble where you mostly see low-quality opponents, reinforcing the sense that “the world is crazy.”
- Some describe a “bubble” and “anti-bubble”: you’re exposed to both friendly allies and highly confrontational enemies, but not calm, well-informed critics.
Who to Listen To / Elitism Concerns
- Many like the core heuristic: weigh arguments from people who show basic knowledge and can steelman opposing views.
- Disagreement over bar-setting: knowing the three branches of government is seen by some as too low, others as a useful “FizzBuzz” filter.
- Pushback that tying legitimacy to civic trivia or knowing your representatives risks excluding the less educated, the recently relocated, or the time-poor.
- Several warn that over-filtering quickly becomes “only people in my bubble count,” which can itself foster extremism.
Marxism, Neoliberalism, and “Extremist” Examples
- Repeated criticism of using Marxism and the labor theory of value as the paradigmatic “extremist” belief.
- Multiple commenters note LTV’s historical mainstream status and argue that contemporary Marxian thought is more nuanced.
- Others mirror the article’s template to show it works equally well for criticizing neoliberalism or other ideologies.
Veganism and Moral Extremes
- The vegan/animal-welfare example is seen by some as mild, by others as highly polarizing.
- Some suggest veganism provokes defensiveness because it implies many non-vegans see it as morally correct yet personally inconvenient.
Beliefs, Rationality, and Falsifiability
- Several discuss Popper, falsifiability, and the need to be willing to be wrong.
- Distinction raised between factual beliefs and symbolic/tribal beliefs; many everyday beliefs are implicit and action-guiding, not explicitly reasoned.
- Commenters emphasize information hygiene: seeking primary sources, checking facts, and being aware of one’s own priors.
Radicalization Pathways
- Observations include radicalization through:
- Serious mental illness or psychosis.
- Life crises plus online communities that reward extreme takes.
- Professional-class people narrowing their social and media diet to one partisan side.
- Some note that extreme or even absurd beliefs can be socially harmless until they become tied to action or broader hateful narratives.