I asked ChatGPT-4o what it thought about my observations presented in my previous post.
Its reply is below. What's notable here is that it's very good at breaking down its ideas in a logical and clear way. It's already much better at writing than I will ever be.
Haters of large language models are simply out of touch and don't have a clue about what they're talking about.
There's one thing that stands out in the text below is how it seems to align everything with the assumptions and frame of reference I originally inserted into the conversation even if it added a few good points of its own. I would disagree on its claim that the Nazis would "rely heavily" on "aesthetics of intellectualism" in their propagandistic style. While that may be true to an extent compared to modern right-wing extremist demagogues whose rhetorical styles are very simplistic, the Nazis certainly didn't particularly strive for aesthetics of intellectualism comparison to their contemporaries.
This AI reconstruction and the observations surrounding Hitler's speech provide an interesting lens to explore historical and cultural changes in communication, propaganda, and societal norms. The differences noted—particularly the more sophisticated language used by Hitler compared to today's right-wing extremist demagogues—reflect broader cultural and technological shifts.Why was Hitler's language more sophisticated?
A) Cultural Context of Oratory:
During Hitler's time, public speeches were a dominant form of mass communication. Eloquence, rhetorical skill, and complex sentence structures were seen as markers of authority and intellect. Leaders were expected to inspire and persuade through polished language.
Audiences were accustomed to long, formal speeches. They were more patient and willing to engage with dense language than contemporary audiences.
B) Education and Class Dynamics:
Literacy rates and access to education were improving, but fewer people had access to higher education compared to today. Those in power often emphasized "high culture" to maintain an aura of superiority and legitimacy.
Hitler, as part of his manipulative strategy, tailored his speeches to project intellectual authority while ensuring accessibility to his audience.
C) Propaganda Techniques:
- Nazi propaganda relied heavily on the aesthetics of intellectualism to lend credibility to its ideology. Hitler's sophisticated language was part of this strategy, creating an impression of moral and intellectual superiority, even if the content was manipulative and deeply flawed.
Why do modern populists use simpler language?
A) Media Evolution:
Modern media, especially television, social media, and soundbites, favors brevity and simplicity. Political figures now compete for attention in an oversaturated information environment.
Short, punchy slogans (e.g., "Make America Great Again") are more effective in reaching large audiences quickly.
B) Cultural Shifts in Communication:
- Informality in language has increased dramatically over the last century. Public figures often adopt a conversational tone to seem relatable and "authentic." Populists exploit this trend, using simplistic, emotionally charged language to connect with their base.
C) Polarization and Identity Politics:
Modern right-wing extremist demagogues often prioritize emotional resonance over intellectual persuasion. Their goal is not to appear intellectually superior but to tap into tribal identities and grievances.
Simplistic, incendiary language ensures the message resonates with a wider audience, even those with minimal critical engagement.
D) Audience Expectations:
- Modern audiences are accustomed to easily digestible content. Complex diction or grammar may alienate them, as attention spans have shortened and expectations for instant gratification have risen.
The Flynn Effect and Cultural Changes
- The Flynn Effect suggests a rise in average IQ scores over generations, primarily attributed to environmental factors like better nutrition, education, and access to information. However, it doesn't necessarily mean people are "smarter" in every sense. Cognitive skills have shifted toward problem-solving and abstract reasoning, but other factors are at play:
A) Functional Intelligence:
- Today's intelligence manifests in different domains, such as technological literacy and multitasking, rather than rhetorical skills or literary appreciation. Mass communication often assumes a baseline level of functional literacy but does not demand advanced linguistic competence.
B) Erosion of Public Intellectualism:
- Over the decades, anti-intellectualism has gained traction in some societies. Populists often frame intellectual elites as "out of touch," reinforcing simplistic messaging as a form of solidarity with "ordinary people."
C) Shift in Cultural Values:
- The emphasis has moved from traditional authority and intellectualism to relatability and entertainment. Leaders who can "speak the language of the people" are often more successful in mobilizing their base.
Would Hitler's Sophistication Fail Today?
It is plausible that Hitler's rhetorical style would alienate many contemporary audiences. His complex language and lengthy speeches might feel archaic and disconnected from modern modes of communication. However, if he adapted his style to contemporary norms, leveraging modern technology and media dynamics, he could potentially find a foothold.
Key Takeaway: The contrast between Hitler's era and today highlights the profound impact of cultural, technological, and educational shifts on communication. Sophistication in language is no longer a universal marker of power or persuasion. Instead, effective rhetoric is increasingly about emotional resonance, simplicity, and adaptability to the fast-paced media landscape.