15
   

Language and Propaganda - an example

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 04:42 pm
@georgeob1,
This article is old, but I haven't worked in a union job since my college days.
http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp143/

Quote:
The impact of unions on total nonunion wages is almost as large as the impact on total union wages.
The most sweeping advantage for unionized workers is in fringe benefits. Unionized workers are more likely than their nonunionized counterparts to receive paid leave, are approximately 18% to 28% more likely to have employer-provided health insurance, and are 23% to 54% more likely to be in employer-provided pension plans.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 06:58 pm
@layman,
Well Peggy Hubbard was both moving and eloquent, and she certainly highlighted a number of too often ignored issues. Thank you for that layman.

I grew up in a very ethnically segmented area in Detroit in a generation in which if you identified yourself as American, you had to be tough. There were Poles, Italians, Jews, Slovenians, Czechs and Slovaks and Irish in abundance. The Americans were all either Black or Hill Billie’s, as we then called them. We all had ready epithets for each group and the various jokes told about each one were amazingly monotonous in their uniform content (I suspect all the Polack. Paddy, Kike, Dago and Nigger jokes started out two or more millennia ago as jokes told by Egyptians about Assyrians or Mesopotamians.)

For all of that, the American "system" (or lack thereof) for assimilating initially despised minorities is the most successful in the world. Each went through more or less the same pattern of involvement in manual labor, crime, sports, politics, entertainment, then business and the professions. After a few generations the emerging group had gained its self-respect, the (often grudging ) respect of others; added it's bit to the growing composite culture; and by then the differences mattered less and less to all involved.

Slavery and Jim Crow stopped the clock on much of that for African Americans, but despite that a strong family culture developed, often against high odds. The end of that coincided with rapid, large scale population migrations in WWII that likely had some lasting, dislocating effects. In my view progress since then has been slowed chiefly by pathologies associated, oddly, with a combination of White guilt and people of all colors willing to exploit it. This has revealed itself in a growing pattern of patronizing maltreatment of Blacks through programs ostensibly designed to "help" them overcome past difficulties and operated by people who really didn't want to be directly bothered with it. The results were perverse feedback loops in which self-destructive behaviors were rewarded and beneficial ones were ignored. Worse a generation of Blacks were told they would be led out of their situation by others (who rarely showed up), as opposed to having to do it themselves. (I can think of no more effective way of enervating any population than to tell them their situation isn't their fault or responsibility and that someone is coming to help - if they will only vote for him).

My impression is that despite all that, the situation is slowly and steadily improving. The evidence is in a growing Black middle class, which unfortunately is largely invisible to most of us. That evidence is right before our eyes, but one has to look for it to see it. I look, and what I see reminds me of the obvious truth that the difference between black and White folks is skin color - that's about it. Peggy Hubbard in the link layman posted above illustrates that very well. Despite the salty patois, she expressed utterly familiar ideas and wisdom. We do however need to quickly end the distorted feedback and the nutty, insincere politically correct nonsense and patronizing that corrupts and misdirects the energy of young Black people at a critical time in their lives.

Life isn’t fair and never will be. However we do live in a country that puts significant success within the grasp of nearly everyone if they will make the effort. Some starting points are better than others, but we have all learned that necessity is the mother not only of invention but of extraordinary effort and achievement.

Interestingly more and more voices within the African-American community are rising up with a similar message. I had the good fortune to spend some time with one of them, Jason Riley. He’s a member of the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board and appears regularly as a commentator on various news shows. I heard a talk he delivered on this subject entitled “Please Stop Helping Us.” I think the title explains the message.


cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 07:14 pm
@georgeob1,
Here's the stats on welfare recepients by race.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 07:35 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Slavery and Jim Crow stopped the clock on much of that for African Americans, but despite that a strong family culture developed, often against high odds. The end of that coincided with rapid, large scale population migrations in WWII that likely had some lasting, dislocating effects.

In my view progress since then has been slowed chiefly by pathologies associated, oddly, with a combination of White guilt and people of all colors willing to exploit it. This has revealed itself in a growing pattern of patronizing maltreatment of Blacks through programs ostensibly designed to "help" them overcome past difficulties and operated by people who really didn't want to be directly bothered with it.. (I can think of no more effective way of enervating any population than to tell them their situation isn't their fault or responsibility and that someone is coming to help - if they will only vote for him).

...We do however need to quickly end the distorted feedback and the nutty, insincere politically correct nonsense and patronizing that corrupts and misdirects the energy of young Black people at a critical time in their lives...

Interestingly more and more voices within the African-American community are rising up with a similar message....


Nice, eloquent post, George. Blacks aren't stupid, notwithstanding being treated as such by their "benevolent" caretakers of the liberal persuasion, and there are a great number of them who agree with your points. The following video, from about 10 years ago, features just one of many examples. Jason Whitlok has the "temerity" (common sense) to call "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson "terrorists," for reasons he explains in the clip.



georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 08:59 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:

Nice, eloquent post, George. Blacks aren't stupid, notwithstanding being treated as such by their "benevolent" caretakers of the liberal persuasion, and there are a great number of them who agree with your points. The following video, from about 10 years ago, features just one of many examples. Jason Whitlok has the "temerity" (common sense) to call "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson "terrorists," for reasons he explains in the clip.


Thank you. I enjoyed the clip.

Most people aren't stupid, particularly in protecting their self interest. Progressives often fail to understand that, while they are so busy creating their solutions for our problems. I suspect that Ezekiel Emanuel and Jonathan Gruber assumed their rather simplistic tricks in "requiring" that the young and healthy purchase ACA health insurance, heavily larded with stuff they don't need ( birth control on all policies) would surely induce the dummies to sign up, so they could use the surplus funds to subsidize their favored targets. It didn't work, but it takes an "educated idiot" to think it would.

Young sailors aren't stupid either, and I learned quickly that they have an unerring nose for patronizing or phoneyness of any sort from their COs. Straight talk and no BS was the only way. Interestingly in really challenging operations requiring improvisation in dealing with totally unfamiliar conditions most of the really useful innovations came, not from the officers, but spontaneously from the kids (in this case) on the flight deck (of an aircraft carrier). I suspect that is likely analogous to your observations. The sad thing here is that anyone with any real experience dealing with people already knows this. We need seasoned leaders, not hot house flowers who think they know ( = cheese eaters ??).
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  3  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 11:16 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote georgeob1:
Quote:
Association and cauasation are not the same thing. The major growth of American industrialization (and that of other countries as well) was the real driver for the rise in living standards in this country.

Of course. But with that industrialization came the advent of big money which could crush the individual worker and fix prices. Workers who got paid almost nothing on payday because they were forced to buy from the overpriced company store as a condition of their employment. The unions gave these workers a much needed voice to balance out this concentration of power among the wealthy-oops, I guess I'm just getting too far into "class warfare" for your liking, george.

Quote georgeob1:
Quote:
I believe you should get better informed about the history of labor unions, partiucularly the UAW in the early 20th century...

How far back do you want to go? The Ku Klux Klan was an acceptable organization in the 1920s and 30s. But the unions changed with the times. Remember, Martin Luther King got killed supporting a sanitation worker's strike. As King himself said in a speech to the AFL-CIO:
Negroes are almost entirely a working people. [...] Our needs are identical with labor's needs: decent wages, fair working conditions, livable housing, old-age security, health and welfare measures, conditions in which families can grow, have education for their children and respect in the community. That is why Negroes support labor's demands and fight laws which curb labor. That is why the labor-hater and labor-baiter is virtually always a twin-headed creature, spewing anti-Negro epithets from one mouth and anti-labor propaganda from the other mouth.

In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as "right to work." It is a law to rob us of our civil rights and job rights. It is supported by Southern segregationists who are trying to keep us from achieving our civil rights and our right of equal job opportunity. Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone. [...] Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights. We do not intend to let them do this to us. We demand this fraud be stopped. Our weapon is our vote.

Indeed, today the black worker is 27% more likely to belong to a union than other workers, and his/her median weekly pay will be 30% higher than a nonunion black worker. Unions have opened up the middle class to black America, just as they first did to the rest of America in the early part of the 20th Century.

And we see what happens when unions decline: Not only the top 1% gets a proportionally greater share of the nation's wealth, but even the top tenth of one percent end up grabbing even more of the nation's largesse. Unions have been the most important factor holding the top thousandth of the population from taking even more, and it is no small surprise that the unions have been targeted by these people. Unions didn't start the class war-the people who want to destroy unions did that.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 06:53 am
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Support of Yiannopoulos is truly concerning.

I'll be surprised if I ever find anything positive to say about someone who will praise Yiannopoulos.
Yeah, I know. He's a repugnant dude and the celebration/support of him is scary. It's not just what he says but the increasingly common elevation of individuals like him who capture media attention through projecting some of our worst human characteristics - because there's money to be made. It is no leap at all from Coulter to this guy.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 07:07 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
The fact is the urgency of action and the primacy of anthromorphic causes for the warming are indeed subjects of acknowledged uncertainty and validity among scientists. His beliefs are not heresy.

Uncertainty, of course. As with many specific steps that led from Australopithicus to Sapiens. As with most everything in the world we try to properly grasp. But some level of uncertainty re the exact nature of our connection with Lucy does not entail a conclusion that young earth creationism is a worthy thesis equal to the story that modern sciences tell us.

Your formulation seems to be based on a claim or premise that the scientific community is something like 50/50 on AGW causes and consequences. You know that's not true. Or maybe your wish to portray the existing large difference in scientific consensus as bogus regardless of what, say, 85% of involved scientists worldwide are saying. Either way, you end up in a very odd place.
layman
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 07:49 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

our worst human characteristics .


Like what? Homosexuality? Conservatism?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 08:48 am
I posted this on another thread but it is acutely relevant here.

If you read anything today, read this Margaret Sullivan piece.
Quote:
The post-truth world of the Trump administration is scarier than you think
...On live radio Wednesday morning, Scottie Nell Hughes sounded breezy as she drove a stake into the heart of knowable reality:

“There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore, of facts,” she declared on “The Diane Rehm Show” on Wednesday.

Hughes, a frequent surrogate for President-elect Donald Trump and a paid commentator for CNN during the campaign, kept on defending that assertion at length, though not with much clarity of expression. Rehm had pressed her about Trump’s recent evidence-free assertion on Twitter that he, not Hillary Clinton, would have won the popular vote if millions of immigrants had not voted illegally.

...What matters now, Hughes argued, is not whether his fraud claim is true. No, what matters is who believes it.

“Mr. Trump’s tweet, amongst a certain crowd, a large — a large part of the population, are truth. When he says that millions of people illegally voted, he has some — in his — amongst him and his supporters, and people believe they have facts to back that up. Those that do not like Mr. Trump, they say that those are lies, and there’s no facts to back it up.” What matters now, Hughes argued, is not whether his fraud claim is true. No, what matters is who believes it.

“Mr. Trump’s tweet, amongst a certain crowd, a large — a large part of the population, are truth. When he says that millions of people illegally voted, he has some — in his — amongst him and his supporters, and people believe they have facts to back that up. Those that do not like Mr. Trump, they say that those are lies, and there’s no facts to back it up.”
Propaganda, properly understood, always seeks to falsely portray the real world
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:39 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

I posted this on another thread but it is acutely relevant here.

If you read anything today, read this Margaret Sullivan piece.


The "piece" you posted here was from a Washington Post reported (a famously dispassionate source). It claimed to be a report of Nell Hughes words, but that turns out to be a deception. It was instead Margaret Sullivan's partisan interpretation of Hughes' words, accompanyied by an essay by Sullivan on the evils of propaganda she doesn't favor.
The underlying issue - namely the possibility of widespread voting by illegals, particularly in the major coastal ciries where Democrat votes were concentratred is itself topical and interesting. A serious inquiry and analysis of acvailable facts on this matter would have been useful and interesting.

Why? Because there is a long history of it in this country by the urban political machines of the Democrat Party. Historians now recognize that the 1960 election was delicered to the Democrats in massive voter fraud in Cook County IL (Chicago) orchestrated by the Mafia. This alone doesn't prove anything, but it does give the question some meaning.

However that is not the world Blatham inhabits. He is interested only in studying (and pasting here) the opinions relative to it of folks who share his views, Oddly he appears to consider this to be real research and reporting of the matter. Instead he is merely shuffling the propaganda pieces of the viewpoints he favors. That is, of course, his right. However he appears to earnestly wish us all to recognize him as performing some form of intellectual analysis. In fact it is neither analysis nor intellectual: it is merely pretense and propaganda.
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:48 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
However that is not the world Blatham inhabits. He is interested only in studying (and pasting here) the opinions relative to it of folks who share his views, Oddly he appears to consider this to be real research and reporting of the matter. Instead he is merely shuffling the propaganda pieces of the viewpoints he favors. That is, of course, his right. However he appears to earnestly wish us all to recognize him as performing some form of intellectual analysis. In fact it is neither analysis nor intellectual: it is merely pretense and propaganda.


Exactly.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 12:00 pm
Do you folks think you could try responding without making it about each other?

_______

there's the rule stuff

Quote:
8) No personal attacks

No personal attacks on other members. Heated arguments are okay; mudslinging and calling each other names is not.

It’s not okay when done in response to attacks on you or others either; please just report and downvote the offending comment instead. (If you feel provoked by offending comments, you can also use the "ignore user" function.) Creating topics specifically to criticize or mock another individual member is definitely not okay. Neither are specific or credible threats to other members.

9) No personal arguments ad nauseum

If a personal dispute between members drags on and on and gets in the way of others being able to discuss a topic (or crosses from topic to topic) members may be suspended.


___

and then there's it's just ******* annoying trying to read around the personal ****

I'm thumbing down posts I find mostly useful/interesting because of the personal stuff larded through it
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 12:03 pm
@georgeob1,
this.
perfect example.
great/interesting post til you get to the final paragraph
so unneeded
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 12:25 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
so unneeded

Yup. Incivility is an impediment. Where posts forward such a tone, I just don't bother with them.

Re the post-truth aspect of what's going on right now and is being justified by various Trump spokespersons (see examples noted above) let's note that where facts are denied, then no one is guilty of lying. This ain't a good thing.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 12:28 pm
@ehBeth,
Gee, I sure hope no cheese-eater ever makes any "personal" comments about our president-elect in this forum. Of course they would never do that, so I guess there's no real need to even contemplate the possibility.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 12:56 pm
@ehBeth,
I seriously disagree. Indeed I belive it is sorely needed. Bernie is a smart energetic guy, facile with words and ideas. However he appears to have succumbed to some easy formulas and victories that should be beneath him. Focusing on the journalistic cant of a single political perspective (no mater what it is) is stuff for small minds and inexperienced people . I think (or hope for) better of him.

He is also rather openly contemptuous of those whose prespectives he opposes. Indeed his specialty is in finding vaporous dark but vague conspiracies directing all the poor saps who express views contrary to his own. This is in fact a fairly widespread and observable phenomenon on this site. It is also insulting. You are rather more restsained in your expressions of it, but my impression is that y0u share in it too.

The supposed personal attacks and scorn to which you refer are, and have long been very common and pervasive on this site. The only change here is some are now directed at those who formerly orchestrated them against others. One must in the end be able to take a bit what he dishes out so prodigously.

The fact is I haven't made any attacks on Bernie's character - only comments on very specific behaviors which i'll readily admit expose his chronic distortions of facts and hypocrisy. However, isn't that what serious conversations are all about? It is simply an observable fact that he consistently confuses carefully selected journalistic opinion with fact, and the study of it (to the exclusion of the objective reality itself) as somehow constituting intellectual research and analysis. That is simply folly and, at very best sophistry. His persistence in this in this forum cries out for rebuttal and he is now getting it. That he finds it uncomfortable is understandable His previous victims likely fiound it uncomfortable too.

Bernie now proposes that others use the moderators and the ignore feature to silence voices with messages he doesn't like. What do you think of that? Do you find that admirable as well?






e beneath him.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 01:12 pm
@georgeob1,
I think the choice to ignore some posters is a good one. I use it on a hand full of posters.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 02:06 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Your formulation seems to be based on a claim or premise that the scientific community is something like 50/50 on AGW causes and consequences. You know that's not true. Or maybe your wish to portray the existing large difference in scientific consensus as bogus regardless of what, say, 85% of involved scientists worldwide are saying. Either way, you end up in a very odd place.


That is precisely the argument the Inqisition used against Gallileo.

THe underlying issues are also serious. Technology is developing fast and the prejudices of the AGW community aare obvious and quite unscientific. I'll name a few;
=> nuclear power is neither rewnewable nor a safe option to reduce Co2 emissions. The oppoisite is true on both poihnts.
=> conventional technology for wind and solar power generations are a satisfactory solution and merit huge subsidies to enbsure their widespread use. Both are very expensive and inefficient. The subsidies actually discourage much needed research and innovation.
=> We don't have time to wait for better technologies: we must impose conventional wind & solar solutions now. In fact technology is advancing at a rapid pace, Jusat the natuarl gas/fracking revolution in a decade achieved far more than wind & solar accompanied by enormous government subsidies did in three,


There is much more.
Blickers
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:43 pm
Quote georgeob1:
Quote:
Historians now recognize that the 1960 election was delicered to the Democrats in massive voter fraud in Cook County IL (Chicago) orchestrated by the Mafia.

It is posts like this that make people wonder why you have such a seemingly high reputation on this board, as if you were somebody who isn't just a cut and paster from conservative political blogs. I can assure you, no reputable historian says or thinks that massive voter fraud in Cook County delivered the 1960 election to Kennedy-that is a conservative shibboleth that old time conservatives such as yourself repeat to this very day.

Proof? Here it is. This is the Electoral College vote for 1960:
Kennedy....303
Nixon........219

Number of Electoral Votes in Illinois: 27.

If Illinois goes to Nixon, the Electoral Votes would be:
Kennedy....276
Nixon........246

Kennedy still wins easily.

That's why I can say with assurance that no reputable historian ever said that Kennedy had the election delivered to him by what went on in Cook County. Because in order to be a reputable historian in the first place, you have to be able to look up the number of Electoral Votes in Illinois, and also add.

However, the propagandists you get your information and opinions from have no such requirements.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 06/22/2021 at 09:11:35