4 ms·

The internal incoherence is a feature of a cult, not a bug! The more deliberately twisted shit they can make you believe, the more dependent your entire cognit

The internal incoherence is a feature of a cult, not a bug! The more deliberately twisted shit they can make you believe, the more dependent your entire cognitive architecture is on them.

PaulHoule 2y ago
It's a mirror of the thoughtless language engineering of their opponents, it's like calling people "latinX" without asking them first.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  A minor difference being that one is a bunch of bluehairs Twitterati and social science professors using a goofy word and the other is a systematic purge of scientific literature and government data... Minor difference though!
  - PaulHoule 2y ago
    Actually I'd argue that left-wing language engineering contributed to right-wing lunatics getting in control. This poll says 56% of Hispanics in the US are uncomfortable with 'LatinX' https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/ipoll/study/31120958/questions#b3a5e106-753b-4c22-b10f-4f02c096dc11 https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/ipoll/study/31120958/questio... These are a swingy group that could go either way. This podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/will-tariffs-end-trumps-honeymoon/id1077418457?i=1000688664252 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/will-tariffs-end-trump... describes polls that make it clear that Americans think that Republicans care about the issues that matter to them and that Democrats don't. "Woke" talk contributes a lot to the latter. The good news for them though is that now that they see Republicans in power talking crazy like this, Democrats will look more normal to people. But if people on the left muzzled their own fanatics years ago we'd have woken up in a different America.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      No disagreement there, it certainly helped lose the election. That still doesn’t mean the two positions are equal but opposite. For example, when Biden was elected there wasn’t a Cmd + F across the federal government for “Latino”.
      - PaulHoule 2y ago
        A serious treatment of that requires considering what the Democratic party actually is. Wintrobe's book [1] has an analysis of a tinpot dictator who wants to steal everything a country has but has to spend some resources on buying people off and some on repression so that he can get away with it. Bill Clinton made a similar maneuver around 'triangulation' that amounts to trying to share as little of the spoils to mass supporters as possible so that he can really give as much as the spoils as he can to donors. In the case of Bill Clinton he got the full court press from [2] so he could say he was under so much pressure from the right that he didn't have to do anything for the left. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, made a clear show of disdain for the activist faction of the party but they were supposed to vote for her because, hey, she's a woman. She also hoped to win by default against Trump. Harris didn't show the activist fringe much love, but she didn't show disdain for it either. She was also hoping to win by default, which didn't happen. Because she didn't define herself, she was defined by Fox News. She would have had to have broken visibly with the activist fringe, however, which seems like it could have been a risky move although the dirty secret is that the activist fringe may not actually vote and if it does vote it is concentrated in places where their vote doesn't count. For now, Trumps's salvos in the culture war are 'cheap talk' that pleases certain people but doesn't consume resources that are coveted by donors. I suspect it will be unpopular too, since people are going to blame you for things once you get in power. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Political-Economy-Dictatorship-Wintrobe/dp/0521794498 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Economy-Dictatorship-Wintro... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife
        llamaimperative 2y ago
        I’m not sure what all this is about. You have one party’s “extremism” which takes the form of bluehaired Twitterati saying stupid shit and, I guess, not getting sufficiently disowned by actual political leaders? On the other hand you have an ongoing ACTUAL ideological purge of our government’s personnel, records, budget, and data, complete with watchwords (like “women”) and loyalty tests.
WillPostForFood 2y ago
[flagged]
- wholinator2 2y ago
  Well cult this, cult that. What i care about is the wellbeing of the citizens. Who is being helped by erasing "trans gender idealogy nonsense"? Give me specifics about how certain people are being tangibly helped. Otherwise it's just more idealogy. It reminds me about how removing abortion rights was about "freedom of religion", who's freedom and what religion? I need examples of actual tangible assistance that has been gained by this. As of current it just sounds like certain people are mad that other people exist. We can talk about the sports issue, the bathroom issue etc. But how many of us have had said issues? How often do these issues occur? Is the resolution in favor of the status quo actually better on the whole if it costs the personal expression of say 10,000 people? 100,000? How many people should be told what to wear and which doctor to see before you are satisfied to have squashed the "idealogy"?
  - PaulHoule 2y ago
    I don't want to endorse the right wing version but my own perception of the young people I know is that if you're young and neurodivergent, different or just don't fit in, you will (at least at Ithaca High School) get jumped on by "egg-hatchers" who have an easy but wrong answer to your problems. You still have all your old problems, but now you have new problems. Back in the 1960s parents got worried that their kids turned into hippies, but hippies managed to supply their own drugs and didn't need to get an Rx from a doc.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Can you explain specifically what you think this memo disproves?

The internal incoherence is a feature of a cult, not a bug! The more deliberately twisted shit they can make you believe, the more dependent your entire cognitive architecture is on them.

PaulHoule 2y ago

It's a mirror of the thoughtless language engineering of their opponents, it's like calling people "latinX" without asking them first.

llamaimperative 2y ago
A minor difference being that one is a bunch of bluehairs Twitterati and social science professors using a goofy word and the other is a systematic purge of scientific literature and government data... Minor difference though!
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  Actually I'd argue that left-wing language engineering contributed to right-wing lunatics getting in control. This poll says 56% of Hispanics in the US are uncomfortable with 'LatinX' https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/ipoll/study/31120958/questions#b3a5e106-753b-4c22-b10f-4f02c096dc11 https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/ipoll/study/31120958/questio... These are a swingy group that could go either way. This podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/will-tariffs-end-trumps-honeymoon/id1077418457?i=1000688664252 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/will-tariffs-end-trump... describes polls that make it clear that Americans think that Republicans care about the issues that matter to them and that Democrats don't. "Woke" talk contributes a lot to the latter. The good news for them though is that now that they see Republicans in power talking crazy like this, Democrats will look more normal to people. But if people on the left muzzled their own fanatics years ago we'd have woken up in a different America.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    No disagreement there, it certainly helped lose the election. That still doesn’t mean the two positions are equal but opposite. For example, when Biden was elected there wasn’t a Cmd + F across the federal government for “Latino”.
    - PaulHoule 2y ago
      A serious treatment of that requires considering what the Democratic party actually is. Wintrobe's book [1] has an analysis of a tinpot dictator who wants to steal everything a country has but has to spend some resources on buying people off and some on repression so that he can get away with it. Bill Clinton made a similar maneuver around 'triangulation' that amounts to trying to share as little of the spoils to mass supporters as possible so that he can really give as much as the spoils as he can to donors. In the case of Bill Clinton he got the full court press from [2] so he could say he was under so much pressure from the right that he didn't have to do anything for the left. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, made a clear show of disdain for the activist faction of the party but they were supposed to vote for her because, hey, she's a woman. She also hoped to win by default against Trump. Harris didn't show the activist fringe much love, but she didn't show disdain for it either. She was also hoping to win by default, which didn't happen. Because she didn't define herself, she was defined by Fox News. She would have had to have broken visibly with the activist fringe, however, which seems like it could have been a risky move although the dirty secret is that the activist fringe may not actually vote and if it does vote it is concentrated in places where their vote doesn't count. For now, Trumps's salvos in the culture war are 'cheap talk' that pleases certain people but doesn't consume resources that are coveted by donors. I suspect it will be unpopular too, since people are going to blame you for things once you get in power. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Political-Economy-Dictatorship-Wintrobe/dp/0521794498 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Economy-Dictatorship-Wintro... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        I’m not sure what all this is about. You have one party’s “extremism” which takes the form of bluehaired Twitterati saying stupid shit and, I guess, not getting sufficiently disowned by actual political leaders? On the other hand you have an ongoing ACTUAL ideological purge of our government’s personnel, records, budget, and data, complete with watchwords (like “women”) and loyalty tests.

WillPostForFood 2y ago

[flagged]

wholinator2 2y ago
Well cult this, cult that. What i care about is the wellbeing of the citizens. Who is being helped by erasing "trans gender idealogy nonsense"? Give me specifics about how certain people are being tangibly helped. Otherwise it's just more idealogy. It reminds me about how removing abortion rights was about "freedom of religion", who's freedom and what religion? I need examples of actual tangible assistance that has been gained by this. As of current it just sounds like certain people are mad that other people exist. We can talk about the sports issue, the bathroom issue etc. But how many of us have had said issues? How often do these issues occur? Is the resolution in favor of the status quo actually better on the whole if it costs the personal expression of say 10,000 people? 100,000? How many people should be told what to wear and which doctor to see before you are satisfied to have squashed the "idealogy"?
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  I don't want to endorse the right wing version but my own perception of the young people I know is that if you're young and neurodivergent, different or just don't fit in, you will (at least at Ithaca High School) get jumped on by "egg-hatchers" who have an easy but wrong answer to your problems. You still have all your old problems, but now you have new problems. Back in the 1960s parents got worried that their kids turned into hippies, but hippies managed to supply their own drugs and didn't need to get an Rx from a doc.
llamaimperative 2y ago
Can you explain specifically what you think this memo disproves?