Comment by dijit | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dijit | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That is how it works.

That’s what we assume will work when we apply sanctions on Russia.

If it was less serious, if it wasn’t in our faces that innocent people were dying, if it was something “far away” and “complicated” and not so one-sided. It would work.

Some (perhaps most) people are extremely selfish, even when it’s detrimental to themselves; you see it all the time with people not leaving enough space to collect luggage at the baggage claim at the airport, meaning everyone can’t see their bags and they can’t retrieve them without a kerfuffle anyway, or in the same way that everyone rushes to get off of a plane even when they prevent someone else from leaving who then will also be unable to leave causing an awkward deadlock.

People are gloriously selfish, and if you hit them in a place that affects them directly: they will turn.

The only reason we’re not is because it’s too close and too devastating for us to turn our eyes away.

You list several examples where people are selfish. In many cases, the selfishness is not inherent in people, it is a combination of the setup of the system and social norms.

Using your "boarding a plane" example. Compare boarding a Ryan Air flight from Frankfurt/Hahn to a Lufthansa flight from Frankfurt am Main. Specifically these two, because Germany still has a somewhat cohesive culture/cultural identity, and one which values taking care of the community over self (for example, at dinner, you ALWAYS pour water/wine for others before you fill your own glass).

Ryan air. No reserved seats. Pushing, shoving, anger, aggression-- really ugly selfish behavior.

Lufthansa. Reserved seats and gate crew controlling boarding. Orderly lines, no stress, people smile and let the families with children go ahead. I won't call it selfless altrusism, but it is a big step up.

Swedish airports (Arlanda/Stockholm at least) paint a big yellow line about 1 meter back from the baggage belt, and people stand behind the line. Not everyone, but when someone breaks this rule they get socially disapproving looks from the others.

There are two nash equilibriums. When the majority of society shows respect for others, you have a really pleasant society where showing respect/care matters. Freeloaders need to be strongly discouraged, because in the short term freeloading is "optimal". You'll get your bag faster, you'll get the seat you want on the Ryan Air flight.

There is a tipping point when too many people start to freeload, happens at around 5-8%, and the system slips into the other nash equilibrium where everyone selfishly tries to grab for themself. Makes for a hellish society.

The tragedy is that it is very hard to move from the selfish society to the caring society.

For further reference, the googleable terms are "high/low trust society".

I’m not sure it’s as cut and dry as that. I flew from Munich to Copenhagen on Friday with Lufthansa.

I was on an aisle seat and was deadlocked twice while leaving the plane, there were also people crowding the luggage conveyor belt, which is why those examples come to mind.

It’s not about cheap vs expensive or culture vs nature: humans have the capacity to be altruistic, but it seems quite common to be selfish.

no, it is exactly culture vs nature.

we can cultivate a high trust society in which altrusism is the norm, or we can cultivate a low trust society where selfishness is the norm.

I chose the airport examples to match the parent observations. I've seen other examples, for example driving patterns. I remember the one summer (actually about a 2 week period) when Minnesota when from "almost no-one cuts in line to get off the freeway" to "everyone tries to push their way through traffic". And just like that, 30 years of high trust is gone.

The famous Marshmallow Test. Do the kids have high trust or low trust in the authority figure to give them 2 marshmallows?

On a positive example, the (US) military puts a lot of emphasis on high-trust.

We are sadly living in an age where the increasing power of money (as "portable reputation") vs reputation based on people respecting what you've contributed to society heavily rewards low trust. Because it doesn't matter as much how you got the money, it just matters that you have it. That, plus the unequal wealth distribution, creates envy and distrust.

And money scales to current population levels. Personal reputation does not.

"The famous Marshmallow Test. Do the kids have high trust or low trust in the authority figure to give them 2 marshmallows?"

Not a good example as those were about the child having the discipline to wait the needed time for the second marshmallow. Trust wasn't measured. You can argue that the kid needs trust to get to the discipline part, but then you're not talking about that experiment anymore, and the burden of proof increases significantly.

Also it has been debunked as an indicator of discipline and later succes in life, and has now become a famous example of the reproduction problem psychology is reckoning with. I would just generally stay away from it to proof a point. It will only weaken your position if someone familiar with it.

Sorry for being off topic here, but it's popular use is starting to irk me

And how do you cultivate a high trust society? I’d argue: “propaganda” — aka publicly-funded social-positive television (TikTok?) videos like Sesame Street; pro-social school/classroom programming; worker safety standard posters and helpline numbers; a ton of messaging about how to behave and how to expect others to behave, about safety, about support, about good decisions (buckle up!), etc.

We have to invest in our society.

Although I agree in the basis, it is more complex than just selfishness.

In this war we have already been primed and aligned. Europe has been effectively aligned with Ukraine, whether it was through propaganda or plain high quality media coverage. So at the very least we will be sad to see Ukraine fall. On top of that we have been thoroughly informed that Russia is a threat to the EU, and Russia has done nothing but confirm that belief.

Besides being selfish we are self preserving. And we'd rather be cold and dropped down a couple notches economically, than have our entire union be threatened by some kleptocracy.

Most people would probably be ok with passively waiting for Ukraine to fall, and being cold while doing so, as well as reinstating relations with Russia after the war is over. But I think if EU leadership decides action is needed and we need a more active hand, it will receive majority support from the populace.

The distance from Paris to Berlin is longer than Berlin to Lviv in Ukraine. Something that is often forgotten it seems.

The European Union has legitimate territorial security interests and a expansionist empire right next door that is encroaching on your borders isn't something the EU leadership likes to have around.

Considering that I doubt passively waiting for Ukraine to fall was never on the menu. Instead I expect the military and financial help for Ukraine to further increase as it is way cheaper to finance someone else to fight the empire next door than having to beef up your own border security.

There are certainly enough useful idiots around that are clamoring for cheap gas at any price but I do not have the impression that they get a lot of traction. I saw some numbers the other day that 70% of the German population agrees that supporting Ukraine is important, even if it means higher energy prices/colder times in winter. Only the voters of the far right party AfD thought it a sensible policy to drop Ukraine. Not surprising really for Moscow's fifth column.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com