"The overarching argument of White Rural Rage is that ruralness can be equated with racism, xenophobia, conspiracism, and anti-democratic beliefs. But rigorous scholarship shows that rural identity is not reducible to these beliefs, which are vastly more numerous outside rural communities than within them. To get to a conclusion so at odds with the scholarly consensus, Schaller and Waldman repeatedly commit academic malpractice."
"Academic malpractice" is the polite, in-house and non-actionable term for what in normal english simply means "faking the facts to fit the arguement" and to purposefully misquote, misconstrue and outright commit academic fraud.
In other words, the authors of the piece in Reason are saying: "This is bullshit and lies!".
> I am an Oberlin College philosophy major, and I can tell you there is nothing difficult to parse here having to do with epistemology or set theory.
Did you learn about the difficulty of proving (necessary to upgrade Belief to Truth) claims of nonexistence in your philosophy classes? How about Direct vs Indirect Realism? How about the psychology of normative cognition?
How about semiotics (I'm getting at the way you use the word "is", which (allegedly) means "to be")?
> Trump is ...
When you are referring to Trump, do you believe that you are referring to Trump *the thing itself*, or do you believe there may be an intermediary in play?
And if you manage to get the correct answer, can you think what the intermediary may be? And for bonus marks: what it is composed of?
> You can can attempt to blow clouds of metaphysical smoke up people's asses but that is where the rubber meets the road.
And you can engage in rhetoric (did you study that, philosophy major?) and framing, and I will point it out, and then wait to see how you (your *trained* mind, technically) reacts. Will you continue with Meme Magic, or will you apply some of the things you've learned in school (or at least try....have you studied free will yet?)?
I will be waiting on the edge of my seat to find out.
The human "chose": Meme Magic, dodging of 100% of the questions asked them about their "facts", and as a cherry on top: soothsaying. This is not very surprising.
I wonder if this is why the general public (and even most philosophers) have such low respect for philosophy.
> It is without any scientific merit, and it is devoid of morality.
Even if your predictions here are true (I always love teasing people about confident claims of nonexistence, and the "smarter" the person the more fun it is): so what?
> So, I stand by my comment. I will not, however, spend the next eight months of my life arguing with people who defend this moron. And he is a moron.
Humans tend to prefer remaining as they are instead of improving, and you're welcome to it, but watch out for the consequences.
> And, my background is in epigenetics, lipids, and embryogenesis.
Ah, I have a "scientific" thinker on my hands do I?
> Again, he is remarkably ignorant.
You are welcome to your opinion, and you are also welcome to avoid distinguishing opinion from fact (but again, note that there may be consequences).
> I do not need to spend any time "improving" this opinion of Trump
This reasoning style has been covered above (poor cognition can have negative consequences).
> but I will spend time improving my understanding of the mRNA vaccine-related science
You may *aspire* to it, but be careful assuming success. Also be careful assuming that science is the only domain that has substantial relevance to covid or vaccines.
> For now, we can see that the mRNA vaccines are triggering mutations in the PI3K molecule which can (and will) trigger cancer and autoimmune pathways in vulnerable people.
Excellent work. Does science have any insight into the harm caused by their behavior, and that of their fan base?
> If you have a counter-argument against this claim then state it, smarty pants. Tell me why Trump is not an idiot regarding the mRNA vaccines? Make your case.
See above. Now, let's see how "you" respond, Human. Considering your lack of even acknowledging much of what I said above in response to your "laying down of the facts" (which we have now found to be something other than that), I am not getting my hopes up.
Mr. Raven, they do and they have. Just sayin... look at h ere an now. Of course there is a chastisement coming and they will receive their dues... though they do not believe it now.. they will then...
Wow, anger issues, Mr. Raven, are quite evident in your posts. Why be such a hater of Israel/Jews? Some demons have taken over your heart and head. Look within. And love thy neighbor as thyself.
I may go outside, but it's because I don't want to stink up my apartment with the smell of vomit.
I look terribly Jewish, don't I? And "Bobby Lime" is such a Jewish name.
Eventually, in time or in Eternity, you will be confronted with the evil which you embody. I hope it is in time, and that you will repent and believe on The Lord Jesus Christ, who happens to be King of the Jews.
It doesn't matter. The book's title is the point. Yokels are angry. They are angry because they are not us, they are poor and outside the city. Losers who are racist.
Not going to argue against that - but I am going to claim this:
The EU-provinces and the USA and the rump remnants of the British Empire are all too far gone along the path to total corporatism, for reconciliation to take place.
Hence, the book and rebuttals to it are more useful as a tool for further marginalising attacks on such people as its authors, as the majority of the population be it rural or urban are not aligned with their views or experiences.
By higlighting all such examples of globalist fascism-in-woke clothing and exposing them and their real beliefs, the wedge can be driven deeper and as that happens and also as the 2/3s who are not engaged in any kind of politics perceive the shift and find deeper emotional truth with one side than the other, a great many on the woke side will start to change.
First as fence-sitters, then as fence-jumpers. It's happening to gaming journalism and video games development as we speak - the "sensitivity readers" and "diversity consultants" are being "right-sized" and the venture capital used to fund their propaganda-platforms for the last ten years have run out.
I think this, not just to try and be uncharacteristically optimistic but from a cynical perspective: woke as a brand is played out. It needs to be replaced with "the new cool" and the capitalist overlords are already preparing to clean house and to declare "we have always been at war with East-Asia", i.e. that they have always been about family values, traditions, blah blah blah.
To capitalists and communists alike, nothing has any value but its instrumental value to the user, after all.
Globalism is fascist, but global rather than national; woke is the latest iteration of the class of useful idiots acting as the proverbial drip hollowing the stone.
What makes you think I claimed that the state police practices of National Socialist Germany were - or even could be - any different from those of any other modern, complex state?
Also, the dispute was about implying 'globalism' was 'fascism', not German National Socialism.
While it's true that German National Socialism under the NSDAP was inspired by Italian Fascism, they are not the same thing. Both considered themselves to be 'democracies' and, in fact, both were 'democracies' even more so than any current 'democracy' in the Anglo-sphere. The exigencies of war (obviously) altered their behaviors, but the same occurred in the 'democracies' of North America and the British Commonwealth.
As for 'propaganda', you're going to need to explain what it has to do with the issue of 'globalism' or 'fascism' and *exactly* what you mean by 'propaganda'.
Skilful usage of philosophy is even more powerful - with adequate volume and skill, this behavior that our entire system is infested by (not a single human is innocent) could plausibly be wiped from the face of the planet permanently.
Philosophy (or semantics, smeiotics, rethorics, all the terminology) when we debate like now - but that won't help much when some group of peaceful protesters are descending on your neighourhood.
I see the reasoning - the philophy as you put it - as part of a well-rounded exercise routine, to be paired with the equivalent material counterparts, both on individual and collective levels.
Kind of how the classics did it. Mr Broad Shoulders was a wrestler at first after all.
Good point. I am a big supporter of having the prospect of extreme violence on the table as an option. In fact, I believe a very small amount of targeted violence could reduce net violence dramatically. All power is wielded by people with squishy bodies.
But then it does no harm. If Mein Kampf is only read by Nazi believers, no one is recruited. Does it inspire a few lazy “Nazis” to get off their asses and vote? Maybe.
There is the possibility that WRR was published just to make a few bucks – a way to exploit the Left’s mania over Trump to extract a few dollars from weak thinkers eager for reinforcement. Of course, that suggests self-awareness – the knowledge by the publisher that the book is BS.
I agree with Chris’ overarching thesis – that the media is 100% manipulative and 0% informative. I mean, what else do you call commentators who describe Brandon’s SOTU speech as great oratory?
Publishers are just as prone to jump on bandwagons as any other business. After the success of *White Fragility* we saw lots of material on the topic. Also keep in mind that publishing has a 12+ month lead time between acceptance and publication.
This was almost certainly conceived by the authors and publishers alike as a money-making scheme. But while it's succeeded in getting some negative coverage, I don't think it's going to reach *White Fragility* levels of popularity or influence simply because that whole anti-Whiteness craze is already past its sell-by date.
You have to understand that being part of the movement isn't binary, but a spectrum, and it is for those that are in the serious believer range that the book is for, to be used as a tool of argumentation to pull those in the "sorta sympathizers but not 100% on board" range closer. That is why the academic (citations at least) book format is important, it provides the sheen of legitimacy via appeal to an agreed upon authority on truth. So when the Party people are telling their less committed targets "Look how bad all those rural people are!" and their targets respond "Well, I don't know... my aunt lives out in the sticks and she's alright," the Party can respond "Well, maybe she is, but have you read this book? It very clearly shows what the problem is, which is exactly these people who are horrible on average. It's science!"
You see the same thing with academic studies that find, purely coincidently no doubt, exactly the findings that the author's political overlords wanted, and thus the study gets famous and pushed on tv and the authors are doing interviews all over etc. Never mind that every other study shows the opposite, and no serious academic takes the new one as gospel that overturns all the others. The point is to have the legitimacy to claim the claims you want so there is always one thing people can wave to say "Look how right we are about this!"
No matter that in 5 years they will be arguing the opposite and there will be another book or study showing that, about as often as not by the same authors...
I take your point. (I have to keep in mind that I’m not normal. At age 19 in 1974, I read a TIME magazine article about Nixon & Watergate that said “Nixon claimed (blah-blah-blah).” I thought “Why ‘claimed?’ Why not ‘said,’ or ‘stated?’” Ever since, I have viewed media language with skepticism, and validate stories (of interest) with other sources. (True for sources on both sides.)
Yea, people like us that really pick things apart are rare, and worse most people who DO pick things apart generally only do so in situations where it validates their priors. Hence "microaggression" nonsense from people who are sloppy as hell with their own language use. Most of the propaganda value of this sort of thing is feeding into that confirmation bias of people who are on the fence, and telling them "Oh, no those people who disagree are wrong, here's some very basic evidence to convince yourself of that. Just go with your feelings and follow us, it is completely right."
I dunno, I think the first time after someone catches "The Authorities (tm)" in obvious bullshit it makes them more likely to look for more bullshit. That starts a cycle of spotting more bullshit, and since there's so much of it, eventually you develop a rule that "I'm going to assume this is bullshit until proven otherwise", which turns out to be a great rule.
That said, not everyone does this at the same pace, some are much faster than others.
The problem is many still believe their propaganda that the dissidents are in the minority, I think the opposite is true. I always take the time to talk to strangers, and statements like "Well, I think there's baby-rapin', baby-eatin Satanists at the top of the pyramid" are much more well received nowadays than say, just a few years ago...
Sometimes, but I notice that Gell-Mann Amnesia is extremely strong for many, possibly most, people. And frankly, most people don't pay enough attention or know enough to recognize BS. So they miss almost all of it, then when they spot it they just figure "Eh, he was wrong about that" and then go on believing everything else they want to.
As to majorities, it really depends a lot on where you live. I swing between very rural and relatively urban areas, and the differences in assumed beliefs is very large. Notably, both areas have their BS blind spots as well.
“…many still believe their propaganda that the dissidents are in the minority, I think the opposite is true.”
The proof will be in November’s election. If people who believe things are bullshit still vote for the incumbent, then those people’s beliefs are irrelevant. It’s only people who react tangibly to new-to-them information who matter in this context.
A Democrat would argue that the fraud was an “insurance policy” that turned out to have been unnecessary.
To my mind, there are a series of incontrovertible pieces of evidence: the vertical blips in the blue lines on the vote total graphs in the swing states occurring between 1am and 6:30am on Nov 4, 2020. Sudden huge blocks of Biden-only votes flowed in, contravening patterns in all tracked elections.
The only known comparable pattern emerged in the 1948 Democratic primary election for Senate in Precinct 13 of Jim Wells County, Texas, when 202 county residents voted unknowingly in alphabetical order, 2 for Stevenson and 200 for Lyndon Johnson, giving Johnson the win by 87 votes out of 988K statewide.
Lara Trump was on FNC yesterday in her new role making noise about how the RNC will be unrecognizable this year in its prodigious vote harvesting efforts in all swing states. We’ll see…
Fortunately, trying to manufacture reality with propaganda, astroturfing, and pay-to-play papers isn't holding up to well against reality. Hell, it doesn't even hold up well against half-assed MS Paint memes.
I don't know about that. Higher education is dead, having been replaced by an indoctrination and propaganda machine, and I don't see a lot of motion towards it returning to an institution that seeks truth in a rough and ready fashion any time soon. The US government has gotten both bigger and less efficient every year for the past 70+, and finding people who want to cut it or shrink it in particulars is difficult.
I think that outside of a few obvious piles like COVID (which many still adhere to the official narratives on) there are many issues for which the propaganda works just fine.
Like the Jan 6 entrapment plot and lawfare persecution of Trump, this book is a direct attack to demonize and stop any sort of MAGA or similar dissent from the desired arc of history as prescribed by leftists.
I’m SO sick of that phrase (“arc of history”). When I was a child, it was uttered rarely, and actually meant the “arc of history.” Now it means “my line of pseudo-intellectual bullshit that purports to support the latest scheme to fuck you over.”
Disdain is an ancient emotion. There will always be those who elevate themselves in their own minds by looking down on others. The absence of such books won’t change that tendency. The only thing that can change it is a respected leader advocating against it, e.g., MLK (in conjunction with Federal law) posthumously leading the bulk of the South away from racism.
Or do we think that publishing more overt racist screeds will expand the population of racists?
As the "stakeholders" (you know, the people who fly into the WEF's Davos meeting every year on their private jets) cut off the energy, food, and other resources (these are the people who say "you'll own nothing, and be happy"), they know we'll actually be angry. They look forward to our destitution and anger as useful tools in their drive to control us:
Yeah, I got the same feeling just from the few snippets mr Bray quoted.
You (americans, that is) are being given the choice of being loyal or free, the purpose of that choice being to make the troublemakers weed themselves out, the way Mao did when he for a brief period allowed free speech, the better to register and identify potential opponents in advance.
The problem with fly-over country and its inhabitants is that they are, for the most part, decentralized, can be self-sufficient, and still have a cooperative social philosophy. This means that they cannot be effectively controlled and coerced by a strategic cutoff of access to goods and services through a social credit program the way that city dwellers can.
The parents in fly-over country were the people who first raised the alarm and exposed the indoctrination of their children when the curtain was pulled back on the curriculum during Covid. This has resulted in school voucher programs being initiated in several states and more parents choosing homeschooling. This has short-circuited the long march through the academy and the destruction from the inside out of individualistic beliefs and philosophies such as personal responsibility, patriotism, religious faith, and/or a sense of communal responsibility to support and assist others rather than rely on government.
Because the people in fly-over country can't be readily controlled and still harbor individualistic as opposed to collective beliefs, they and their values must be discredited as uneducated, unscientific, backward, weird, wrong, and out of step with the "real" world.
Having the school curriculum exposed for the propaganda it is was a temporary setback. Now, useful idiots in the form of influencers and media personalities constantly bombard our youth with the message that middle-American values are stupid, ignorant, racist, bigoted, and, worst of all for the easily influenced, unfashionable. The persistent and pervasive message is, to quote the song, "conform or be cast out."
You can replace America and USA with any EU-nation save Hungary, both for your post and that american version of 'Mein Kampf' you refer to.
Just to be clear - "White Rural Rage" is what reminds me of 'Mein Kampf', not your writing!
Did you see the rebuttal in Reason from two of the researchers cited and used as sources?
https://reason.com/2024/03/07/the-truth-about-rural-rage/
"The overarching argument of White Rural Rage is that ruralness can be equated with racism, xenophobia, conspiracism, and anti-democratic beliefs. But rigorous scholarship shows that rural identity is not reducible to these beliefs, which are vastly more numerous outside rural communities than within them. To get to a conclusion so at odds with the scholarly consensus, Schaller and Waldman repeatedly commit academic malpractice."
"Academic malpractice" is the polite, in-house and non-actionable term for what in normal english simply means "faking the facts to fit the arguement" and to purposefully misquote, misconstrue and outright commit academic fraud.
In other words, the authors of the piece in Reason are saying: "This is bullshit and lies!".
Very glad to see that piece in Reason.
> When you read Trump's recent tweet lauding the Covid vaccines to the point of claiming they cure cancer then their argument falls apart.
No it doesn't.
Do you have a background in rhetoric, epistemology, ontology, set theory(!), any of these things?
> Trump is as stupid as they are
You have no way of knowing:
a) How stupid Trump is.
b) How stupid the people you are comparing him to are.
Are you able to realize the substantial irony here, Human?
Well noted Johnny
It has to do with the constituent parts of the overall argument (that has now been deleted), and whether the these parts are comprehensive.
Why do you ask, Mr. Raven? Are you interested in philosophy, rationality, etc?
Please answer comprehensively, and truthfully (which is similar but distinctly different (in fact, though typically not in experience) than honestly).
> I am an Oberlin College philosophy major, and I can tell you there is nothing difficult to parse here having to do with epistemology or set theory.
Did you learn about the difficulty of proving (necessary to upgrade Belief to Truth) claims of nonexistence in your philosophy classes? How about Direct vs Indirect Realism? How about the psychology of normative cognition?
How about semiotics (I'm getting at the way you use the word "is", which (allegedly) means "to be")?
> Trump is ...
When you are referring to Trump, do you believe that you are referring to Trump *the thing itself*, or do you believe there may be an intermediary in play?
And if you manage to get the correct answer, can you think what the intermediary may be? And for bonus marks: what it is composed of?
> You can can attempt to blow clouds of metaphysical smoke up people's asses but that is where the rubber meets the road.
And you can engage in rhetoric (did you study that, philosophy major?) and framing, and I will point it out, and then wait to see how you (your *trained* mind, technically) reacts. Will you continue with Meme Magic, or will you apply some of the things you've learned in school (or at least try....have you studied free will yet?)?
I will be waiting on the edge of my seat to find out.
Refreshing comment. I've entertained this lens, but inevitably get yelled at for defending Trump.
For anyone else reading this, the point of these arguments is NOT to defend Trump. It's about limits of knowledge.
Is this simulation we're in not downright hilarious!! I just can't get enough of it lol
Fully agree, just not the with the Gnostic smoke. Someone's been telling you lies about Gnostics.
They were far more interested in the truth than any of the Abrahamic religions, and paid dearly for it.
The human "chose": Meme Magic, dodging of 100% of the questions asked them about their "facts", and as a cherry on top: soothsaying. This is not very surprising.
I wonder if this is why the general public (and even most philosophers) have such low respect for philosophy.
At least Trump never forced the jab on anyone
> Say what you will, but I don't need to do any of the things you suggest.
In an absolute sense you sure don't, but if you desire your (sub-perceptual) model of reality to more closely match the real thing, you would need to.
> Just look at what he said. It is remarkably ignorant.
Are you able to realize the relevance of this to your claim about "reality" here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_and_indirect_realism
> It is without any scientific merit, and it is devoid of morality.
Even if your predictions here are true (I always love teasing people about confident claims of nonexistence, and the "smarter" the person the more fun it is): so what?
> So, I stand by my comment. I will not, however, spend the next eight months of my life arguing with people who defend this moron. And he is a moron.
Humans tend to prefer remaining as they are instead of improving, and you're welcome to it, but watch out for the consequences.
> And, my background is in epigenetics, lipids, and embryogenesis.
Ah, I have a "scientific" thinker on my hands do I?
> Again, he is remarkably ignorant.
You are welcome to your opinion, and you are also welcome to avoid distinguishing opinion from fact (but again, note that there may be consequences).
> Of course I am welcome to my opinion. And you are welcome to yours.
a) Please represent your opinions as opinions, not as facts.
b) Are you asserting or implying (perhaps unintentionally) that everything I've written here is *only* opinion, or that all opinions are equal?
> My opinion: Trump is an idiot.
Agreed, as are all humans.
> I feel certain of this fact with regard to the Covid mRNA vaccines, which is what my original comment was about.
You weren't a fan of Operation Warp Speed, that Trump supported?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed
> I do not need to spend any time "improving" this opinion of Trump
This reasoning style has been covered above (poor cognition can have negative consequences).
> but I will spend time improving my understanding of the mRNA vaccine-related science
You may *aspire* to it, but be careful assuming success. Also be careful assuming that science is the only domain that has substantial relevance to covid or vaccines.
> For now, we can see that the mRNA vaccines are triggering mutations in the PI3K molecule which can (and will) trigger cancer and autoimmune pathways in vulnerable people.
Excellent work. Does science have any insight into the harm caused by their behavior, and that of their fan base?
> If you have a counter-argument against this claim then state it, smarty pants. Tell me why Trump is not an idiot regarding the mRNA vaccines? Make your case.
See above. Now, let's see how "you" respond, Human. Considering your lack of even acknowledging much of what I said above in response to your "laying down of the facts" (which we have now found to be something other than that), I am not getting my hopes up.
> I genuinely hope you enjoy your day.
You as well!!
Israel, being smart, is no country's friend but its own. However, it is our ally.
More soothsaying Mr. Raven? Do you never tire of dabbling in the supernatural?
Just as I figured, another f*cking, damned N*zi. You should read the Bible. You'd find out what God has in store for unrepentant anti - Semites.
Mr. Raven, they do and they have. Just sayin... look at h ere an now. Of course there is a chastisement coming and they will receive their dues... though they do not believe it now.. they will then...
Wow, anger issues, Mr. Raven, are quite evident in your posts. Why be such a hater of Israel/Jews? Some demons have taken over your heart and head. Look within. And love thy neighbor as thyself.
2 Kings 19:35, N*zi.
I may go outside, but it's because I don't want to stink up my apartment with the smell of vomit.
I look terribly Jewish, don't I? And "Bobby Lime" is such a Jewish name.
Eventually, in time or in Eternity, you will be confronted with the evil which you embody. I hope it is in time, and that you will repent and believe on The Lord Jesus Christ, who happens to be King of the Jews.
It doesn't matter. The book's title is the point. Yokels are angry. They are angry because they are not us, they are poor and outside the city. Losers who are racist.
It works for its intended audience.
Not going to argue against that - but I am going to claim this:
The EU-provinces and the USA and the rump remnants of the British Empire are all too far gone along the path to total corporatism, for reconciliation to take place.
Hence, the book and rebuttals to it are more useful as a tool for further marginalising attacks on such people as its authors, as the majority of the population be it rural or urban are not aligned with their views or experiences.
By higlighting all such examples of globalist fascism-in-woke clothing and exposing them and their real beliefs, the wedge can be driven deeper and as that happens and also as the 2/3s who are not engaged in any kind of politics perceive the shift and find deeper emotional truth with one side than the other, a great many on the woke side will start to change.
First as fence-sitters, then as fence-jumpers. It's happening to gaming journalism and video games development as we speak - the "sensitivity readers" and "diversity consultants" are being "right-sized" and the venture capital used to fund their propaganda-platforms for the last ten years have run out.
I think this, not just to try and be uncharacteristically optimistic but from a cynical perspective: woke as a brand is played out. It needs to be replaced with "the new cool" and the capitalist overlords are already preparing to clean house and to declare "we have always been at war with East-Asia", i.e. that they have always been about family values, traditions, blah blah blah.
To capitalists and communists alike, nothing has any value but its instrumental value to the user, after all.
Attacking ordinary working people has nothing to do with 'fascism' in either theory or practice. WWII would like their propaganda back.
Query: clarification of statement required.
I was responding to 'globalist fascism-in-woke clothing'.
Globalism is fascist, but global rather than national; woke is the latest iteration of the class of useful idiots acting as the proverbial drip hollowing the stone.
Hence my expression.
“ordinary working people”
You think “ordinary workers” were exempt from one-way Gestapo trips? There was nothing unique about the practice of Nazi
propaganda that distinguishes it from other countries’. Translate WRR into German and the motif would parallel.
What makes you think I claimed that the state police practices of National Socialist Germany were - or even could be - any different from those of any other modern, complex state?
Also, the dispute was about implying 'globalism' was 'fascism', not German National Socialism.
While it's true that German National Socialism under the NSDAP was inspired by Italian Fascism, they are not the same thing. Both considered themselves to be 'democracies' and, in fact, both were 'democracies' even more so than any current 'democracy' in the Anglo-sphere. The exigencies of war (obviously) altered their behaviors, but the same occurred in the 'democracies' of North America and the British Commonwealth.
As for 'propaganda', you're going to need to explain what it has to do with the issue of 'globalism' or 'fascism' and *exactly* what you mean by 'propaganda'.
1) “you're going to need to explain”
Not one of us here “needs” to explain anything to another. You can argue and ask pointed questions, but you damn sure don’t set diktats.
2) As to introducing “propaganda,” you wrote “WWII would like their propaganda back.”
The only way to fight back is to apply raw power and might.
Skilful usage of philosophy is even more powerful - with adequate volume and skill, this behavior that our entire system is infested by (not a single human is innocent) could plausibly be wiped from the face of the planet permanently.
Surely both?
Philosophy (or semantics, smeiotics, rethorics, all the terminology) when we debate like now - but that won't help much when some group of peaceful protesters are descending on your neighourhood.
I see the reasoning - the philophy as you put it - as part of a well-rounded exercise routine, to be paired with the equivalent material counterparts, both on individual and collective levels.
Kind of how the classics did it. Mr Broad Shoulders was a wrestler at first after all.
Good point. I am a big supporter of having the prospect of extreme violence on the table as an option. In fact, I believe a very small amount of targeted violence could reduce net violence dramatically. All power is wielded by people with squishy bodies.
But then it does no harm. If Mein Kampf is only read by Nazi believers, no one is recruited. Does it inspire a few lazy “Nazis” to get off their asses and vote? Maybe.
There is the possibility that WRR was published just to make a few bucks – a way to exploit the Left’s mania over Trump to extract a few dollars from weak thinkers eager for reinforcement. Of course, that suggests self-awareness – the knowledge by the publisher that the book is BS.
I agree with Chris’ overarching thesis – that the media is 100% manipulative and 0% informative. I mean, what else do you call commentators who describe Brandon’s SOTU speech as great oratory?
Publishers are just as prone to jump on bandwagons as any other business. After the success of *White Fragility* we saw lots of material on the topic. Also keep in mind that publishing has a 12+ month lead time between acceptance and publication.
This was almost certainly conceived by the authors and publishers alike as a money-making scheme. But while it's succeeded in getting some negative coverage, I don't think it's going to reach *White Fragility* levels of popularity or influence simply because that whole anti-Whiteness craze is already past its sell-by date.
🎯
the tv networks weren't the only corporate media who made a killing taking truth ministry money
"What else do you call commentators who call Brandon's SOTU speech great oratory?"
Apparatchiks
🎯 (In their native Chinese: 党员)
You have to understand that being part of the movement isn't binary, but a spectrum, and it is for those that are in the serious believer range that the book is for, to be used as a tool of argumentation to pull those in the "sorta sympathizers but not 100% on board" range closer. That is why the academic (citations at least) book format is important, it provides the sheen of legitimacy via appeal to an agreed upon authority on truth. So when the Party people are telling their less committed targets "Look how bad all those rural people are!" and their targets respond "Well, I don't know... my aunt lives out in the sticks and she's alright," the Party can respond "Well, maybe she is, but have you read this book? It very clearly shows what the problem is, which is exactly these people who are horrible on average. It's science!"
You see the same thing with academic studies that find, purely coincidently no doubt, exactly the findings that the author's political overlords wanted, and thus the study gets famous and pushed on tv and the authors are doing interviews all over etc. Never mind that every other study shows the opposite, and no serious academic takes the new one as gospel that overturns all the others. The point is to have the legitimacy to claim the claims you want so there is always one thing people can wave to say "Look how right we are about this!"
No matter that in 5 years they will be arguing the opposite and there will be another book or study showing that, about as often as not by the same authors...
I take your point. (I have to keep in mind that I’m not normal. At age 19 in 1974, I read a TIME magazine article about Nixon & Watergate that said “Nixon claimed (blah-blah-blah).” I thought “Why ‘claimed?’ Why not ‘said,’ or ‘stated?’” Ever since, I have viewed media language with skepticism, and validate stories (of interest) with other sources. (True for sources on both sides.)
Yea, people like us that really pick things apart are rare, and worse most people who DO pick things apart generally only do so in situations where it validates their priors. Hence "microaggression" nonsense from people who are sloppy as hell with their own language use. Most of the propaganda value of this sort of thing is feeding into that confirmation bias of people who are on the fence, and telling them "Oh, no those people who disagree are wrong, here's some very basic evidence to convince yourself of that. Just go with your feelings and follow us, it is completely right."
I dunno, I think the first time after someone catches "The Authorities (tm)" in obvious bullshit it makes them more likely to look for more bullshit. That starts a cycle of spotting more bullshit, and since there's so much of it, eventually you develop a rule that "I'm going to assume this is bullshit until proven otherwise", which turns out to be a great rule.
That said, not everyone does this at the same pace, some are much faster than others.
The problem is many still believe their propaganda that the dissidents are in the minority, I think the opposite is true. I always take the time to talk to strangers, and statements like "Well, I think there's baby-rapin', baby-eatin Satanists at the top of the pyramid" are much more well received nowadays than say, just a few years ago...
Sometimes, but I notice that Gell-Mann Amnesia is extremely strong for many, possibly most, people. And frankly, most people don't pay enough attention or know enough to recognize BS. So they miss almost all of it, then when they spot it they just figure "Eh, he was wrong about that" and then go on believing everything else they want to.
As to majorities, it really depends a lot on where you live. I swing between very rural and relatively urban areas, and the differences in assumed beliefs is very large. Notably, both areas have their BS blind spots as well.
“…many still believe their propaganda that the dissidents are in the minority, I think the opposite is true.”
The proof will be in November’s election. If people who believe things are bullshit still vote for the incumbent, then those people’s beliefs are irrelevant. It’s only people who react tangibly to new-to-them information who matter in this context.
Assuming there's a fair accounting.
If they had the majority they wouldn't have had to engage in absentee voter fraud last time.
That alone should prove they're not in the majority, but there's other signs (e.g. all the polls are push polls, except perhaps Rasmussen).
A Democrat would argue that the fraud was an “insurance policy” that turned out to have been unnecessary.
To my mind, there are a series of incontrovertible pieces of evidence: the vertical blips in the blue lines on the vote total graphs in the swing states occurring between 1am and 6:30am on Nov 4, 2020. Sudden huge blocks of Biden-only votes flowed in, contravening patterns in all tracked elections.
The only known comparable pattern emerged in the 1948 Democratic primary election for Senate in Precinct 13 of Jim Wells County, Texas, when 202 county residents voted unknowingly in alphabetical order, 2 for Stevenson and 200 for Lyndon Johnson, giving Johnson the win by 87 votes out of 988K statewide.
Lara Trump was on FNC yesterday in her new role making noise about how the RNC will be unrecognizable this year in its prodigious vote harvesting efforts in all swing states. We’ll see…
Fortunately, trying to manufacture reality with propaganda, astroturfing, and pay-to-play papers isn't holding up to well against reality. Hell, it doesn't even hold up well against half-assed MS Paint memes.
I don't know about that. Higher education is dead, having been replaced by an indoctrination and propaganda machine, and I don't see a lot of motion towards it returning to an institution that seeks truth in a rough and ready fashion any time soon. The US government has gotten both bigger and less efficient every year for the past 70+, and finding people who want to cut it or shrink it in particulars is difficult.
I think that outside of a few obvious piles like COVID (which many still adhere to the official narratives on) there are many issues for which the propaganda works just fine.
"there are many issues for which the propaganda works just fine"
For now.
High quality critique!
Like the Jan 6 entrapment plot and lawfare persecution of Trump, this book is a direct attack to demonize and stop any sort of MAGA or similar dissent from the desired arc of history as prescribed by leftists.
I’m SO sick of that phrase (“arc of history”). When I was a child, it was uttered rarely, and actually meant the “arc of history.” Now it means “my line of pseudo-intellectual bullshit that purports to support the latest scheme to fuck you over.”
They are Satan’s disciples. They worship the devil. The evil cult is much bigger than we can possibly imagine.
All true, but the issue is whether pushing trash like this actually changes minds, vs. just reinforces beliefs held in closed minds.
I disagree. It would do plenty of harm. It reinforces already present disdain for ordinary folks. It may not create it, but it keeps it alive.
Disdain is an ancient emotion. There will always be those who elevate themselves in their own minds by looking down on others. The absence of such books won’t change that tendency. The only thing that can change it is a respected leader advocating against it, e.g., MLK (in conjunction with Federal law) posthumously leading the bulk of the South away from racism.
Or do we think that publishing more overt racist screeds will expand the population of racists?
As the "stakeholders" (you know, the people who fly into the WEF's Davos meeting every year on their private jets) cut off the energy, food, and other resources (these are the people who say "you'll own nothing, and be happy"), they know we'll actually be angry. They look forward to our destitution and anger as useful tools in their drive to control us:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJTnkzl3K64
[WEF founder: Must prepare for an angrier world]
How to account for we, the angry, white (and non-white) "blue city" dwellers? We also "rage" -- where's our book?! 🤪
It may be enough to win 48.2% of the vote, AKA a “Hillary majority”
I hadn't thought of it as an "American Mein Kampf", but my first instinct says that's correct.
We (Americans) are being prepared for something very bad.
Yeah, I got the same feeling just from the few snippets mr Bray quoted.
You (americans, that is) are being given the choice of being loyal or free, the purpose of that choice being to make the troublemakers weed themselves out, the way Mao did when he for a brief period allowed free speech, the better to register and identify potential opponents in advance.
The problem with fly-over country and its inhabitants is that they are, for the most part, decentralized, can be self-sufficient, and still have a cooperative social philosophy. This means that they cannot be effectively controlled and coerced by a strategic cutoff of access to goods and services through a social credit program the way that city dwellers can.
The parents in fly-over country were the people who first raised the alarm and exposed the indoctrination of their children when the curtain was pulled back on the curriculum during Covid. This has resulted in school voucher programs being initiated in several states and more parents choosing homeschooling. This has short-circuited the long march through the academy and the destruction from the inside out of individualistic beliefs and philosophies such as personal responsibility, patriotism, religious faith, and/or a sense of communal responsibility to support and assist others rather than rely on government.
Because the people in fly-over country can't be readily controlled and still harbor individualistic as opposed to collective beliefs, they and their values must be discredited as uneducated, unscientific, backward, weird, wrong, and out of step with the "real" world.
Having the school curriculum exposed for the propaganda it is was a temporary setback. Now, useful idiots in the form of influencers and media personalities constantly bombard our youth with the message that middle-American values are stupid, ignorant, racist, bigoted, and, worst of all for the easily influenced, unfashionable. The persistent and pervasive message is, to quote the song, "conform or be cast out."
Wow. I hadn't thought of it that way, Rikard.
Personally, I'm with team-reality. Even if it costs me everything. (Easy words until it does though. Then we find out if I'm right and they're true.)
Want to write a pro narrative book called White Rage?
Irrespective of quality, expect every red carpet to be rolled out: Easy publishing deal, fat advance, massive promotion, sycophantic reviews, etc.
Want to write any analysis based in fact?
Eek out a living on sub stack.
Waldman and Schaller obviously came to their conclusions first, then did their research
Great source from Reason.
Schaller and Waldeman, need I say more? Hint: of the tribe that belongs to the ones that claim tribe but are not tribe as the good book states?
Thx