Give me a grade-schooler at breakfast and I’ll have this cleared up by lunch: As they haven’t yet learned to look away from the obvious to deny the undeniable. Taking on the entire country by myself is worlds away from what everyone else is doing. If you even understood that much — that would be something.
You could feel insulted — or stop insulting your intelligence for people who don’t give a damn about you.
Wut?
In a culture where even a PhD acts like an imbecile in the face of overtures he doesn’t instantly understand: Conventional methods aren’t gonna put a pinprick through the envelope of intransigence encasing hermetically sealed minds of our times. “Wut?” reflects a society tuning in to people you think are geniuses for telling you what you wanna hear and thinking you’re enlightened for it.
None of these echo chambers are entirely wrong — the problem is that you all think you’re entirely right (on everything). You defend before you consider — which is in gross breach of the very foundation of what you claim to represent. You don’t even allow for debate to breathe enough to understand what you’re disagreeing about — suffocating the conversation with narrative (new and old).
How could you profess a love of facts then blow right by evidence as undeniable as it gets? Below is a graphic that by itself is nothing — but the story behind it is everything (including being central to the Crap is King culture our country has become). That — takes time & effort to understand. But despite me putting it all on a silver platter: You refuse to do any work it takes to understand (while having no qualms about clinging to beliefs that are demonstrably false).
What gives? Not you — not ever!
There’s no willingness to say, “I’m wrong.” I mean, you have to take a 2×4 to these people, basically — to get ’em to, sorta, knock ’em down and admit they were wrong.
That physicist is talking about the people pushing the aluminum tubes fantasy that took us to war.
And I’m talkin’ about you
Even in the face of irrefutable evidence of mathematical certainty (of world-altering consequence, no less) — you blindly defend the indefensible. If you argue in such ways when you have no idea what you’re talking about and couldn’t craft a sound argument on the subject to save your life: Just how clear-eyed could you be on matters a far cry from concrete? On top of this behavior being egregiously out of line with the principles you preach:
What entirely escapes you is that being glued to your win-at-all-costs attitude when you’re wrong:
Cripples your case when you’re clearly in the right.
I don’t have that problem — as I happily belong to an infinitesimal minority that feels we’re not informed enough to have all the answers to every controversial issue in America. We don’t have a monopoly on virtue — and don’t want one. We’re not only willing to change our minds, we welcome it — and appreciate those who correct us.
This nation has no such notion
How can you expect anyone to admit when they’re wrong if you won’t? And every time you allow emotion to run roughshod over reason, you further calcify habits at the other end of the spectrum from these:
Rather than assert that all opinions are equal, students in seminar learn to judge opinions on the basis of the reasons given for those opinions.
Nobody ever had to explain that to me. I’m sure you all feel the same:
And yet here we are
The smorgasbord of sub-cultures has created another dimension of delusion in America — hardening minds not broadening them. The commentary in these communities speaks volumes about social media and the state of society:
Habitually hailing high praise for purveyors of virtue — virtues that vanish the second they’re called to put them to the test.
I’m sure it’s intoxicating to amass a following and feel like you’re making a difference. But I’m gonna weigh your impact partly as a reflection of your community: How people behave — not what they believe.
If you can’t get that right, I don’t care how big your following gets — you’re taking this nation nowhere. Not in the right direction, anyway. Fanatical followers of pundits act like these people are some of the greatest minds to ever live. We’ve become a culture that wildly exaggerates on everything: Gushing with over-the-top praise or seething with over-the-top scorn. And gain you get in the moment is the only measurement that matters.
I’ve always been partial to the bigger picture — I’m old-fashioned that way:
In reference to its opening image on that post, I wrote the following:
Half the country is with me on this — and I just lost the other half. Had I started with the image below — it would be the opposite half.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Taking on the entire country is apples & oranges as it gets when compared to the transactional nature of news and social-media norms. How do you convey fair-mindedness in a culture that instantly supports or scorns on lickety–split perception alone? You can rattle off personalities you perceive as fair-minded, no doubt. But how many of you have dealt with any of ’em one-on-one? And of that group, how many have put their principles to the test on matters practically woven into their DNA?
Stick around — and you’ll see how some household names of the fair-minded behaved in the face of irrefutable fact.
So I will ask you once again . . .
How do you expose the whole charade — when bona fide fair-mindedness is not welcome here?
In the face of this
You think this . . .
Rises to the standards of what you think these people represent? keep in mind — I contacted Elder as a fan at the time of the following exchange. I’ve had my moments of having some hope in people who showed some promise, but I don’t hold onto that faith once they reveal who they really are.
This isn’t about not being perfect — it’s about flagrantly failing to be authentic.
As for the Obama element of this exchange: I say this as someone who voted for him in 2008. I gave him a shot even though I knew he wouldn’t be the candidate he claimed. How did I know that? Because past is prologue — and someone without a record of risk is not a catalyst for change. But I sure didn’t know he was gonna blow it as big as he did, and I don’t reward people for poor performance and dishonesty.
I’m old-fashioned that way too.
And yet here we are
20 years later . . .
And now, even now: The cat . . . TOTALLY out of the BAG!
then there’s this guy
Who once called my writing “brilliant” and was “blown away” by this site and signed up. Alas, he wasn’t too keen on the truth when I took his hero to task.
Back to Loury later
But over and over again, it’s the same story that prevents the truth from being accepted by those who dependably deny it (including the truth that Larry & Loury have to tell). Where they’re wildly wrong doesn’t change where they’re right.
I’m finding it nearly impossible to find people who understand that anymore.
People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results. They choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar — and I’m not and never have been familiar.
— Michael Burry, The Big Short
Countless people would instantly fire back to dispute that claim about their choice in authority, but exactly zero could craft a sound argument to back it up. How do I know that? Because the ones who instantly replied have an insatiable appetite for:
Affirmation independent of all findings
— Peck borrowing from Buber
They sling assumptions first and never ask questions later.
We’re not talking about your love of talking about your love affair with facts — we’re talking about having a history of objective scrutiny that shows your commitment. And for people who flaunt their love for facts — you sure have a helluva lot of hate for irrefutable facts that fly in the face of your calcified convictions.
What is the intent of the opening imagery and how does it tie into the title of this post? I’d have to investigate before making assumptions about anything. I’m old-fashioned that way. And I’m the opposite of most of America — as I’m intrigued by the unfamiliar.
What you blow right by would be impossible for me to ignore.
For telling undeniable truth that takes both parties to task (on matters of mathematical certainty, no less): I’ve been practically spit on for following principles those same people promote on a daily basis.
You’ve probably heard of yellowcake. How about uranium hexafluoride?
Does calling someone a “Bush hater” strike you as a valid counter to that question? Never mind this story goes straight to the top with who’s in the White House right now — on very specific culpability to boot.
How so? How I’d love to live in a world where you’d ask not out of party-line pursuits — but because it’s on the trail to the truth.
But I’m not and never have been familiar . . .
You can’t even imagine the mountain of spectacularly stupid & childish shit I’ve seen for 20 years on this topic. And social media just turbocharged the torturing of truth without mercy.
A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on
That quote’s been around in various forms for over 300 years (evidently the original being from 1710):
Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect.
I know the feeling — all too well
If falsehood could fly so fast a few hundred years ago — imagine the lightning-fast lies solidified by a culture craving attention & affirmation with ease:
That long ago lost its way even on the idea of acting your age.
Adulthood is about spending the time to think before talking . . . Adulthood is about controlling our emotions, learning to take a deep breath and modulating our moments of anger or frustration.
I don’t know how people find the path of least resistance so satisfying — as I love the demands of difficulty and discernment. To not step up my game in the midst of opportunity or challenge:
Would be tantamount to treason upon my very existence.
This nation has no such notion
America wallows in a fantasyland of circular certitude & self-congratulations — where denying the obvious has become a duty to defend your tribe.
Hiding behind your force field of fallacy:
You win from the start and even more at the end — reinforced by the fellowship of friends cemented in the same standards. No amount of irrefutable evidence & expertise can convince you of anything in your race for satisfaction and insatiable appetite for glorifying those who give it to you.
Anything Goes on social media
Or as I coined it
Where you can promote principles in one breath and abandon them the next. And get away with it with ease:
Because you’ve got friends
The individual believer must have social support. It is unlikely that one isolated believer could withstand the kind of disconfirming evidence we have specified. If, however, the believer is a member of a group of convinced persons who can support one another, we would expect the belief to be maintained and the believers to attempt to proselyte or to persuade nonmembers that the belief is correct.
These five conditions specify the circumstances under which increased proselyting would be expected to follow disconfirmation.
— When Prophecy Fails
I did the doc to address that behavior that’s rampant across-the-board, but in the last 2 years — I’ve seen savagery beyond anything that inspired it: All in defense of one man with a cult-like following unlike anything I’ve ever seen.
As I’ve been in the trenches battling hermetically sealed minds for decades, that’s saying something.
His disciples see him as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes — never mind his history being wildly out of sync with his sanctimonious claims. This crowd defends him before they even know what the subject matter is — and issue unconscionable excuses once they do.
I’m even assailed on things we agree on, because they instantly assume I’m out to discredit him on everything. And this story is a conduit through which to tell a larger story: Driven by an idea that could put us on a path to a new kind of story.
There’s a faction for everybody to belong — except me, because I don’t want to and never have. What I want is for America to find her way back to something in the realm of sanity — and I’ve got a foolproof plan for far beyond that.
All ya gotta do — is do what you say you do.
And my idea is a framework for debate that boxes you in to do exactly that. And believe it or not, it banks on the barriers to problem solving to start solving some. You’re all trying to plow through problems when you should be going around them. Ray Liotta put it best in Copland:
You don’t drive down Broadway to get to Broadway. You move diagonal . . . you jag
We could have worked wonders with my doc had you listened to me 9 years ago. But through the years of you showing me nothing but contempt for the truth on matters you know nothing about and proudly refuse to learn:
I found another way — and now we can work even more wonders.
How do we make people realize they’ve been lied to? You have to knock down one small pillar that’s easier to reach.
The people who Tweeted those lines I combined from a conversation I came across — had no idea that they perfectly captured the principle of my Clear the Clutter plan.
I’ve got the perfect pillar
If you want to start solving problems, first you need to clear the clutter that’s crippled this country. To do that, you don’t go after everything, you go after one thing that ties to everything:
And you do it by holding one man to his own standards.
You’re all fighting the almost impenetrable forces of human nature and predictably getting nowhere. My idea uses self-interest to serve the truth — revealing reality in a way that’s never been done before.
To the uneducated, abstract ideas are unfamiliar; so is the detachment that is necessary to discover a truth out of one’s own knowledge and mental effort. The uneducated person views life in an intensely personal way — he knows only what he sees, hears or touches and what he is told by friends. As the unknown sage puts it, “Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.”
But more than ever, even the most educated minds act in an uneducated manner in service of their interests:
And do catastrophic damage by doing so.
Echo chambers are killing our culture — and yet within each one are components of concerns that offer invaluable truth. That should be honored even if they’re full of shit on everything else. You’re using their history of hypocrisy to ignore your own:
All of America is pulling that stunt every single day:
Allow me to show you how it’s done:
Geraldine Ferraro and Rush are in opposite camps, and yet she said essentially the same thing he did:
If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.
Every word of her statement is true — but that didn’t matter one bit to those who bombarded her with “vicious e-mail messages accusing her of racism.”
Utterly Ridiculous
And I say that as someone who voted for Obama in 2008. I gave Romney a shot in the second round. I just have this old-fashioned idea about not rewarding people who are dishonest and don’t do a good job.
This nation has no such notion.
That Rush did more damage to America than maybe anyone in history — has no bearing on the truth when he told it. My mind is not for sale — so I can see what’s what: No matter what I think of the source.
Fighting the problems of today with conventional tactics is colossally counterproductive, dangerous, and even deadly. But almost everyone is operating on faith-based belief that their efforts will prevail:
Bolstered by the fact that they’ve achieved some fashion of success.
I suggest you reconsider
This bit about Coleman Hughes captures the principle upon which my site and documentary were founded:
[Coleman] Hughes says he formerly accepted the premise of Black Lives Matter — that, in his words, “racist cops are killing unarmed black people” — but now believes that this premise does not survive scrutiny once factors other than race are taken into account.
You’re all ignoring a mountain of other factors to keep calcified beliefs that cannot survive scrutiny once you account for information you refuse to consider.
You won’t like my idea . . .
But here’s the deal — your opposition won’t either. And who knows, you might learn to love embracing challenge, changing your mind, and the fruits from demanding across-the-board accountability.
This — is not that
This — is Broadcasting Your Beliefs About That
I don’t roll that way
You can’t seem to comprehend that I don’t care what damage the truth inflicts upon politicians of any brand. I have this crazy idea that across-the-board accountability is always in the best interests of the nation.
As for my frustration — I have this thing about people who regurgitate nonsense in the face of overwhelming evidence that counters their baseless beliefs.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
Pay no mind to how many times we go backwards by the means in which you move forward. America is in perennial pursuit of ideologies — warfare waged with:
opinions lightly adopted but firmly held . . . forged from a combination of ignorance, dishonesty, and fashion
— Theodore Dalrymple, Life at the Bottom
The Fair-Minded Fellows
An entire industry of organizations plastering websites with principles pledged by liars and hypocrites hired to help fix problems they helped create and perpetuate:
With curiously one-sided ways running non-partisan think tanks that never think things through.
In fairness to F.A.I.R. — there are far-worse culprits across these clans. I’m only using this illustration because it’s specific to this story (and because of the egregious hypocrisy involved). I’m not making a generalization about their entire organization or commenting on the quality of the work.
But I’ve yet to find a single organization or prominent pundit that’s the genuine article. And I’ve been around!
Speaking of Coleman Hughes
According to Coleman (a member of F.A.I.R’s board of advisors):
[T]he basic premise of Black Lives Matter — that racist cops are killing unarmed black people—is false. There was a time when I believed it. . . . . My opinion has slowly changed. . . .
Two things changed my mind: stories and data.
— Stories and Data: Reflections on race, riots, and police
Stories and data — works for me!
How do you think Hughes would handle his hero flagrantly ignoring stories and data (of mathematical certainty, no less):
On the biggest and most costly lie in modern history?
A helluva lot better than the savagery I’ve seen — no doubt. But would he abide by F.A.I.R’s Pro-Human Pledge of Fairness, Understanding, and Humanity? If he didn’t follow through on the principles he pledged to live by — what would that say about him? And if you’re part of that savagery I’ve seen — what does that say about you?
Stories and data . . .
Anyone entering this discussion with sincerity — would come away realizing that there is no debate and there never was.
They just made it up
Funny thing about information
It can seem incoherent when you don’t take any of it into account.
Would you browse a textbook then blame the teacher for your failure to understand the material? If you’re not gonna watch clips at the crux of the story, what’s the point? That the decline of America over the last 30 years in the Gutter Games of Government — doesn’t unfold for standard scrolling with ease, is not a flaw in my argument and array of illustrations:
It’s a flaw in your willingness to work through it — absorbing each building block of information your brain is well-equipped to handle.
Or at least it used to be before information became so funneled in a fashion to your liking — you don’t even know what to do with anything that isn’t. It astounds me that wading through unfamiliar territory on this site is somehow seen as complicated as quantum physics.
I assure you
What it took to acquire this information was infinitely more demanding than anything you face here — let alone the complexities in exposing systematic deception at the core of our country’s ills.
One glance at the doc imagery and I’d know:
This guy’s not f#@%*!` around!
You’d know that . . .
If you’re weren’t so fond of the familiar (or decided it’s time to step outside your comfort zone and do what you say do you). Do that — and you’ll be amazed by what a new set of eyes will see tomorrow.
Or Not . . .
I offered you overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that exhaustively exposes the biggest and most costly lie in modern history — taking both parties to task for it (on that issue and then some): You refused to even glance at the doc while deriding my efforts with pleasure.
You won’t consider 160 seconds, let alone 160 minutes.
You think I wanted to chop up my doc into clips to accommodate America’s attention span?
But still that wasn’t enough. I do all the work, you do nothing and consider nothing — then blame me for failing to convince you. In slinging your insults, you’re insulting your intelligence far more than you’re insulting me (not to mention being in gross breach of those precious principles you promote).
So with this site I tried another approach: Interweaving clips in conjunction with the behavior of those who slavishly defend the indefensible. The doc is structured to the hilt in 7 segments averaging 24 minutes apiece — so it’s much easier to digest.
But circular certitude is quite the convenient cop-out:
Allowing you to blow off the doc, dish your derision on issues you’re wildly unqualified on — then complain how you can’t follow the format of a site that wouldn’t be needed if you simply watched the doc in the first place. And to top it all off — you go right back to broadcasting beliefs you instantly abandoned:
Anything Goes for apologists trying to preserve what they perceive. I know their Rolodex of Ridicule rabbit-hole routine — all too well:
And Now for the Weather . . .
Or Not . . .
Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
Stirring Defense
And by the way: I beat the hell out of Democrats and I don’t need childish lingo like “Democrat Party” to do it. Just what do you think such language is designed to do? It’s Indoctrination 101. Criticize ’em all day long (I don’t care — as long as it’s on the merits).
But Jesus, just act your age!
If I came across someone so clearly in command of this material — I wouldn’t give a f#$k about format. They could write it down on napkins and I’d roll with it. I don’t need somebody to babysit me with the just the right formula for me to carefully consider something. I’m happy to put some time and effort into working it out on my own.
And for anything requiring clarification — I’d ask questions.
I’m old-fashioned that way too
Einstein borrowed from the one below:
The worth of man lies not in the truth which he possesses, or believes that he possesses, but in the honest endeavor which he puts forth to secure that truth; for not by the possession of, but by the search after, truth, are his powers enlarged, wherein, alone, consists his ever-increasing perfection. Possession fosters content, indolence, and pride.
— Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
Speaking of the moon
I’d suggest heading on back to that backwater school, Purdue, for a little more indoctrination, er, I mean education.
“BACKWATER SCHOOL“
To call the Cradle of Astronauts “backwater”
Is award-worthy for asinine statements.
The “arguments” of “Expert” By Association — taking cue from his kin on Rolodex of Ridicule:
- “You use words like honor, courage and commitment as punch lines at liberal cocktail parties” — ripping off A Few Good Men and thinking I wouldn’t notice
- The “Get help!” routine
- “Academia”
- “I’ve stood on the wall — have you?” — Jesus, why not toss in “You weep for Santiago” while you’re at it?
What does any of THAT have to do with the price of tea in China — or THIS?
Out of 31 tubes in subsequent testing, only one was successfully spun to 90,000 RPM for 65 minutes — which the C.I.A. seized on as evidence in their favor.
One D.O.E. analyst offered a superb analogy of that contorted conclusion: “Running your car up to 6,500 RPM briefly does not prove that you can run your car at 6,500 RPM cross country. It just doesn’t. Your car’s not going to make it.”
In an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter, these guys were playing horseshoes with centrifuge physics.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
That sounds worthy of consideration — don’t ya think?
Not to Sowell’s camp
And their kin who came before them:
It is as though with some people — those who most avidly embrace the “we are right” view — have minds that are closed from the very get-go, and they are entirely incapable of opening them, even just a crack.
There is no curiosity in them. There are no questions in their minds. There are no “what ifs?” or “maybes.”
— Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Going for Gold in the Gutter Games of Government
All to glorify themselves and their beloved Sowell they wanna put on Mount Rushmore. These people pull off spectacular feats of psychological gymnastics to ignore his regurgitated garbage and glaringly obvious history of hypocrisy.
Facts Over Feelings Parade
This crowd thinks they’re part of some revolution in reason by ceaselessly Tweeting the tenets of Thomas Sowell. And yet the second I scrutinize your “National Treasure” on evidence you know nothing about:
Those precious virtues you peddle in the Facts Over Feelings Parade — are rolled right over with your feelings.
Behold my “hatred” of Thomas Sowell:
How do you reconcile that with this?
And what happened to all this? . . .
Following Facts Where They Lead
“Said so and so”? . . . that’s one helluva trip you took there, Mr. Sowell.
Stirring Defense!
About that “mudslinging” . . .
truth verifiable from experience or observation
If you have a history of hypocrisy and lying — you are a hypocrite and a liar. If you don’t like being called those things, don’t do those things. But so typical of the times — nothing has meaning anymore.
Calling criticism “mudslinging” is just somethin’ to say to escape scrutiny.
And the irony is:
I’ve received almost nothing but mudslinging for decades — by people who cry foul with counterfeit claims on what they do for real. And let’s face it: You need it to be mudslinging, because if it’s not — your binary beliefs are gonna fall apart.
Putting aside Bill Cosby’s fall from grace . . .
He was a universal icon of goodness growing up. In just this 5-second scene from Picture Pages — a parallel can be drawn to everything I advocate on this site:
The.Deal.Is.That.We.Connect.These.Dots . . .
You see
Imagine!
[W]e must accept responsibility for a problem before we can solve it
— M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled
In a nation that incessantly blames and complains (seemingly for sport) — no one’s taking responsibility for anything. The ever-rising ocean of partisan pettiness is gluttony under the guise of concern.
What would you call untold millions marching to a Twitter-rage parade on WMD — dishing on the deaths of Rumsfeld and Powell (and whatever anniversary marks the moment):
But too lazy to take the time to look at what we can do about it. Of course, that would require holding their own accountable as well:
So there’s that — and this . . .
The WMD Brigade
Happy 20th Anniversary!
Seize the day to be jacked up on fuel to fire off your fury and excuses in a nation that never learns: But loves to light it up in lip service to virtues. Ever-so bold behind force fields of fallacy that butcher those “beliefs.“
It’s all a cesspool of certitude no matter what the topic or team. There’s only an infinitesimal fraction of people out there who choose authority wisely.
And that’s a fact
truth verifiable from experience or observation
The Social Dilemma Division
A rare response of reasonableness on Twitter (or anywhere, for that matter):
Your documentary was ahead of its time
Six years ahead of The Social Dilemma — which was “viewed in 38,000,000 homes within the first 28 days of release.” Educational and enjoyable — but accomplished absolutely nothing. I could have told ’em that before they wrote one word.
Then again
Do these people really wanna solve problems anyway? Do you?
Man is at least as much a problem-creating as a problem-solving animal. Better a crisis than the permanent boredom of meaninglessness.
— Life at the Bottom
Conventional efforts with no specificity that’s personal — don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell at making a dent in today’s trench warfare between armies of unreachables.
How many zeros you think would drop off that number if their doc drilled into all of America?
With Surgical Specificity That Cuts to the Bone:
Ah, the “Have you seen The Social Dilemma?” crowd:
Viewed in 38,000,000 homes within the first 28 days of release
So why don’t ya Tweet about it some more — because surely the reason it didn’t work is insufficient exposure for a documentary damn near everyone in America knows about. If you advertise your concerns enough — surely that’ll magically make a dent someday. And if it doesn’t, at least you got your fix for feeling like you’re participating in addressing a problem you’re perpetuating by the very nature in which you participate.
All day every day
By all means, Tweet your message — but the idea to act on those concerns when an opportunity comes along to do so. Searching “Social Dilemma” delivers no shortage of concern about the state of society — but ask ’em to do anything to address those concerns that takes time & effort to think it through . . .
But would work precisely because it demands something of your mind:
Perhaps the single most lucid, succinct, and profoundly terrifying analysis of social media ever created for mass consumption.
— IndieWire
It’s not that difficult to be succinct when you deliver no detail that hits home — and hard! Same goes for lucid when the line is linear. On the title alone: If I came across this and hadn’t done my homework:
My first thought would be . . .
I must be missing something pretty big . . .
you have other ideas:
Button your lip and don’t let the shield slip
Take a fresh grip on your bulletproof mask
And if they try to break down your disguise with their questions
You can hide hide hide behind Paranoid Eyes
In the face of that
All of the Above & Below
This — is your answer?
Coming this winter, the updated Death of Expertise . . .
I’m a big fan of the book: Just not of fanfare for what predictably failed and will again.
The Death of Expertise Division
Winter is coming
And so is an updated & expanded edition of The Death of Expertise. When I saw Tom Nichols touting his upcoming book in a Tweet, I had to laugh — as the tragedy of it all is so comical anymore.
Looking forward to this, Tom. Like Serling, you were definitely ahead of the curve. I’ve referred to this book repeatedly since it first came out, so the idea of an updated version sounds very appealing.
No, he wasn’t — I was
3 years ahead of his excellent book that accomplished exactly what Social Dilemma did (and everything else). I was going to begin by writing, “I bought that book the year it came out,” but I wanted to verify just to make sure:
That I took a moment to confirm what I was damn near certain of — should tell you something all by itself (so should the fact that I was writing about the same issues long before his book came out). Tom Nichols was tracking the same tactic I have for 20 years:
The gutting of “agree to disagree.”
I’ve written a lot on the sickening slop of applying “agree to disagree” without any regard for its original intent. But nothing tops Tom’s “conversational fire extinguisher” for a one-liner to call this bullshit what it is:
No matter what the subject, the argument always goes down the drain of an enraged ego and ends with minds unchanged, sometimes with professional relationships or even friendships damaged. Instead of arguing, experts today are supposed to accept such disagreements as, at worst, an honest difference of opinion.
We are supposed to “agree to disagree,” a phrase now used indiscriminately as little more than a conversational fire extinguisher. And if we insist that not everything is a matter of opinion, that some things are right and others are wrong . . . well, then we’re just being jerks, apparently.
Oh yeah, I know the routine — all too well!
As I said in my documentary (3 years before his book came out) — and other writings long before that:
We have become a society of spin doctors who manipulate language anytime it suits our needs. Nowadays you can “agree to disagree” about subject matter that you know absolutely nothing about. Being smoothly smug is now considered civil — never mind the notion of genuine courtesy that comes with the willingness to be wrong. . . .
We begin and end our conversations believing that we’re right– shunning the discipline it takes to be correct. I think the following sheds light on how we created a culture that thrives on eradicating reason anytime we perceive a threat to our interests.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act V
A go-to tactic of the doubt-free is to make damn sure the debate never reaches the merits of the matter. I’ve seen highly intelligent people derail discussions by claiming that:
Everything’s just an opinion!
Nobody really believes that — it’s just a cop-out. And if you call ‘em on it, they fall back on Old Faithful — “agree to disagree.” How this hijacked-for-hackery catchphrase caught on over the years can be charted with the times:
Where things that once meant something, now mean nothing.
Clearly you think my line of thinking is incorrect and I think yours is wrong also so I would have to say this is one of the spots where agreeing to disagree is appropriate. I know you don’t believe in that but I’m sure it’s safe to say that you aren’t going to change your mind on . . . and neither am I, BUT THAT IS Ok!
— 2011 exchange with a friend
The minimum standard for a “line of thinking” — is to do some thinking. You cannot counter with nothing and say it’s something. AudioEnglish.org does a nice job of defining “line of thinking”:
The process of using your mind to consider something carefully
People love to plug “nobody’s perfect”:
And yet so many of ’em proudly refuse to be corrected on anything. The incorrigible in that camp act like they’re never wrong, never rude, never foolish, never over-the-top, never unreasonable, and never insulting. In the spirit of “only guilty man in Shawshank” — I’ve been all of those things at one time or another.
If you wanna gauge someone’s commitment to doing right by their fellow man — ask ’em how many times they didn’t.
This nation has no such notion
And once again, Tom can’t be topped on capturing this crap:
The United States is now a country obsessed with the worship of its own ignorance. . . . [W]e’re proud of not knowing things. Americans have reached a point where ignorance, especially of anything related to public policy, is an actual virtue. To reject the advice of experts is to assert autonomy, a way for Americans to insulate their increasingly fragile egos from ever being told they’re wrong about anything.
It is a new Declaration of Independence: no longer do we hold these truths to be self-evident, we hold all truths to be self-evident, even the ones that aren’t true. All things are knowable and every opinion on any subject is as good as any other.
We no longer have those principled and informed arguments. The foundational knowledge of the average American is now so low that it has crashed through the floor of “uninformed,” passed “misinformed” on the way down, and is now plummeting to “aggressively wrong.” People don’t just believe dumb things; they actively resist further learning rather than let go of those beliefs.
I was not alive in the Middle Ages, so I cannot say it is unprecedented, but within my living memory I’ve never seen anything like it.
— The Death of Expertise
And what’ve you’ve seen pales in comparison to what I’ve seen. I gave Tom his due. Now it’s time to explain the problem he miserably fails to see in his success (along with everyone else):
@Rare_Thoughts — Indeed . . .
By the way, that friend once told his wife before meeting me: “Rick’s the most honest guy you’ll ever meet.” I had only seen him a couple of times since high school, and that is what he remembered most. How quickly they forget when their interests are on the line.
Another friend and former colleague once said:
Rick’s the type of guy who would lose his job on principle
— CH (circa 2007)
I damn near burned my career on it, but I still came out ahead. The bigger picture is a beautiful thing: As your interests can be served in ways you wouldn’t have imagined had you gotten what you wanted. To be sure, I’ve paid a price for my principles many times over — but the gains far outweigh the loss.
If you can’t see how that applies to America — I don’t know what to tell ya.
In a blurb on yet another book on cognitive dissonance, a science-fiction writer wrote:
[The author] has seen the future
If he had, he’d know his book has no chance of achieving its aims. On what basis would you believe that another garden-variety book, conference, project, study, report, or podcast — would put a pinprick in the atmosphere of absurdity suffocating the country? Conventional methods have repeatedly failed. Why would you believe next time will be any different?
But integrate those same tools into an unconventional framework for honest debate — and it will be different.
When a deservingly popular book didn’t make a dent in 7 years (and everything’s gotten worse to boot): I fail to understand your excitement for an expanded edition doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of making a dent either.
The ultimate irony is he’d sell a ton more books with what I have in mind. Do you wanna sell books or solve problems? Hear me out and you can do both.
At this rate, we could have made it an annual series
OR
Reconsider your success in another predictable failure. I’m sure it’ll sell and that it’s great work — but it’s not going to work. Hear me out on how my idea will work — and I don’t even need it to sell.
My idea is simple:
Cutting through our Crap is King culture to get you to see it — is not.
Where infantile insults are celebrated
The doubt-free who don’t do their homework are the experts.
Those who belittle and outright reject correction — are the righteous and wise. The ones with courage to admit when they’re wrong — are the weak. Tireless dedication is mercilessly mocked — while intellectual laziness is esteemed.
Original thinking and uniqueness are bashed — while conforming to the trite is trumpeted. Depth is discarded with disdain — while shallowness is embraced with love.
The honest & sincere are shunned — while manipulators & liars are welcomed with open arms.
This is my story — and if you read it in full, you’ll find it’s part of your story too. You’ve all dealt with the same behavior I have — the difference is that I get it from every direction:
But you know best . . .
And Your March of Folly Mentality Always Has
Like many alternatives, however, it was psychologically impossible. Character is fate, as the Greeks believed. Germans were schooled in winning objectives by force, unschooled in adjustment. They could not bring themselves to forgo aggrandizement even at the risk of defeat.
— Barbara Tuchman
Unschooled in Adjustment
Stockton Rush’s name will never be forgotten for his folly that took 5 lives in a contraption doomed to fail. That same wishful thinking in totally unsuitable material — was held by a CIA/WINPAC analyst named Joe Turner:
Who provided a path to war that cost countless lives, unspeakable damage, and $2.2 trillion.
Never heard of him . . .
I imagine not — in a country that can’t even get this straight:
You can’t have “Compared to What?” without comparing what’s in question. In the aftermath of 9/11 — manipulating matters of mathematical certainty to sell a war in the Middle East:
Is as critical as comparison gets.
If evidence claimed as components to build a nuclear bomb isn’t worthy of consideration, what is? For a Maverick who’s worshipped for following the facts — wouldn’t he take the trail to where they matter most?
As in the marquee claim that manufactured this fraud?
I did — Sowell didn’t
Which one below looks like he’s on point?
All the sarin gas shells in the world would have no bearing on the aluminum tubes and other intel, but loyalists to logical fallacies are not burdened by the inconvenience of FACT.
They will nitpick over pebbles while refusing to even glance at the mountain of evidence that crushes their “convictions.”
— Richard W. Memmer: Act V
For the sake of argument
Let’s say Saddam had full-blown active WMD programs on chemical & biological weapons. The tubes would still be a lie — whether the war would have been justified in that scenario or not.
I’ll go one further: Let’s say he had an enrichment program in operation as well, but that the rotors were carbon fiber — not aluminum.
Once again, the tubes would still be a lie. Getting lucky in finding something you didn’t know about — does not absolve you from a case that was woven out of whole cloth.
By Design
America Remains Mired in the Murky
On an issue involving an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter: What does it say to you that the “debate” was hijacked by 10-second sound bites? Shouldn’t any debate establish what the debate is actually about? What does it say about a country that can’t even establish that much on a matter of this magnitude?
The road to reality is blocked by detours designed to keep you going in circles. Purveyors of poppycock reroute you with narratives that avoid detail like Black Death.
The way out is to start with an inconsistency or two that’s narrow in scope — and take the trail where it leads. To ascertain the truth on any topic: If you’ve got something concrete to go on — that’s your point of entry. By all means, keep the door open in every direction.
But by nailing down the definitive first, it paves a clearer path to all the rest. This country does the exact opposite on everything: Lumping it all together and never even approaching where you should have started in the first place:
The Right wants the Left and the black community to get its act together on matters deeply woven into the fabric of America’s long history of brutality and disgrace:
Slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, murder, decades of civil rights violations, questionable shootings, and so on.
While the Right won’t even look at the material properties of a tube. What’s wrong with that picture — and this one?
Hmm, so the dimensions exactly match the tubes used in Iraq’s history of manufacturing the Nasser-81mm artillery rocket (a reverse-engineered version of the Italian Medusa)
Be quite a coincidence if they weren’t . . .
Ya know, connected
I can’t imagine . . .
A life of so little thirst to not to look into the larger story so clearly implied below — as you breeze on by so you can get back to habitually broadcasting beliefs I live by. For 20 years, I’ve been practically spit on for following principles those same people promote on a daily basis. I did the doc to address such behavior, but in the last two years — I’ve seen savagery beyond anything that inspired it:
And that — is opportunity . . .
What you see in the opening imagery are tools to be used in new ways that will make measurable impact that their approach never will (or anyone following a formulaic approach on the issues of our times). But before we can properly harness those tools for good — you gotta look at the bad and your role in creating it.
If you wanna start solving problems instead of perpetuating them, it’s gotta get ugly.
Or as ol’ Bill perfectly put it:
If I came into this cold
I’d instantly know this guy’s up to something I’ve never seen before — and I’d have to find out what that is. That observation isn’t just about me — it’s about how you observe anything of depth that takes time and effort to digest.
But if you’re telling me the truth in a story chock-full of spelling mistakes and sloppy sentences — I’ll take it. The truth is what is what I’m after — and I don’t care where it comes from, how it looks, or through what delivery mechanism it arrives
I was bored to death by the professor in that World History class at Purdue — so I started flipping through the pages. It was a life-altering moment the second I saw that sculpture. You don’t have to care about art or be uplifted by it — but isn’t there anything that goes off in your mind to wonder:
Hmm, I’ve never seen anything like that before. He’s saying something with it.
That information tells you something about the sophistication of somebody right off the bat. Props mounted on lamps. A motorized turntable (serving a practical and symbolic purpose). Black & white outfits. Silver masks. There’s a sophisticated design here — and not only would I instantly know that, I’d be fascinated by it.
I wouldn’t care what I thought I knew. I’d just know that this guy knows something I don’t.
The artistry in the images. The names of the sites. The dots between “The Deal.” Trillion Dollar Tube. The story on the postcard’s back. Most of America is so bogged down by baggage and bullshit — that none of these things even register.
Half the country took the word of professional know-it-alls over nuclear scientists. And when your camp came up empty on WMD — you just bought more bullshit from the same people who sold you the first batch:
Shrewd!
Preach responsibility and take none
The question comes down to whether or not you’re basing your belief on something in the realm of reason — not some fail-safe fantasy that allows you to believe whatever you want.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act III
Hide and Seek
True folly, Tuchman found, is generally recognized as counterproductive in its own time, and not merely in hindsight. In Tuchman’s template, true folly only ensues when a clear alternative path of action was available and ruled out.
I point you to a 7-part, 2 hours and 40 minutes doc — that distills a story that demanded a massive amount of effort, thought, research, and writing:
And you tap a Tweet with a talking point or two — thinking you can inform me.
How many laypeople have you ever come across who wrote and produced a documentary? In nearly 20 years of challenging people on these issues and others, I’ve never met a single one. What road have you taken to lose sight of such things deserving of at least a little respect?
A modicum of courtesy perhaps? Doing your homework used to count for something. How about we just start with that?
Respect is not my concern
But if you showed some — it might be just enough to crack open a conduit to this quaint thing called conversation. And since everything you see today was shaped by the story below — whatever conversation you’re having:
Fits under the umbrella of mine . . .
“And then some” . . .
And therein the rub — as I don’t have situational rules:
We’re well beyond “disagreement” in America — this is madness (countless millions miserably failing to follow even the most fundamental methods of how understanding works).
Tuchman alighted on a root cause of folly that she called “wooden-headedness” — defined in part as “assessing a situation in terms of preconceived fixed notions while ignoring or rejecting contrary information.”
The second you shun evidence that doesn’t fit the narrative you want — you have contaminated your judgment. How quickly you come to your conclusions — and what you’re willing to ignore to solidify them:
That is the underlying message of my efforts.
As I said in my doc:
At the heart of why we fail to live up to our potential as a society is because we excel at polluting even the purest form of fact. How can we possibly solve serious problems when we refuse to adhere to some semblance of the fundamentals of making sense?
— Richard W. Memmer: Epilogue
It’s All Window Dressing
- You thirst for critical thinking — as long it doesn’t threaten your interests (or is even perceived as such)
- You follow the facts — so long as they’re going the direction you desire
- You demand accountability — as long you & yours aren’t being held accountable
- You preach responsibility — as long as it fits the formula that works for you
- You love the idea of talking about ideas — so long as there’s no work involved that would interrupt you Tweeting your lives away with your concerns
- And that idea damn sure better be about exposing the enemy — because you sure as hell have no role in who’s to blame — of course!
The shitshow of America has eroded reason beyond recognition — eating away all that was once right and good.
We could do something about that:
But you’re busy
It’s not my writing, my graphics, or my documentary: The flaw is within you — and it always has been. You have no original ideas and have no questions for those who do. I have to spoon-feed you like a child while you spit it out and cry about being hungry. You have no imagination and are utterly devoid of any virtue that would allow for actual conversation to take place:
Not that lickety-split, self-satisfied crap you flood the internet with daily.
You endlessly congratulate yourselves while flooding the internet with praise for people putting a slight twist on saying the same thing every goddamn day.
Is this working?
It’s bad enough that such obvious questions never enter your mind — but it doesn’t even compute when someone does. Hiding behind your force field of fallacy to protect your binary beliefs (as you cry for critical thinking skills behind a wall where there is none): It doesn’t even cross your mind that there might be a better way — even as I’m offering it to you.
It just doesn’t register . . .
As I’m not and never have been familiar
Arrival is a movie that makes you think — and that’s a gift that keeps on giving.
Their efforts to develop a conduit of communication is in striking contrast to how we talk to each other today. With the word “HUMAN” written on a whiteboard, they were able to build on that by seeing patterns in indecipherable symbols.
We have the most sophisticated communication tools in history — and we can’t even talk to each other in the same language.
Instead of listening and learning — slinging snippets of certitude has become America’s pastime. We’ve created a knee-jerk nation where discernment is derided and negligence is in vogue. What was beyond the pale in the past is now perfectly acceptable.
And any attempt to have a conversation on issues that clearly call for careful consideration — is hijacked by baseless beliefs beaten into your brain as bedrock fact. From decades of being increasingly accommodating of liars aligned with your interests:
There was a time when adults acted their age. Those days are long gone — as the internet and the cable clans paved the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd. The Yellow Brick Road is the path of America’s pursuits — and how systematic oversimplification has taken over to the point where inconvenient correlations are condemned as convoluted.
You kept lowering the bar
And Now There is No Bar
“We . . . want it now, and if it makes money now, it’s a good idea. But . . . if the things we’re doing are going to mess up the future, it wasn’t a good idea. Don’t deal on the moment. Take the long-term look at things.”
— The Dust Bowl
That the reaction is not to think it through, not to question, not to assemble facts, not to make arguments — but instead to wave banners and spout slogans such that you could hardly distinguish what they were doing from a manifesto that would come out of [does it matter?]
— Glenn Loury, Tucker Carlson Today
When the context suits you, such words are solid gold. What you do when it doesn’t — determines the worth of your word.
Loury was rightly talking about the Black Lives Matter manifesto driving the aftermath of George Floyd. But the Left’s ludicrous ways pale in comparison to conservatives going batshit crazy after 9/11. The Right delights in ridiculing the Left for burning buildings to further the cause:
Yet the “party of personal responsibility” set the world ablaze while browbeating anybody out of line in their March of Folly.
Ripping on woke is all the rage
And outrage industries of dish it but can’t take it — would talk about race and responsibility till the end of time. But heaven forbid we have a single conversation about war and responsibility.
And by the way
Repeatedly rehashing issues is not the mark of problem solving — it’s the mark of a market. All these channels are blunt instruments:
Including those I agree with!
Like Black Lives Matter, you’re just pounding away at problems without any examination of the efficacy of your efforts. The problems that plague America are interrelated — and anything short of addressing that is going nowhere. But everyone’s wrapped up in their wheelhouse — operating under umbrellas of interests that don’t account for complexities outside of them.
If you think you’re making progress because of ever-increasing attention to your concerns . . .
I suggest you reconsider
An endless barrage of niche-based argument to beat back bunk — has no chance in today’s trench warfare between armies of unreachables. Just picking the “root cause” that works for you doesn’t get it done.
You’ve gotta look at interconnected causes across-the-board:
We could work wonders with my idea:
Which would only get better with what all walks of life would add to it. But you’re in my way and always have been. And the ultimate irony is — you’re in your own way and don’t even know it:
Ah, the pooh-poohers of possibility:
Forever on the front lines of lowering the bar while I’m trying to raise it — you’ve been a constant companion almost all my life.
Where would I be without you?
Remember that guitar in a museum in Tennessee
And the nameplate on the glass brought back twenty melodies
And the scratches on the face
Told of all the times he fell
Singin’ every story he could tell . . .
It was as if they had looked at all the possibilities Rock had to offer, and built their music out of only the best parts . . . Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers made music like the last of the true believers.
They gave back to their audience what they took from Rock & Roll themselves . . . the best of everything.
Sounds like a good way to build a country — but that’s me.
Yeah, yeah, yeah — I know it would never be like “the best” above or even close. But come on! We could at least do something in that spirit, couldn’t we? I can see that each side makes more sense on some things:
Why can’t you?
The best of everything . . .
Imagine!
There are powerful forces that make damn sure you don’t!
It astounds me that even sharing something in hopes of a human connection — that maybe having something in common could connect in a way that undeniable evidence doesn’t: Even that is mocked — and conveniently taken as “weakness” in argument.
So in the face of centrifuge physics:
Belittling my “disjointed” & “juvenile” website with “irrelevant music & movies” is the best ya got?
I defy you to find a single instance of anyone on the Right even attempting to make an argument on the dimensions, material, and quantity of the tubes. You’ll be lucky to find them mentioned at all.
You think it’s just a coincidence that all the “arguments” on the Right just happen to follow the same pattern (conveniently leaving out the marquee claim on a mushroom cloud)?
That — all by itself, speaks volumes:
To anyone who thinks world-altering wars are more important than whining about websites that expose painfully obvious lies, anyway.
Oh my god, he’s a genius — one of the greatest minds in the last hundred years. A National Treasure . . .
Well, if you’d just STFU and do what you say you do:
And objectively apply those principles you claim to love: I can demonstrably prove he’s not the Maverick he manufactured in his follow-the-facts fantasyland you delight in deriding others for failing to do what you don’t.
Following the facts going the direction you desire doesn’t count — anybody can do that.
I’m not out to “DESTROY” Sowell
Quite the contrary! Stick around — you’ll see.
But lemme put it in terms you’ll understand: If he stepped into a debate with me on this matter, the beating he’d take would be biblical. If you think you can challenge me on that, I invite you to try.
I’ve been inviting you for a really long time:
That his supporters instantly sling assumptions about everything to avoid having to answer for anything (coupled with rapid-fire ridicule for satisfaction in full): Flies in the face of the principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal.
I imagine most of the time his opposition probably is out to destroy him (just as you’re out to do the same to them).
That’s your world — not mine.
Discovering the difference is at the core of what abiding by principles is all about: To arrive at conclusions — not jump to them. But thanks to the internet and the cable clans paving the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd — everything is poisoned by perception and hypocrisy now.
And by the way: Clickbait for battles you’ll do all over again tomorrow — doesn’t strike me as destroying anything.
I have a higher purpose in mind for Sowell (one in which he could become a “National Treasure” for real): Not that fantasyland where you wallow in a cesspool of sycophants: Congratulating yourselves for advertising virtues that vanish the moment they’re inconvenient.
In the aftermath of 9/11 — did Thomas Sowell have motive to lie in order to support his party in the invasion of Iraq?
I asked that question to the guy running The Genius of Thomas Sowell podcast — and he wouldn’t even acknowledge what could not be more obvious. For all these geniuses you love to laud — you sure aren’t learning much.
You introduce statements and arguments of people who aren’t Thomas Sowell
As this story is also
About the behavior of the echo chamber around Sowell — it’s kinda necessary to include other people to properly illustrate the problem. And I wouldn’t mind explaining everything — if you thought about anything.
There is no measure for how asinine these acolytes are in defending the indefensible — automatons devoid of rational thought & manners. Your behavior has not an atom of integrity, courtesy, curiosity, courage, decency, effort:
Or any virtue of any kind
On evidence involving artillery rockets and material properties of centrifuge rotors — the apostles of Sowell smugly cite his books on economics, race, and whatnot: Anything to glorify him as they abandon any notion of accountability:
Butchering his bedrock beliefs as they dance in delight behind their force field of fallacy.
These people do nothing but question my motives, mock my site, and assault my character — then proudly post quotes of Sowell looking stately as he condemns the very thing they’re doing.
- Repeat slogans: “Everybody believed Iraq had WMD”
- Question people’s motives: Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
- Bold assertions: Russians said so, British said so, Bill Clinton said so, Leaders of both parties said so . . .
No coherent argument, Repeat slogans, Vent their emotions, Question people’s motives, Bold assertions . . .
The rolodex of excuses around Sowell is off the charts — which is obscenely out of line for the standards he espouses. There’s a faction for forgiveness — by people who have nothing of the kind for their enemies.
Everyone is human and at least occasionally shows poor judgement.
That doesn’t cut it when you miserably fail to acknowledge that poor judgment: Particularly when you make a living pouncing on others about theirs. On top of all that:
They have no idea of the depths of deception involved here — but have no qualms about issuing instant forgiveness for it.
Faction for the hybrid model
- No big deal
- No authority
- Forgiveness
If your strongest criticism of him is that he was wrong on the Iraq war, I’d frankly say “big deal.” Millions of people were wrong about that shit back then. He had no political authority or say on the matter, so I think he could be forgiven for that mistake. (Assuming that you’re right of course, I’m still waiting for you to supply the evidence).
He has no idea what the deal is . . .
But is perfectly satisfied in blowing it off as “no big deal.”
And right on cue:
I’m still waiting for you to supply the evidence
And this — is just priceless:
Even if he said that stuff, your entire diatribe smacks of the now classic modern progressive tactic of taking a single mistake by anyone whose views they don’t like and using that one error in judgement to try and discredit ALL their work.
Who said I disagreed with his work?
Outside of butchering the debate on WMD — and his partisan hackery in flagrantly ignoring his own camp’s abominable behavior, record of recklessness, systematic lying, and hypocrisy that knows no bounds: I haven’t come across anything I object to.
As for economics — I’m not qualified on that front. Imagine — there are still people who measure their knowledge in such ways.
At every turn . . .
The faithful tap dance around reality — oily evading anything that requires them to hold Sowell to his own standards.
Hard to Imagine:
That I have to explain that quote to people who seemingly live to flood the internet with his words.
He and his flock incessantly complain about the media — and they don’t make policy. But the second I scrutinize Sowell — suddenly you have new standards.
180 — how fitting
When you have no idea what the argument is (making no effort or inquiry to understand, no less):
Wrapping quotes around “argument” is as ridiculous as using air quotes incorrectly.
That you even think that a story so complex and convoluted could be explained away so easily — is a monumental problem all by itself.
And without even the most basic insight into anything on this story: That camp has a habit of glossing over global issues of catastrophic consequences with . . .
“Seems”
Then tell me how he was wrong about one thing that he has no expertise in.
lemme get this straight
A layperson with limited resources and no connections:
- Can do countless hours of research & writing
- Interview a world-renowned nuclear scientist
- Correspond with Colin Powell’s chief of intelligence — along with a key physicist
- Spend $15,000 of his own money to write & produce the most detailed documentary ever done on WMD (taking both parties to task for it)
Qualifying me to exhaustively explain how half the country could not be more wrong on this issue of world-altering consequence.
But it’s all good . . .
That Sowell cranked out this crap that any Iraq War cheerleading jackass could issue in chain-letter lies — topped off with smug sloganeering.
After all — he doesn’t have any expertise in it.
“It’s indefensible!
Don’t you know that?”
Consequences matter or should matter more than some attractive or fashionable theory.
— Thomas Sowell
I couldn’t agree more . . .
Except there were no consequences on the fiasco for the ages driven by this manifesto:
She also saw wooden-headedness as a certain proclivity for “acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by facts.”
The outcome of which fashioned a culture of no consequences.
And along came — this
If you’re not gonna do your part and accept responsibility for the damage you’ve done and dishonesty baked into your beliefs — why should the Left?
Why should anyone?
Wooden-headedness, said Tuchman, was finally — “the refusal to benefit from experience.”
— Russ Hoyle
The Refusal to Benefit from Experience
Sowell is lauded for calling out problems he helped create. A lot of that goin’ around! The Right treating Bush like the Second Coming of Christ — set the stage for the rise of the Rock Star they spent the next 8 years railing against.
That doesn’t strike me as sound strategy.
Dumb, dishonest, and delusional wars doesn’t either.
Speaking of Loury
It’s a mighty fine day when you wake up to find high praise from a man his caliber:
Twice!
He called I Don’t Do Slogans on The Yellow Brick Road “brilliant” and was “honored” by my commentary:
Thank you, Rick Memmer, for your brilliant commentary. I am honored by it.
He partly inspired this site and was “blown away” by it and signed up:
As he’s also a member of F.A.I.R’s board of advisors, I had hoped he would consider the side of Sowell his followers refuse to see.
Alas, Loury wasn’t about to look at undeniable evidence warranting that he change his mind.
So he changed the rules . . .
Right on cue | Never fails
Cognitive dissonance doesn’t care that you signed a pledge. More on Loury later, but I assure you:
F.A.I.R was nowhere to be found.
Such high praise from Loury is a helluva lot of incentive for me to think these people are the “geniuses” their audience thinks they are. I don’t roll that way. While I maintain a degree of respect for him — and I’m forever grateful for the inspiration he provided:
If you’re part of the problem, I don’t care who you are — I’m calling you out.
And that’s
Had Loury listened . . .
With the idea I have in mind: We could have changed the rules by putting a mechanism in place that boxes everybody in to abide by them. Ya know, the rules you rail on others for failing to follow — then instantly abandon when they don’t work in your favor.
To see the character of the government and the country so sported with, exposed to so indelible a blot, puts my heart to the torture. . . . Or what is it that thus torments me at a circumstance so calmly viewed by almost everybody else? Am I a fool, a romantic Quixote, or is there a constitutional defect in the American mind?
Were it not for yourself and a few others, I . . . would say . . . there is something in our climate which belittles every animal, human or brute. . . . I disclose to you without reserve the state of my mind. It is discontented and gloomy in the extreme.
I consider the cause of good government as having been put to an issue and the verdict against it.
And now, even now
If only you’d laid it all out exactly as I like it — then I’d abide by the principles I preach
Is that how it works?
That’s about the size of it. I guess I figured that if you didn’t understand something — you’d try this on for size, but I’m old-fashioned that way:
Funny how there’s always an excuse . . .
Back in the day — there was no website with an array of illustrations to gripe about. I was just sharing Trillion Dollar Tube to all these fine folks flaunting their badge of beliefs so F.A.I.R.
Showing some courtesy for a 5-minute excerpt doesn’t seem like much to ask such bastions of virtue. But without watching one second — self-satisfied scorn was your gold standard for gleefully gutting the truth.
And why mess with tradition?
If you don’t like my illustrations, go read the bone-dry reports for yourselves: And I’ve got plenty more material to add to your reading list. But that takes work — and why bother when you can just ridicule those who did it for you.
One picture is worth a thousand words:
When you don’t want the pictures and you don’t want the words — what would you have me do?
And once I did it
We both know your next move . . .
A Faction for Everybody
But Sowell’s crowd takes the take
My surgical specificity of this clip puts this lie in its place in 5 minutes alone. To take a story this complex and convoluted and boil its essence down to a few minutes was no small feat.
Trillion Dollar Tube
Imagine what I did with 160
“There is no skimming over the surface of a subject with [Hamilton]. He must sink to the bottom to see what foundation it rests on.”
— Major William Pierce (Ron Chernow, Alexander Hamilton)
Wouldn’t it be absurd to share that quote if my clip contained nothing but trite talking points? Some circles are not burdened by squaring their walk with their talk. They seem to think that advertising virtue equates to embodying it.
Case in point
People who talk glibly about “intelligence failure” act as if intelligence agencies that are doing their job right would know everything.
— Thomas Sowell
D.O.E’s standard is to spin a tube at 20% above 90,000 RPM before failure — so 48,000 short is a pretty loose definition of “rough indication.”
And since the entire point of testing should be to replicate the conditions of centrifuges, one would think that the full-blown testing would be performed before the N.I.E. was completed.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
Between Sowell’s words and mine
Which ones strike you as glib?
And these are on the mild end of the savagery I’ve seen.
You couldn’t carry Sowell’s jockstrap!
Seriously? Get a life. It doesn’t matter what you say, he’s better than you basically in everything.
You deserved to be treated that way! You’re a moron and pathetic character assassin
Holy shit…. a video of a circle jerks with a nut in the center talking about RPMS. Yet somehow Thomas Sowell is a liar.
How do you reconcile that with this?
So you found one small crack in Sowell’s character where he defended Iraq having WMD, does that hurt his credibility?
This man muddied the waters of debate to serve himself: On a little matter of war in the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11.
On top of unconscionably ignoring irrefutable evidence of world-altering consequence, he has a habit of toeing the party line. Not only did Sowell flagrantly fail to follow the facts on all-things Iraq — he brazenly ignored the debauchery in his own party to politely pounce on the other.
In light of his history being wildly out of sync with his sanctimonious claims: That “one small crack” is a wide-open window into his character and credibility.
I wouldn’t care if Sowell cured cancer:
You don’t get a pass for basking in baseless beliefs that cripple the country — and have the bottomless nerve to preach responsibility & accountability to boot.
That — is a cancer of its own . . .
The poison he pumped into the atmosphere helped destroy the internal organs of America. So we have very different standards as to what qualifies as a National Treasure.
His army of apologists are gutless in the face of facts they don’t like:
Disguised by their goose-stepping glory in the Facts Over Feelings Parade. He’s the Grand Marshal of this lockstep lovefest — and the Admiral of the Scot-Free fleet.
Is that this fraud got followers to believe he’s not only a genius, but some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes to boot. Never mind his history being wildly out of sync with his sanctimonious claims.
I’m not out to “DESTROY”
But you are — by butchering Sowell’s bedrock beliefs in blind defense of him. In your fail-safe fantasyland of the “The Genius of Thomas Sowell”: You smugly assert “there’s no there there” — without even going there.
Hiding behind your force field of fallacy — you can believe anything: Just like the Left. The Left institutionalizes weakness — and the Democratic Party is notorious for lacking backbone. You weaken the very people you’re trying to strengthen — branding weakness to boot.
And right on cue, the Right is ready to pounce.
I don’t blame ’em — except for the part about them being weak while branding strength.
Conservatives have put on a masterclass of complaining for 30 years — but because the intelligentsia on the Left perennially pumps candy into that piñata: They beat the hell out of you — while unconscionably ignoring the debauchery of their own behavior.
Sailing away on Scot-Free.
Then there’s this
America obsessively concerns itself with symbols . . .
Fixating over a missing flag pin on a politician’s lapel, for instance.
So — these people can:
- Incessantly lie
- Manipulate the hell out of you
- Start dumb wars and never finish them
- Drag their feet forever
- Obstruct as if not doing your job were a virtue
- Take off all kinds of time after accomplishing nothing
- Waste mountains of money while touting concerns about spending
- Spend enormous amounts of time & energy assailing the opposition while absolving their own at every turn
- Broadcast beliefs that have no bearing on their record or yours
- Rile you up with red meat to savagely scorn the other side — as you sail Scot-Free on an ocean of bottomless lies and hypocrisy . . .
Never in doubt — while you fret over flair:
Conservatives control the narrative about responsibility and think that magically translates to taking responsibility. Republicans pounce on the Left day in and day out — as if the Right’s record vanished off the face of the earth.
It’s all about framing the narrative — and the Left institutionalizing weakness is a gimme for the Right to rail on ’em.
That the Left brings it on themselves is another matter . . .
And the icing on the cake: The likes of Loury & McWhorter justifiably calling out universities, woke ways, racially rigged incidents and such: Providing endless fodder for the Right to rip people for behavior that pales in comparison to what they’ve done for decades.
Speaking of McWhorter
First time I ever heard of him was in a 2017 interview with Brian Williams. In talking about take a wild guess, he said . . .
He has a rather narcotic joy in dismissal and belittlement
A lot of that goin’ around too!
The likes of Loury & McWhorter miserably fail to see how they are unwittingly conditioning people to act exactly as McWhorter’s quote above. I’m sure it’s intoxicating to amass a following and feel like you’re making a difference. But I’m gonna weigh your impact partly as a reflection of your community: How people behave — not what they believe.
If you can’t get that right, I don’t care how big your following gets — you’re taking this nation nowhere. Not in the right direction, anyway.
What’s more, you’re making matters worse and being rewarded for it. I’m going to show you how to fix the problem you don’t even know you have. And I assure you — the gains you get now pale in comparison to what awaits you.
And all ya gotta do — is do what you say you do.
And this — is not that
And they already belonged to one before that:
Alas, we live in a world that would rather split hairs over semantics than consider the spirit of an argument. Whether or not it’s literally “religion” is not the point — it’s faith-based belief that has no bearing on reality:
A.K.A. Wishful Thinking
To believe in God is not delusional, but denying what’s right in front of your eyes — is delusional by definition:
- A delusion is a mistaken belief that is held with strong conviction even when presented with superior evidence to the contrary
- Characterized by or holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument
- Something a person believes and wants to be true, when it is actually not true
Wars have started that way . . .
Speaking of wishful thinking:
To believe Sowell’s a “great man” and “fearless” Maverick with what you knew of him — is one thing. To continue to believe it in the face of overwhelming and irrefutable evidence:
Is pure fantasy
Anyone worthy of this ridiculous hero-worship — wouldn’t want it, as they’d have a helluva lot higher expectations of their supporters.
In an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter, these guys were playing horseshoes with centrifuge physics . . .
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
Who are “these guys” on this fiasco for the ages? Who are the “most experts” Powell was referring to in his UN speech?
That’s the untold story I told in 2014:
When I set out to set the record straight on this endless saga of absurdity.
“To learn to ask: ‘Is that true?’” . . .
Maybe there’s something to what she just said. Let me think about it. That’s interesting. Maybe I should change my mind.’” . . .
When is the last time you can honestly remember a public dialogue — or even a private conversation — that followed that useful course?
Someone wonders
Not long before this Tweet — this PKIA parishioner was condemning my efforts like all the rest that day (and every day).
And then he opened the doc . . .
That’s the exception
This is the rule . . .
I’ve always hated Twitter and when I’m done doing what I gotta do — I’m never goin’ back. Until then, I’m sending out a certain set of messages looking for intelligent life (fiercely independent thinkers who want to solve problems — not endlessly talk about them).
Think of my signals as a poor man’s SETI:
I’ve got an idea — and it’s got teeth
There’s a way we can harness folly from the past for the benefit of the future. It’s as out-of-the-box as it gets but rooted in timeless truths America made outdated. I’ve already done all the work: I just need a little help in having it land in the right hands.
I have a very specific target audience to get this in gear, so it wouldn’t take much. One email could set off a chain of events that could open the door to the kind of conversation this nation’s never had.
Conventional methods have repeatedly failed and won’t put a pinprick in the atmosphere of absurdity suffocating the country.
Going by the galaxies filled with rock stars of reasoning across the social media universe — I should have no shortage of people eager to examine my idea and discuss how we could improve on it and proceed.
You tell me where those people are and I’ll gladly send out my signals to them.
If you’re not interested in hearing me out and having meaningful conversation — we have nothing to talk about and I wish you well. I’d just ask that you block me and politely move along. Is that really too much to ask? But if you’re game for good old-fashioned conversation — please contact me through the site, Anchor.Press.gg@gmail.com, or DM (Direct Message) on Twitter:
As I no longer respond to Tweets or superficial fragments of any kind.
In a culture that craves attention — it just boggles the mind that you blow right by imagery and ideas unlike any the world has ever seen (from a guy saying):
You don’t earn my time — you don’t get my time
I can’t imagine not being intrigued by that. But then again, I’ve never been fond of the familiar. It’s not too late to discover a whole other world that awaits you. So if you wanna get busy on ideas that will actually work, lemme know.
Speaking of Work
Work is a Journey on Which You Welcome Challenge
Work does not instantly respond — work digs to discover and inquires to clarify. Work is difficult and demands discernment. Work wonders, pauses, listens, absorbs, and reflects.
Work does not rest on who’s right and who’s wrong: Work wants to know if there’s something more to see, something to learn, something that sharpens the mind. Work never stops building on the foundation of your own work and what you learn from the work of others.
Work works its way through material that is not easy.
Work recognizes complexity and the demands of in-depth explanation. Work will go on a trip to ideas that take time and effort to understand. Work knows that you can’t see your way through to a solution without understanding the different dimensions of a problem.
Work does not defend before you consider
Work does not race to conclusions — work arrives at them through careful consideration. Work is willing is rethink what you think you know. Work takes integrity, courtesy, curiosity, courage, and decency.
Work comes with the willingness to be wrong.
Work is not self-satisfied. Work does not sling snippets of certitude — work crafts argument on the merits. Work is an exchange where each party takes information into account. Work does not issue childish insults — work demands that you act your age.
You’ll find that work is far more fruitful and fulfilling than ease.
Work rises & falls
As this is the prism through which we work:
How we weigh what we see and measure our response. We’ll fall short from time to time — but those willing to work will keep each other in check.
Work respects your intelligence by using it . . .
And shows respect to others as we work our way to mutual respect. Work won’t be pretty and might even get ugly — but work will do what it takes to work it out.
And if you want to start solving problems — work is what it’s gonna take.
Einstein borrowed from the one below:
The worth of man lies not in the truth which he possesses, or believes that he possesses, but in the honest endeavor which he puts forth to secure that truth; for not by the possession of, but by the search after, truth, are his powers enlarged, wherein, alone, consists his ever-increasing perfection. Possession fosters content, indolence, and pride.
— Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
Remember what it was like to be uplifted by the genuine spirit of America? Maybe it wasn’t as real as I imagined it to be:
But that authenticity is worlds away from where we are now.
Thank you for reading!
When you open your eyes to what’s underneath — it intrinsically trains your mind to see with increasing clarity
— Richard W. Memmer . . .
One Voice Became Two 