AuthorTopic: Knarf's Knewz Channel  (Read 1412149 times)

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Journalism’s Role in Reducing Ignorance About Socialism
« Reply #12165 on: March 21, 2019, 04:45:18 AM »

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) speaks during a news conference on better wages for workers, on Capitol Hill Oct. 6, 2015 in Washington, DC.

One of the most important issues of our time is the choice between capitalism and socialism. The cluelessness of millions of Americans about this topic is appalling and frightening. It’s appalling because the evidence that socialism leads to economic impoverishment is overwhelming. It’s frightening because if we take the socialist path, the results will be as destructive here as they have been wherever socialism has been tried.

Journalists do precious little to enlighten Americans about the disconnect between the beguiling slogans of socialist rhetoric and the baneful effects of socialism in practice.

To take one example from the mainstream press, The Christian Science Monitor has reported compassionately about the wretched conditions and consequent human suffering in Venezuela today, yet their reports assiduously avoid using the “s-word”—socialism—that is the root of the humanitarian disaster there. Instead, they use oblique terms like “mismanagement.”

By contrast, the mainstream media have no trouble writing about capitalism and its alleged shortcomings. Why this double standard? Why is it considered bad form to question socialism, while straining to find fault with capitalism—the economic system to which we owe our unprecedented prosperity—remains perennially fashionable?
Death of Capitalism

Reporters often include statements like this when commenting on capitalism: “Some of the earliest concerns about capitalism are the very ones that are salient today: that the system fuels inequality, degrades the environment, and tears the social fabric with disruptive change.”

Yes, capitalism liberates our diverse gifts, resulting in growing productivity and higher standards of living, with those market participants who have supplied the most value to their fellow man becoming richer than those who produce and supply less. By contrast, socialism results in citizens living in greater economic equality as they share depressed standards of living.

No, capitalism does not progressively degrade the environment, but pushes societies over the hump of the Kuznets curve where greater prosperity leads to cleaner environments. The socialist economies of Eastern Europe were far more polluted than the capitalist West.

Yes, capitalism is disruptive—beneficently so—replacing outmoded products and services with new ones. Socialism, on the other hand, entrenches stagnation and resists progress, as I explained in my recent article, “Jobs for All.”

When a millennial commented, “People in my generation have had a pretty profoundly negative experience with capitalism” due to “student debt burdens, high rents, and the nation’s faltering progress on things like poverty,” he misdiagnosed the cause of the problems he cited. Those economic hardships are caused primarily by government interference with free markets, not by actual free markets.

Sadly millennial Americans have never lived under real capitalism. Markets didn’t cause the cost of college to spiral upward. Billions of federal tax dollars channeled into higher education, costly government regulation of colleges, and inflationary monetary policies have done that.

High rents are most problematical in areas surrounding places where government has imposed rent controls.

Free markets were steadily reducing the poverty rate in America, but that long-term trend was interrupted when President Lyndon Johnson launched a government War on Poverty. During the half-century of the War on Poverty, the poverty rate has bounced around between 11 and 15 percent.
Power at the Top

In February, the Monitor’s Ned Temko wrote that what Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) are proposing is “not a drive for socialism in the classic definition of the term: replacing market economics with state ownership and control.”

In the first place, Temko’s statement is disingenuous, since even Vladimir Lenin realized the total unviability of the state taking over the entire economy and instead settled for government control of the primary industries, the “commanding heights” of the economy.

No modern socialist would think of advocating textbook socialism. But anyone who reads the Green New Deal can see plainly that the Democratic socialists are proposing—ŕ la Lenin—government control over the commanding heights of today’s economy.

Temko also charged, “Free market capitalism has ceased to work the way it used to, or ought to.” When you think about it, it’s presumptuous for a reporter to write as if he is the arbiter of how an economic system “ought” to work. It’s unarguable, though, that capitalism doesn’t work like it did in earlier generations. The reason for this is simple: Big Government won’t let it. Markets haven’t failed; they have been hindered, distorted, and suppressed.

Temko also reiterated the platitudinous fallacy about “huge economic power residing in a very few individuals and corporations at the top.” Oh, like Jeff Bezos, aka “the world’s richest man”? Bezos knew that he was no match for the political machine in the Big Apple, and so he bailed out.

If you want to complain about immense economic power residing in the hands of a small elite, take a look at Congress: Those 535 individuals, some of dubious morals and wisdom, control the flow of more than $4 trillion per year and they have the power to make life miserable for private businesses.
Branding Socialists

Contrary to the Monitor’s traditional standards, Temko’s anti-capitalist bias veered into partisanship. He accused President Donald Trump of using this year’s State of the Union address to brand “his rivals as ‘socialist’” to “conjure up powerful visions of Soviet communism or the collapse of Venezuelan socialism in voters’ minds.”

First, it’s not Trump who branded his rivals as socialists. The socialists themselves—Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ocasio-Cortez, et al.—openly and enthusiastically proclaimed themselves to be socialists. Second, let’s hope fervently that the public gains accurate visions of socialism. People need to understand that the laws of economics are immutable and that if we adopt policies similar to the socialistic policies adopted in Venezuela, the results here would be quite similar.

The only cure for our society’s current widespread ignorance about the relative virtues of capitalism and socialism is a widespread, persistent, and energetic dissemination of the truth that annihilates that ignorance. Let’s hope that journalists do a better job of assisting this worthy and necessary effort.

Mark Hendrickson is an adjunct professor of economics and sociology at Grove City College. He is the author of several books, including “The Big Picture: The Science, Politics, and Economics of Climate Change.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/journalisms-role-in-reducing-ignorance-about-socialism_2842839.html
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Finland is the world’s happiest country – again
« Reply #12166 on: March 21, 2019, 04:55:04 AM »




The world is getting used to being told that Scandinavian countries are among the best places to live. The release of the 2019 World Happiness Report again confirms that impression with four Nordic countries in the top five happiest nations.

Finland, which headed the table last year, came top again, followed by Denmark, Norway (top in 2017) and Iceland. The Netherlands joined them in the top five. Switzerland, Sweden, New Zealand, Canada and Austria completed the top 10.

The US only made it to number 19, down from 18 last year. The UK was placed 15th, one ahead of Ireland with Pakistan ranked 67 and India 140 out of 156 nations surveyed. Two nations riven by civil strife, South Sudan and the Central African Republic were ranked as the least happy.





It’s easy to see how civil war and insurgencies can bring misery to people, but what really makes a happy nation? The report’s authors insist it's not just about money, even though the top 10 are all affluent countries.

Money can’t buy you happiness

The survey, conducted by Gallup, uses a three-year rolling average of survey responses around six factors: GDP per capita; social support; life expectancy; freedom to make life choices; generosity; and corruption levels. Finland scores well on all factors but particularly strongly on generosity.

The authors say that helping others makes you feel better, but only if you choose to do it. Almost half of Finns donate regularly to charity and almost a third said they had given up time to volunteer for a charity in the previous month.

The Copenhagen-based Happiness Research Institute points out that Finland tops the happiness list despite not having the highest GDP of the Nordic countries. It is the country’s social safety net combined with personal freedom and a good work-life balance that gives it the edge.

The OECD’s Better Life Index suggests that Finland’s sense of wellbeing may also be down to a feeling of personal safety in a troubled world. Finns feel good about their environment, sense of community and public services and education, but they worry about jobs and housing.

As if to prove that you cannot buy happiness, the US sits at number 19, one place down from last year. Although it has the world’s highest GDP, economist Jeffrey Sachs, one of the report’s authors, said worsening health conditions and declines in social trust and trust in government were making Americans less happy.

Any wellbeing benefits from rising incomes in the US were being offset by growing addictions to gambling, social media use, video gaming, shopping and consuming unhealthy foods which were causing unhappiness and even depression, he said.



Governments can make you happy

The World Happiness Report says countries which improve civic engagement by making their government more representative will be happier. Happier populations have higher voter turnout, while political division and declining social trust reduce happiness.

Leading the nations recording the strongest growth in happiness this year was Benin, which has enjoyed a period of stability. The West African nation is ranked 102 in the overall happiness table followed by Nicaragua, Bulgaria, Latvia and Togo. The five sharpest declines were in Venezuela, Syria, Botswana, India and Yemen.

Benin has experienced steady GDP growth in recent years with life expectancy improving. It is part of a welcome trend across sub-Saharan Africa led by the more politically stable nations. Conversely, Venezuela's societal woes and Syria’s civil war have coincided with plummeting happiness levels.



Governments clearly hold the key to their people’s happiness. Tackling corruption, avoiding civil strife and improving basic public services are crucial to success. But so too is enabling people to enjoy personal freedom and encouraging them to participate in civil society. Money helps, of course, but alone it cannot buy you happiness, the report shows.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/03/finland-is-the-world-s-happiest-country-again/
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Newly released tax documents show that Chick-fil-A is still giving money to anti-LGBTQ organizations, years after promising to stop.

Seven years ago, Chick-fil-A’s record of donating to anti-LGBTQ organizations came to light. The fast food chain had donated to the the SPLC-designated hate group Family Research Counsel and the conversion therapy group Exodus International.

CEO Dan Cathy told a newspaper that the company was “guilty as charged” of making anti-LGBTQ donations and said that marriage equality proponents “have the audacity to define what marriage is about” and were “inviting God’s judgment on our nation.”

Chick-fil-a has spent years trying to downplay these donations, saying that they “will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation” and that the company’s charity arm “is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas.”

But that hasn’t stopped them from donating to anti-LGBTQ organizations.

The 2017 tax returns of the Chick-fil-a Foundation were just made public, and Josh Israel at ThinkProgress found several anti-LGBTQ organizations listed as receiving money: the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) got $1,653,416, the Paul Anderson Youth Home got $6,000, and the Salvation Army got $150,000.

The FCA, an organization founded to spread Christianity through sports that has been accused of enouraging public school coaches to proselytize to athletes, has a “sexual purity statement” that leaders are supposed to follow.

The statement says that marriage is “a covenant between one man and one woman,” that “God intends sexual intimacy to occur only between a man and a woman,” and that “each person’s gender is determined by biological sex instead of one’s self-perception.”

The FCA’s Statement of Faith also says that marriage is “between one man and one woman as the foundation of the family and the basic structure of human society.”

The Paul Anderson Youth Home in Atlanta is a Christian organization that says it works with young men who have substance abuse problems or who are otherwise “troubled.”

The organization’s website used to have an article that called homosexuality “evil” and said it was caused by the “sexual, physical, and mental abuse of children.” Another article, which appears to have been deleted, said that the “homosexual behavior and lifestyle” was lawlessness. Another part of the website used to call marriage equality a “rage against Jesus Christ and His values,” although that sentence appears to have been deleted.

The Salvation Army has a history of opposing civil rights legislation for LGBTQ people and has discriminated against transgender people on multiple occasions.

Chick-fil-a defended two of the organizations they donated to but said that they had already decided to stop giving to the Paul Anderson Youth Home after the articles were unearthed.

The company told ThinkProgress that their donation to the FCA was specifically for summer sports camps, although, presumably, the people who work at those programs would have to follow the organization’s Statement of Faith.

Their donation to the Salvation Army, they said, was specifically for children’s programs.

“Since the Chick-fil-A Foundation was created in 2012, our giving has always focused on youth and education. We have never donated with the purpose of supporting a social or political agenda.”

It does not appear that Chick-fil-A donated to any LGBTQ organizations, though.

The tax returns mention a $2500 donation to the Southern Poverty Law Center for “civil/community programming.”

In 2017, the fast food chain came under similar scrutiny for their donations to the same three organizations.

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/03/chick-fil-gave-1-8-million-anti-lgbtq-groups-according-recent-tax-returns/?fbclid=IwAR3A0SnIqlGayQSSzNW-USseOrQ2Rc139WgyqIAyubUfTnRuRtEpsaekdjk
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Companies are not your friends
« Reply #12168 on: March 21, 2019, 05:10:12 AM »




When you’re looking at a payroll of 9,800 names, it’s hard to see the human in the numbers. ‘Developers 1 through 799 have to go,’ you sigh, fleetingly considering the pain of telling Developers 1 through 799 their fate. Of course, you don’t have to. You’re just the finance guy. And this is just the best thing for the company.

Activision’s decision to lay off 800 employees at the same time as posting record earnings makes their priorities clear. It’s unusually brazen: the company are unapologetically exchanging employees for money, money that seems destined to flow into shareholders’ pockets or into other Activision games (themselves money-making vehicles which also flow into shareholders’ pockets). I’m not anti-capitalist, but I can see why people are miffed.

The thing is, the company is never your friend. It’s never on your side. Even when it’s run by benevolent humanists, the company and its employees have fundamentally opposing agendas: companies want to make money, people want to get paid. People who work for a company may value humans over cash, but the company itself doesn’t.

There are many pragmatic reasons why businesses might want to treat staff well: it’s more expensive to replace staff than retain them, mistreatment gives bad PR, happy workers are more productive and do better creative work, some people want to go to bed at night feeling like they’re not a bastard. But if it ever comes down to a choice between ‘do the right thing’ and ‘secure company funds’, most people with a significant personal stake in the company’s finances choose the latter.

Again and again, I see developers expect their small indie studios to look out for them, or their kindly middle-manager protect them from the unknowable triple-A board they’ve never met. I wish developers would place less faith in the machine, living as we are in an industry that makes a lot of money and fires a lot of people.

The problem, as it usually is, lies in the money itself. Give perfectly decent, kind people shares in a big pot of gold and watch their priorities shift. Would you feel better about the Activision debacle if 800 people had to go, but the remaining 9,000 Activision employees got an equal share of the pie? What if you were one of those 9,000? How about if Activision had only fired 400 people and the extra cash got your project green-lit?

One studio I worked for binned four out of sixteen developers, then posted their biggest ever profit, nearly a million pounds. Choosing money over employees isn’t a problem unique to Activision, or to big business: it’s a conflict of interest in companies of every size.

I’ve heard a lot of studios describe themselves as ‘families’ and many studios, obviously, treat their people well (see ‘pragmatic reasons why you’d want to do that as a business’, above). But families fundamentally care about the people they are. Imagine your mum throwing her hands up in front of a spreadsheet and saying, ‘I’m afraid we have to let you go, dear. It’s just the best thing for the family.’

We should stop expecting companies to look after us like friends and family would, because they consistently prove that they won’t. Unions are a great start - they should force workers into companies’ priorities lists, though they’ll never get them to #1. But I’d urge everyone who works for someone to remember that companies ask you to an agenda that isn’t yours. Don’t let them fool you into loving them for it.

https://wireframe.raspberrypi.org/features/companies-are-not-your-friends
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
In a rebuke of the Trump administration’s ‘energy-first’ agenda, a judge rules greenhouse gas emissions must be considered


Drilling has been halted on more than 300,000 acres of public land in Wyoming.

In the first significant check on the Trump administration’s “energy-first” agenda, a US judge has temporarily halted hundreds of drilling projects for failing to take climate change into account.

Drilling had been stalled on more than 300,000 acres of public land in Wyoming after it was ruled the Trump administration violated environmental laws by failing to consider greenhouse gas emissions. The federal judge has ordered the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which manages US public lands and issues leases to the energy industry, to redo its analysis.

The decision stems from an environmental lawsuit. WildEarth Guardians, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the Western Environmental Law Center sued the BLM in 2016 for failing to calculate and limit the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from future oil and gas projects.

The agency “did not adequately quantify the climate change impacts of oil and gas leasing”, said Rudolph Contreras, a US district judge in Washington DC, in a ruling late on Tuesday. He added that the agency “must consider the cumulative impact of GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions” generated by past, present and future BLM leases across the country.

The decision is the first significant check on the climate impact of the Trump administration’s “energy-first” agenda that has opened up vast swaths of public land for mining and drilling. Environmental advocates are praising the move, with Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians’ Climate and Energy Program director, calling it a “triumph for our climate”.

“This ruling says that the entire oil & gas drilling program is off the rails, and moving forward illegally,” said Nichols.

Under Trump, the pace of leasing public lands for oil and gas development has surged. A recent study found the administration has made more than 13m onshore acres available for leasing, far more than any similar period under Obama. The vast majority are located in the western states of Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming. The administration also plans to make large portions of the Atlantic available for oil and gas development, and the interior department has been criticized for favoring the energy industry.

The BLM did not reply to a request for comment. The Western Energy Alliance, one of the defendants in the case, also did not respond to a request. Kathleen Sgamma, its president, told the Washington Post: “This judge has ignored decades of legal precedent in this ruling. The judge is basically asking BLM to take a wild guess on how many wells will be developed on leases, prematurely.”

Nichols predicts there will be implications for public lands across the west. His group is now poised to bring litigation to block drilling on hundreds of thousands of acres in other states.

“With the science mounting that we need to aggressively rein in greenhouse gases, this ruling is monumental,” said Kyle Tisdel, attorney and energy and communities program director for the Western Environmental Law Center. “Every acre of our public land sold to the oil and gas industry is another blow to the climate, making this ruling a powerful reality check on the Trump administration and a potent tool for reining in climate pollution.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/20/judge-halts-drilling-climate-change-trump-administration
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17439
    • View Profile
Re: Redacted Tonight: Systemic Racism is a myth
« Reply #12170 on: March 21, 2019, 06:47:56 AM »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1</a>

Funny and no doubt a popular show....but the "proof" is the typical kind of proof I always see.....it doesn't really stand up to real scrutiny. Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

  The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all. I think the Dems and Rebups receive a lot of money from corps that influence our lawmakers to come up with grants for University studies to get the kind of statistics that further there self-interest. It goes both ways.
  An ironic thing about this is that, who would want to "Make it" in a system that is corrupt and destructive?

The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all.

No, actually, that isn't right.

I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative.

But I'm under no particular obligation to take a long video full of crap and dissect it to prove my point, That's more work than I have time to do, and I don't care enough about what you or anybody else thinks to waste my valuable time doing it.

But I'll give you one example I remember. He talks about FEMA buying out rich people and not poor people. Specifically he says FEMA doesn't give money to poor people with "no property"  That's completely deceptive, the equivalent of a bait and switch. In the sentence before he is talking about buy-outs. How the fuck could FEMA buy out somebody with no property?

The truth is that FEMA gives more than one kind of assistance. It give assistance to renters for temporary housing and it pays for some other things. One thing is pretty clear, the mandate FEMA has, as a federal program, is to not discriminate. If they do, they are liable.

o Non-discrimination: All forms of FEMA disaster housing assistance are available to any
affected household that meets the conditions of eligibility. No federal entity or official (or
their agent) may discriminate against any individual on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, age, national origin, disability, or economic status.


https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1461689021638-cfcfd7f6c263635802fa7a76a19e00ea/FS001_What_is_Individual_Assistance_508.pdf


That's only one of several deceptive statements the guy makes. There are a number of similar slick little lies.

You stuck it on the Diner. Apparently you have no obligation to vet anything you put up? That puts you on the same footing as AZ, who posts about beings from the fourth dimension taking us all home to Alpha Centauri.  Who is being dishonest?

Well, he isn't and you aren't either. But he has no filters and no critical thinking skills. You have better filters and better critical thinking skills, but you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly. You don't look at the stuff you agree with very critically.

But don't accuse me of being dishonest. I'm a great deal more honest than a number of people who play in this sandbox.

What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15451
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12171 on: March 21, 2019, 07:24:33 AM »
Your reply to knarf:
"I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative."

Here's what you characterized as "very honest feedback:"

Quote
Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

I may be wrong, but that reads as an outrageous opinion rather "honest feedback." Your points about FEMA aid notwithstanding.

And then there's this floater:
Quote
you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly.

IN your opinion, ace, which is that of an aging, well to do American professional whose opinions have veered decidedly rightward during the last three years. I credit myself with the ability to read and write critically and have a decent frame of reference for the changes our country has undergone in the last 60 years. As to what that means, we will surely disagree.

But congratulations: you're now the board enforcer.

Rather than contribute to the rising animus and the smell of stale urine that permeates the forum these days, I'm going to absent myself for a while rather than respond to every backhanded slap, deserved or no. I am mindful of the comments of others who are clearly annoyed by the fact that I am simply not wired to make flat twistings of fact stand as holy writ without a vigorous challenge.

So knock yourself out. I find that I have opened up a giant can of, "Life's too short."

"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Ashvin

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 2644
    • View Profile
Re: Redacted Tonight: Systemic Racism is a myth
« Reply #12172 on: March 21, 2019, 08:05:42 AM »
The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all. I think the Dems and Rebups receive a lot of money from corps that influence our lawmakers to come up with grants for University studies to get the kind of statistics that further there self-interest. It goes both ways.

While both major political parties receive torrents of money from parties interested in being first at the trough to pick winners, I'd like to see some evidence that political parties are "grants for University studies to get the kind of statistics that further there self-interest." Corporations and private interests? Sure. They are always interested in waving a self-serving study in the air to prove a point. (See the recent article RE posted in re Bayer/Monsanto.) Monsanto spent years cherry picking some studies and suppressing others.

What is certain is that the culture of academe and its "publish or perish" ethos insures that the world is full of studies. Some have merit, and some don't. For a peek check out the SSRN website: https://www.ssrn.com/index.cfm/en/

It's not limited to social sciences, but encompasses a number of disciplines. And papers from adjuncts on the make for tenure. Very interesting, and certainly many are arguable; but it's evidence.

The hoax perpetrated by Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay and Helen Pluckrose is very informative on this topic:

//
The point wasn’t to expose academia in general, but rather politically trendy fields that, as Harvard’s Yascha Mounk suggests, “cannot differentiate between real scholarship and noxious bloviating.”

In short, it exposed the academic equivalent of Fake News and its lucrative professional infrastructure. But don’t expect any change: Facing the facts would kill the golden goose.

The Atlantic has a more detailed analysis - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-sokal-hoax/572212/

So what are we to make of this? Even in reading the Atlantic article, I am not sure I understand the motivations of the authors. By writing garbage and discrediting the academic journals, they have handed some of the worst people on the planet as loaded weapon. Swell.

The Atlantic article get is correct:

"Sokal Squared is already being used as ammunition in the great American culture war. Many conservatives who are deeply hostile to the science of climate change, and who dismiss out of hand the studies that attest to deep injustices in our society, are using Sokol Squared to smear all academics as biased culture warriors. The Federalist, a right-wing news and commentary site, went so far as to spread the apparent ideological bias of a few journals in one particular corner of academia to most professors, the mainstream media, and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"These attacks are empirically incorrect and intellectually dishonest. There are many fields of academia that have absolutely no patience for nonsense. While the hoaxers did manage to place articles in some of the most influential academic journals in the cluster of fields that focus on dealing with issues of race, gender, and identity, they have not penetrated the leading journals of more traditional disciplines."

I must say that I really enjoyed the title of one article: “Rubbing One Out: Defining Metasexual Violence of Objectification Through Nonconsensual Masturbation.” Are editors no longer capable of saying, "You're shitting me, right?"

If your post is a single selected instance of attempting to discredit academic research, the you've made it clear you are joining coordinated attack from the right on academe and objective truth. If your post is to say you can't believe everything you read, that's a different story.

I read this on the internet, so it must be true.

No I am definitely not trying to discredit academic research in general. There are a lot of great researchers out there, mostly in the "traditional disciplines" as the article points out. However the humanity and social science departments are rife with these non-traditional disciplines, and they are no small part of the Academy in general. Administrators cow tow to them, partly out of fear of backlash, but mostly out of greed for more grants and tuition dollars.

Also we can't assume traditional disciplines will be forever immune to such postmodern rubbish. Biology is already under social constructionist attack by people who claim biological sex, gender identity, gender expression and sexual preference are all independent of each other. This mostly happens at the level of grade school now. Hopefully they don't gain any more ground in schools and universities, but we can't summarily rule that possibility out.

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Re: Redacted Tonight: Systemic Racism is a myth
« Reply #12173 on: March 21, 2019, 09:27:52 AM »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1</a>

Funny and no doubt a popular show....but the "proof" is the typical kind of proof I always see.....it doesn't really stand up to real scrutiny. Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

  The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all. I think the Dems and Rebups receive a lot of money from corps that influence our lawmakers to come up with grants for University studies to get the kind of statistics that further there self-interest. It goes both ways.
  An ironic thing about this is that, who would want to "Make it" in a system that is corrupt and destructive?

The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all.

No, actually, that isn't right.

I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative.

But I'm under no particular obligation to take a long video full of crap and dissect it to prove my point, That's more work than I have time to do, and I don't care enough about what you or anybody else thinks to waste my valuable time doing it.

But I'll give you one example I remember. He talks about FEMA buying out rich people and not poor people. Specifically he says FEMA doesn't give money to poor people with "no property"  That's completely deceptive, the equivalent of a bait and switch. In the sentence before he is talking about buy-outs. How the fuck could FEMA buy out somebody with no property?

The truth is that FEMA gives more than one kind of assistance. It give assistance to renters for temporary housing and it pays for some other things. One thing is pretty clear, the mandate FEMA has, as a federal program, is to not discriminate. If they do, they are liable.

o Non-discrimination: All forms of FEMA disaster housing assistance are available to any
affected household that meets the conditions of eligibility. No federal entity or official (or
their agent) may discriminate against any individual on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, age, national origin, disability, or economic status.


https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1461689021638-cfcfd7f6c263635802fa7a76a19e00ea/FS001_What_is_Individual_Assistance_508.pdf


That's only one of several deceptive statements the guy makes. There are a number of similar slick little lies.

You stuck it on the Diner. Apparently you have no obligation to vet anything you put up? That puts you on the same footing as AZ, who posts about beings from the fourth dimension taking us all home to Alpha Centauri.  Who is being dishonest?

Well, he isn't and you aren't either. But he has no filters and no critical thinking skills. You have better filters and better critical thinking skills, but you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly. You don't look at the stuff you agree with very critically.

But don't accuse me of being dishonest. I'm a great deal more honest than a number of people who play in this sandbox.


I put that video on because it is an example of what you have been trying to say. It makes great ratings to be a super hero SJW. I have no intent on dismissing what you and many others are trying to get at here. I just don't see the major impact on society as they are preaching there is. It is kinda like I don't believe in hell, or really I am just afraid to believe in hell. That's no choice. Maybe you can explain how this is a big reason for the fall of the American Empire., or is it just the compassion for those poor people shooting themselves in the foot by believing the media?
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17439
    • View Profile
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12174 on: March 21, 2019, 09:56:57 AM »
Your reply to knarf:
"I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative."

Here's what you characterized as "very honest feedback:"

Quote
Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

I may be wrong, but that reads as an outrageous opinion rather "honest feedback." Your points about FEMA aid notwithstanding.

And then there's this floater:
Quote
you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly.

IN your opinion, ace, which is that of an aging, well to do American professional whose opinions have veered decidedly rightward during the last three years. I credit myself with the ability to read and write critically and have a decent frame of reference for the changes our country has undergone in the last 60 years. As to what that means, we will surely disagree.

But congratulations: you're now the board enforcer.

Rather than contribute to the rising animus and the smell of stale urine that permeates the forum these days, I'm going to absent myself for a while rather than respond to every backhanded slap, deserved or no. I am mindful of the comments of others who are clearly annoyed by the fact that I am simply not wired to make flat twistings of fact stand as holy writ without a vigorous challenge.

So knock yourself out. I find that I have opened up a giant can of, "Life's too short."

No,I've never even tried to be the "board enforcer"  All I've ever tried to do is speak my piece and defend it... like I just did.

On the other hand, several other people (including you) have tried pretty hard to shape this forum into a paen to what I'd call the false narrative of the liberal party.

Not just socialism, which is part of it. In fact, my gripes haven't mostly been about that, but rather what I see as wrong with our current way of dealing with racial injustice, and with the rise of a destructive new form of feminism, and with the rise of the social justice warriors, all of which is driven by a distorted view of reality, which you and AG and Knarf and RE all studiously ignore.

Now...because the right is fairly evil in this country, and our entire political system is driven by big corporations and big money, you and me and everybody else should be concerned with the bad things being perpetuated by the Kochs and their friends, and their puppets (like Pence) and their strange bedfellows (Trump and his populist base)...it's very easy to side with the Democrats as the good guys. I'm with you that far.

I spent yesterday looking at the Democratic candidates and trying to decide which one or ones I'd vote for.....because, yes, I will still vote against Trump (not that I expect him to lose).

What I'd like to see is a reasonable agenda from the liberal side that could get the support of all non-rich people in this country.

Like, healthcare for all is good. I can support that. I can support access to public college that is subsidized. I can support a response to climate change, although I don't think it's going to gain enough traction soon enough to matter much.

And I get why we're seeing the proposals from the left get more radical. Since Reagan, social services have mostly been gutted, and the way the tax structure is skewed is insane.

But the idea of reparations is absurd. It's clearly coming from two crazy places. One is a false narrative of social injustice toward blacks and brown immigrants. (And of course there is SOME injustice. Just not as much or exactly the way it gets painted on TV and in tabloids.)

The second thing?  It's coming from is just flat  pandering to try to get blacks to come to he polls and elect a Democrat. The Clinton/Biden side of the party, the "pre-socialist" neo-liberal elite Dems have been counting on demographics to save them and help them build a new power base. Politics is always about votes, not about doing what is right. That's why I hate politics, right and left. Both sides offer lip service to something and deliver something entirely different.

Equally important, and generally lacking in the current socialist rhetoric, is a massive demilitarization. Nobody is calling for that. I only see two candidates with the guts to even approach that baobab tangentially. Bernie...and maybe it was Gabbard.  We need to cut the military but most of the new socialists are strangely avoiding that issue....mainly because it tends to be political suicide.

The guy from Washington who is the climate change candidate? His campaign doesn't stand a chance.

The anti-robot guy who wants guaranteed annual income? That's a non-starter.

It's like.....the Democrats see the country getting more radical on both sides....so they are running these flags up the flag pole to see what gets saluted. Unfortunately our new democratic socialists will get behind anything that nets them votes.....and I shudder, because what most people want in this country, and what needs to be done, are very different. And the world view of most liberals is almost as distorted as the evangelicals and the no-nothings on the other side.

Yeah, life is too short. We agree on that much.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2019, 10:06:34 AM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 37245
    • View Profile
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12175 on: March 21, 2019, 10:36:03 AM »
And I get why we're seeing the proposals from the left get more radical.

What "Left"? ???   :icon_scratch: There is no "Left" in the FSoA.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17439
    • View Profile
Re: Redacted Tonight: Systemic Racism is a myth
« Reply #12176 on: March 21, 2019, 11:29:35 AM »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/WiuOtfHij8Q&fs=1</a>

Funny and no doubt a popular show....but the "proof" is the typical kind of proof I always see.....it doesn't really stand up to real scrutiny. Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

  The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all. I think the Dems and Rebups receive a lot of money from corps that influence our lawmakers to come up with grants for University studies to get the kind of statistics that further there self-interest. It goes both ways.
  An ironic thing about this is that, who would want to "Make it" in a system that is corrupt and destructive?

The only way to know which statistics are "true" ( which probably they all are ) in either case, would be to fact check them all.

No, actually, that isn't right.

I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative.

But I'm under no particular obligation to take a long video full of crap and dissect it to prove my point, That's more work than I have time to do, and I don't care enough about what you or anybody else thinks to waste my valuable time doing it.

But I'll give you one example I remember. He talks about FEMA buying out rich people and not poor people. Specifically he says FEMA doesn't give money to poor people with "no property"  That's completely deceptive, the equivalent of a bait and switch. In the sentence before he is talking about buy-outs. How the fuck could FEMA buy out somebody with no property?

The truth is that FEMA gives more than one kind of assistance. It give assistance to renters for temporary housing and it pays for some other things. One thing is pretty clear, the mandate FEMA has, as a federal program, is to not discriminate. If they do, they are liable.

o Non-discrimination: All forms of FEMA disaster housing assistance are available to any
affected household that meets the conditions of eligibility. No federal entity or official (or
their agent) may discriminate against any individual on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, age, national origin, disability, or economic status.


https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1461689021638-cfcfd7f6c263635802fa7a76a19e00ea/FS001_What_is_Individual_Assistance_508.pdf


That's only one of several deceptive statements the guy makes. There are a number of similar slick little lies.

You stuck it on the Diner. Apparently you have no obligation to vet anything you put up? That puts you on the same footing as AZ, who posts about beings from the fourth dimension taking us all home to Alpha Centauri.  Who is being dishonest?

Well, he isn't and you aren't either. But he has no filters and no critical thinking skills. You have better filters and better critical thinking skills, but you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly. You don't look at the stuff you agree with very critically.

But don't accuse me of being dishonest. I'm a great deal more honest than a number of people who play in this sandbox.


I put that video on because it is an example of what you have been trying to say. It makes great ratings to be a super hero SJW. I have no intent on dismissing what you and many others are trying to get at here. I just don't see the major impact on society as they are preaching there is. It is kinda like I don't believe in hell, or really I am just afraid to believe in hell. That's no choice. Maybe you can explain how this is a big reason for the fall of the American Empire., or is it just the compassion for those poor people shooting themselves in the foot by believing the media?

By turning the party of regular people into the party of special people and special rights for special people,  to the degree that has been done, has had the effect of driving the biggest voting bloc of "non-rich" people (who are the white working class) right into the arms of the fascists and the climate deniers .....

My main point is not to bash people like Surly who have their hearts in the right place. My goal is to point out the reasons why the bad guys always win.....and part of it is that the narrative that the Democrats have tried to sell hasn't sold, because it's pretty obviously bogus to a lot of working class white people who have lost ground economically in the last generation or two. But the leadership keeps doubling down, and sources like that video keep hammering out the same false narrative.

Unfortunately the poor white people love the military, because that's been programmed into them since WWII, and it's gone off the charts since 9-11. I don;t know if it was a false flag,  but if it wasn't it was real damned  lucky for the USMIC, which was the main beneficiary  of the "terrorist threat" which hasn't amounted to much compared with our crazy over the top response to it........

I'd like to see the bad guys lose, but do do that the liberal party has to bring people together instead of tearing them apart. 

Now, what you see is that maybe eventually (probably not this elections cycle,but soon) we will see a rise of the left. A radical left willing to deliver on every silly promise to every special group......at the expense of somebody.

And I'm always one of those somebodies. Not the uber rich elites. The productive upper middle class, what's left of it. Yeah, I am out for my own interests. So what? Most people, including most here, think it'd be just fine if I got taxed a little more..that the hundred of thousands of tax dollars I pay should be even more than it is.

There are several Diners who consider themselves democratic socialists, socialists, or even communists.

Of those.......only K-Dog and Surly even pay any income tax at all. Both of them work for employers who deduct taxes, so neither one of them ever writes a $30,000 to $50,000 check to the IRS, which I do at least 4 times a year. I've paid as much as 240K and it's never less than 150K/year.

If they got paid their real pay and had to give a lot of it back, instead of it being painlessly bled out of them, I'm pretty sure they'd wake up and smell the coffee.

The corporations pay almost no tax after they slide through the loopholes they've bought. The uber-rich primarily pay low taxes because their income comes from long term gains..... nearly half the country is so poor they pay no net tax. 

So who is left to pay all the freight? Guys just like me, the few that are left.

I'm not impressed by broke-ass people who want socialism. For them its a great deal. Why not?  But fair? Hardly.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline knarf

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11384
    • View Profile
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12177 on: March 21, 2019, 11:37:34 AM »
Your reply to knarf:
"I watched most of the video and decided what I thought about it. I gave you back some very honest feedback, and if you want to view that honest feedback as bullshit, then that's your prerogative."

Here's what you characterized as "very honest feedback:"

Quote
Sorry, but it's mostly crap that just reinforces the belief system of the average liberal leaning American. We could take it a line at time and I could show you just how many false assumptions went into the making of this video, but there's no point. It wouldn't change anyone's mind.

I may be wrong, but that reads as an outrageous opinion rather "honest feedback." Your points about FEMA aid notwithstanding.

And then there's this floater:
Quote
you're just completely swayed by your belief system, as is Surly.

IN your opinion, ace, which is that of an aging, well to do American professional whose opinions have veered decidedly rightward during the last three years. I credit myself with the ability to read and write critically and have a decent frame of reference for the changes our country has undergone in the last 60 years. As to what that means, we will surely disagree.

But congratulations: you're now the board enforcer.

Rather than contribute to the rising animus and the smell of stale urine that permeates the forum these days, I'm going to absent myself for a while rather than respond to every backhanded slap, deserved or no. I am mindful of the comments of others who are clearly annoyed by the fact that I am simply not wired to make flat twistings of fact stand as holy writ without a vigorous challenge.

So knock yourself out. I find that I have opened up a giant can of, "Life's too short."

No,I've never even tried to be the "board enforcer"  All I've ever tried to do is speak my piece and defend it... like I just did.

On the other hand, several other people (including you) have tried pretty hard to shape this forum into a paen to what I'd call the false narrative of the liberal party.

Not just socialism, which is part of it. In fact, my gripes haven't mostly been about that, but rather what I see as wrong with our current way of dealing with racial injustice, and with the rise of a destructive new form of feminism, and with the rise of the social justice warriors, all of which is driven by a distorted view of reality, which you and AG and Knarf and RE all studiously ignore.

Now...because the right is fairly evil in this country, and our entire political system is driven by big corporations and big money, you and me and everybody else should be concerned with the bad things being perpetuated by the Kochs and their friends, and their puppets (like Pence) and their strange bedfellows (Trump and his populist base)...it's very easy to side with the Democrats as the good guys. I'm with you that far.

I spent yesterday looking at the Democratic candidates and trying to decide which one or ones I'd vote for.....because, yes, I will still vote against Trump (not that I expect him to lose).

What I'd like to see is a reasonable agenda from the liberal side that could get the support of all non-rich people in this country.

Like, healthcare for all is good. I can support that. I can support access to public college that is subsidized. I can support a response to climate change, although I don't think it's going to gain enough traction soon enough to matter much.

And I get why we're seeing the proposals from the left get more radical. Since Reagan, social services have mostly been gutted, and the way the tax structure is skewed is insane.

But the idea of reparations is absurd. It's clearly coming from two crazy places. One is a false narrative of social injustice toward blacks and brown immigrants. (And of course there is SOME injustice. Just not as much or exactly the way it gets painted on TV and in tabloids.)

The second thing?  It's coming from is just flat  pandering to try to get blacks to come to he polls and elect a Democrat. The Clinton/Biden side of the party, the "pre-socialist" neo-liberal elite Dems have been counting on demographics to save them and help them build a new power base. Politics is always about votes, not about doing what is right. That's why I hate politics, right and left. Both sides offer lip service to something and deliver something entirely different.

Equally important, and generally lacking in the current socialist rhetoric, is a massive demilitarization. Nobody is calling for that. I only see two candidates with the guts to even approach that baobab tangentially. Bernie...and maybe it was Gabbard.  We need to cut the military but most of the new socialists are strangely avoiding that issue....mainly because it tends to be political suicide.

The guy from Washington who is the climate change candidate? His campaign doesn't stand a chance.

The anti-robot guy who wants guaranteed annual income? That's a non-starter.

It's like.....the Democrats see the country getting more radical on both sides....so they are running these flags up the flag pole to see what gets saluted. Unfortunately our new democratic socialists will get behind anything that nets them votes.....and I shudder, because what most people want in this country, and what needs to be done, are very different. And the world view of most liberals is almost as distorted as the evangelicals and the no-nothings on the other side.

Yeah, life is too short. We agree on that much.

Shit, I'd campaign for you. Your second point. to include eliminating the Electoral College voting system, and go Popular vote.
HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING! Our communities blog is at https://openmind693.wordpress.com

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 37245
    • View Profile
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12178 on: March 21, 2019, 11:47:10 AM »
Shit, I'd campaign for you. Your second point. to include eliminating the Electoral College voting system, and go Popular vote.

Liz Warren came out in favor of that.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17439
    • View Profile
Re: Knarf's Knewz Channel
« Reply #12179 on: March 21, 2019, 11:49:53 AM »


I'm with Bill. Not a job worth having,
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.