4 ms·
There's nothing quite like an author getting basic history completely wrong at the very beginning. Really builds confidence.
by ttpphd 4y ago
There's nothing quite like an author getting basic history completely wrong at the very beginning. Really builds confidence.
- drewcoo 4y agoDo you mean the paragraph that was lifted almost verbatim from the first paragraph of this Wikipedia page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_majority
- ttpphd 4y agoOh bless your heart
- hot_gril 4y agoAnd it's even the title of the article.
- lvturner 4y agoWhat color is the bike-shed?
- ttpphd 4y agoThe actual silent majority was a violent, reactionary, prowar group led by Nixon. They were not anti war, and they were not silent. The comparison the author made is an incredibly bad analogy, at least to anyone who actually understands reality.
- quietbritishjim 4y agoIf the colour of the bike shed is in the name of your nuclear reactor, maybe it actually does matter.
- trasz 4y agoNixon’s internal politics isn’t “basic history” anywhere except US.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- noirbot 4y agoSure, but if your premise for the article is "This thing in my field is a lot like Nixon's politics", I'd expect you to not get Nixon's politics wrong, specifically because a lot of people may not know it enough to tell if your comparison is correct.
- ttpphd 4y agoAnd to those who do know, it immediately discredits you in front of them.
- astura 4y agoI'm flagging this; it's marketing drivel[1] devout of any sort of substance or insight. The author of the post is the submitter. [1] the marketing here is a CTO position himself as some sort of "though leader," which I wouldn't be opposed to, if there was some sort of substance.