America lost its way long ago (and you’re right about how some of that happened). But all that pales in comparison to the aftermath of 9/11. Every major problem in America was exponentially exacerbated because of that fiasco for the ages — which Sowell helped sell and got off scot-free.
They all did
As they always do (Democrats & Republicans alike):
And thanks to all that: Which Thomas Sowell is a part of while engineering the illusion that he’s not.
even 20 years later
Half the country still can’t get this straight:
By Design
America Remains Mired in the Murky
What does it say to you: That on evidence claimed as components to build a nuclear bomb — 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? As I said in my doc:
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 a uranium 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.
How would you tell the story of America’s decline over 30 years in the Gutter Games of Government? Give it a go! I’ll be happy to show you the courtesy so few have shown me. Just one thing: You gotta tell the whole story — not the story that serves you. And if you did, you’d discover the immeasurable value of learning from your mistakes in predictably counterproductive pursuits.
Believe it or not, the best way to serve your interests is to first and foremost — hold your own accountable. If you wanna make the opposition look bad, try looking good.
If you wanna have the moral high ground, try earning it:
The moral high ground, in ethical or political parlance, refers to the status of being respected for remaining moral, and adhering to and upholding a universally recognized standard of justice or goodness.
Until you’ve tried taking on the entire country by yourself, you have no idea how bad it’s gotten. You’re on a team, I’m not. What does it say to you that across communities where claims of critical thinking are everywhere — I haven’t found it anywhere? I’ve got an idea and it’s got teeth. 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. You won’t like it — 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 Beliefs About That
I put the truth above all else . . .
And if at times the truth helps your interests and hurts mine, I’ll still stand by it. I love moments of truth that put my principles to the test. One of my favorites is the Florida election fiasco of 2000. I just wanted the right thing to be done — whether it served my interests or not was irrelevant. That sense of fairness is so foreign I might as well be speaking another language.
I learned early on in life that what you want gets in the way of what you see.
Because of that and a lifelong history of outside-the-box thinking — I see opportunities that others don’t. Conventional means have no chance of breaching the envelope of intransigence around armies of unreachables in the trench warfare of our times. Everyone is trying to plow through problems when you should be going around them (think asymmetrical “warfare”). The rules have changed, as in — there are none. By failing to recognize that, you cannot adapt to deal with it.
In America’s March of Folly — adapting is nowhere to be found.
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
Case in Point
America’s in perennial pursuit of ideologies: Warfare waged with galactic levels of baggage & bullshit bolstered by . . .
opinions lightly adopted but firmly held . . . forged from a combination of ignorance, dishonesty, and fashion
— Theodore Dalrymple, Life at the Bottom
The moment Obama caved on the Democratic Party playbook on race — he put Trump on the path to the presidency. And 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.
Exponentially exacerbating the very problems you’re fighting against — is not smart.
Just what would it take to have that conversation? If you’re unwilling to put the time and effort into understanding how to address your concerns more effectively — just how concerned could you really be?
it’s all window dressing
Where inquiry that holds up a mirror to your magical thinking is met with venom to defend values.
- 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 in 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 your incessant Tweeting of 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!
This 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.
You’re always busy
There was time when people saying, “Show Me the Evidence” — would look at it when you did. It was a time when newfangled ways of “argument” wasn’t all the rage — where you furiously fire off some fashionable form of “You’re wrong!” and dish it all day long: Insisting on “affirmation independent of all findings” (borrowing from Peck who borrowed from Buber).
I don’t roll that way.
You’re wrong — and here’s why
That’s the discipline — to have a work ethic in the way you think. Without “here’s why,” you’re just whistlin’ Dixie.
There was a time when people understood how to understand — and didn’t blame the source because the material doesn’t magically unfold for standard scrolling with ease. It was a time when you stopped to think about things before breezing on by clips at the crux of the story — then bitching because you don’t understand what you didn’t stop to think about.
And there was a time when honoring something was reflected in what you do, not simply what you say. Those days a long gone — but in a world where advertising virtue magically equates to embodying it, you can believe whatever you want and get away with it with ease, because you’ve got friends.
Anything Goes when going for gold in the Gutter Games of Government. And when you’re constantly reinforced by your fellowship of fury — you can promote principles in one breath and abandon them the next.
Or as I coined it
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.
The facade it all is so sickening:
A culture craving a fix by broadcasting beliefs that have no bearing on what you actually do. One of my favorite examples is the lip service by Band of Brothers lovers. On any video from the exceptional series, right on cue: Out comes the cheerleading on leadership, honor, courage and sacrifice:
In a nation that worships people who are the opposite of every virtue you revere.
What gives?
Leadership’s defining quality is honesty. To honesty, add fairness and consistency.
Where Winters moved forward in the face of fire, you fall back on Old Faithful in the face of offense and difficulty: Blame the website, blame the writing, blame anything and everything but you and your blameless way of life.
And it shows!
And then congratulate yourselves for how many times you’ve watched Band of Brothers to honor their sacrifice with all talk and no action. If you’re all so committed to the truth, why is this country led by liars Left & Right? If you’re so brave, why do you run away when challenged? And if the people you put on a pedestal are so smart, why do you behave so stupidly?
Because you’re bullshitters by definition:
The bullshitter . . . does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.
Case in point
For 20 years, America has made it impossible to have a conversation on this:
While gleefully pointing to that . . .
Never mind that THIS Does Not = THAT. You can’t even get that straight:
Conveniently allowing you to ignore this:
And yet
You think you’re clear-eyed on this crap?
This nation has no remorse — not for relatively recent wrongdoing, anyway. It appears I’m more horrified by my typos than America is with dumb, dishonest, and delusional wars.
[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 get off your ass to see what we can do about it. Of course, that would require holding your own accountable as well:
So there’s that
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.“
And truth be told, those who landed on the right side on Iraq: Most of ‘em don’t know jack either. Just because you were right doesn’t necessarily mean you arrived at it intelligently — and being reinforced by casual conviction makes for increasingly sloppy & stupid thinking.
Shallow thinkers do not think beyond the immediate and the observable. They usually take information at face value and only look at immediate consequences. They are not capable of looking at all sides of an issue or think deeply about the issue before making decisions or drawing conclusions . . .
They also believe that their opinion is based on deep thinking because they genuinely believe that their opinion is based on truth and facts. Whereas, deep thinkers look at the whole sequence of events and the consequences.
When we dig deeper, we understand better. We can compare different outcomes, examine, tear apart, and make cognizant judgments that are derived from different mental models.
Left and Right, I’ve yet to find a single person who digs beyond the depth of their immediate domain of interest. In our entirely transactional times, America endlessly rehashes topics of today — never once considering the totality of events that created them (or even having a notion of the need to).
With the issues I address — you might as well be saying the Civil War wasn’t germane to the assassination of Lincoln.
I don’t understand. I don’t know understand. It’s all so incoherent and confusing with all these things I have to stop and think about.
That’s because you wallow in a world of paint by numbers — where people telling you what you wanna hear every goddamn day: Package it all neatly into nursery-rhyme narratives (turning your mind into mush). Isaac Newton and Einstein were brilliant — partisan hacks and high-minded influencers fueling your fix, are not. And after all that brilliance you broadcast about your beloved geniuses:
Whining about my website and acting like a child is the best ya got? How proud Winters would be of your calm, cool, and collected nature:
God can’t make square circles
— Pastor Derwin Gray, Forest Hill Church
It’s not a theological question — it’s just about being logical (as even the Almighty can’t make something it is not). But thanks to the internet and the cable clans paving the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd — you can shapeshift anything or anyone into what you want to see: Even making saints out of people with a patently obvious history of hypocrisy and lies.
I don’t understand. I don’t know understand.
I’m not surprised!
In this this shithole you call home:
Same goes for all these echo chambers of bullshitters below — cesspools of certitude and self-congratulations for accomplishing absolutely nothing and making matters worse to boot.
V for Victory and Venom for Values
“Wut”
In my youth, I could not have imagined a world in which even people with PhDs would act like imbeciles in the face of information they don’t instantly understand. That an entire country could take satisfaction in insulting your own intelligence on a daily basis just astounds me.
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.
“WUT” reflects a society tuning in to people who perpetuate problems under the pretense of seeking to solve them. Some are sincere (or at least started out that way). But they all lose their way in the adulation and rewards from feeding the frenzy. I coined Star Wars Syndrome to capture the plague of allowing nostalgia to create the illusion that a movie is far better than it actually is. In and of itself, wildly exaggerating the quality of movies is harmless.
But when it becomes habit in how you see everything — either gushing with over-the-top praise or seething with over-the-top scorn:
That’s a plague!
You think I just come up this stuff out of thin air?
In these echo chambers of your choice: Regurgitating garbage gets people to Like you — celebrating “victory” by clicking “bravo” to bad manners and bunk. A world where the rush is everything:
- The rush to respond
- The rush you get from responding
- The rush to roll out the next issue of concern
- Repeat and never reflect
It’s not my writing, my graphics, or my doc: The flaw is within you and it always has been. You have no original ideas and not a molecule of courtesy or curiosity 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.
I put it all on a silver platter for you 10 years ago:
When I Saw the Writing on the Wall
I took on the automatons of the time (Left & Right). No one listened, and lo and behold — automatons exponentially multiplied. Those times were tame compared to today. In the last few years — I’ve seen savagery beyond anything that inspired the doc. The toxicity of venom has been taken to a whole other level with pride.
As it turns out though — that is an opportunity (to take a problem and turn it into a solution).
But the same people who proudly made it impossible to tell that story 10 years ago — are in the way now more than ever (and they’ve got friends). But with what I do, even their enemies are in my way. If you’d all just stop talking and start listening — you’d find that you’re in your own way.
The rotor speed required to separate uranium isotopes doesn’t care who’s president, and when it comes to ascertaining the truth, neither do I. In order to maintain such speeds, the material properties of centrifuges are as critical as it gets. You don’t need to interview a world-renowned nuclear scientist to figure that out — but I like to be thorough. To claim that Iraq WMD wasn’t a lie should be like saying we didn’t land on the moon.
As I wrote and produced the most exhaustive documentary ever done on WMD, I would know.
3 minutes and 33 seconds into the Prologue — the parallel in the Profile Principle is revealed (an exemplary example of applying the same rules to both sides). But rather than taking the time to digest what someone’s saying, you’re already confused (as if I invented the idea of setting up a story with a parallel that will be driven home by the end).
3 minutes and 33 seconds:
Ahhh . . .now I see where he’s going with this
Imagine!
There are powerful forces that make damn sure you don’t!
And it shows!
My surgical specificity in this clip puts this lie in its place in 5 minutes alone (so it’s disingenuous in the extreme to suggest that failing to meet your style-guide standards is the impenetrable obstacle in the way of your unquenchable thirst for truth.
If you’re gonna blow right by this from the beginning — why bother proceeding at all? But we both know the answer to the question — and it damn ain’t because you’re digging to discover. If you wanted to do that — here’s your chance:
Trillion Dollar Tube
For all my efforts, I may not make a damn bit of difference in the world — but at least I’ll leave something behind that shows a serious-minded person who did the work to reflect his words with unassailable integrity.
This — is the mark of your making:
The biggest bullshitter of them all:
I’m not out to “DESTROY” Sowell. Quite the contrary! Look around — you’ll see. Ask some questions and you’ll more clearly. 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.
8. Old information at the beginning of the sentence, new information at the end.
— Steven Pinker
How do you feel about no new information — anywhere?
In what parallel universe does this even remotely reflect anything like that:
A couple of 2-minute reads that never even mention the tubes that took us to war (or anything else of substance on this endless saga of absurdity). Touting technicalities as “facts” doesn’t get it done: Especially when you make a living selling slogans and catchy quotes about careful consideration.
If you only apply the principles you preach when it serves your interests — they’re just empty claims on a cup and a meaningless mantra touted on a T-shirt.
I couldn’t agree more
But there’s another reason why so many people misunderstand so many issues.
Professional know-it-alls like you pull stunts like this while peddling lines like that as cover: To whitewash your record of patently obvious hypocrisy and lies. What would you call someone who shoots their mouth off without addressing the evidence — but banks on their fabricated reputation to create the impression that they did?
This man has a patently obvious history of hypocrisy & lies — and yet he’s worshipped as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes. And that — is an opportunity!
As a distinguished scholar once said: “The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie.”
— Thomas Sowell
The man’s a magician:
As I’m practically spit on by people promoting principles I followed to find he didn’t. Simply by virtue of writing those words, he couldn’t possibly do the same in service of his own ideals?
And lo and behold — sleight of hand is how they pulled it off.
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 . . .
Thomas Sowell is a magician who makes magical thinking for a living: A snake oil salesman who carved out a career craftily complaining about snake oil salesmen. It’s painfully obvious what this guy’s up to. He’s engineering an illusion — and you bought it. You assume I’m out “DESTROY” him — and right on cue, you play the hate-card.
Never mind that assuming bad motives is in gross breach the standards Sowell espouses. But why bother abiding the principles you preach when he doesn’t either? His “logic lovers” love to object to my characterization of Sowell making magical thinking — bolstering my argument because they have actually not idea what the subject matter is. And blindly defending anyone flies in the face of the principles upon which they put him on a pedestal.
And yet . . .
Somehow this Sowell supporter below had no trouble understanding my site (and even politely replied with the makings of what real conversation looks like). To be sure, he could have investigated it further and asked some questions on that front, but to get the ball rolling — this will do:
And is worlds away from what I’m used to.
- He acknowledges the marque evidence driving the story
- While he already knew the truth about the tubes — he’s keeping the door open on Sowell (as to whether he “fell for it or lied about it”)
- It’s the most clear-cut case of lying by omission imaginable, but right now — all the matters is that he’s allowing the conversation to breathe (which means we can build on it)
- He did something for me and now it’s my turn to respond in kind. Barking back with “No, No, No, he lied” — is not how it’s done
- Genuine conversation is a journey — and along the way in this pursuit of truth & understanding, are glorious discoveries in the willingness to be wrong
- Where you just must find that in acknowledging that you’re wrong (in part or in whole) — just might create a hairline crack in the convictions of your interlocutor (enough to shed some light on the truth you have to tell)
- And through that exchange — perhaps they’ll come around to realizing they’re wrong (in part or in whole)
And all that sounds a lot like this:
Contrast this crap below with the reasonable reply above. Do you see any politeness and consideration here? And there is no measure for how laughable it is that he’s telling me to “take yourself above what you’re told to find the truth on the subject” (when he doesn’t even know what the subject matter is).
And yet, someone who’s blindly defending Sowell (with no idea of the issue or what Sowell said about it): Wants to educate me on critical thinking.
On a matter of mathematical certainty in centrifuge physics (an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter): I’m the only person who told this story in full (from all the angles that matter most). If Sowell’s acolytes simply abided by the principles they preach, they’d know in no time that their “National Treasure” is not the man they believe him to be.
Because [Sowell] doesn’t show favoritism on any subject matter.
That is demonstrably false and no rational person would argue otherwise. It took me all of 10 minutes to size up Sowell. On WMD, it took 2. And guaranteed, there’s more where that from. There always is.
by the way
What road have you taken where you must remain glued to the utterly ridiculous notion that we have to stay boxed in by what started a conversation: Instead of considering the possibility that someone just came along with a larger conversation.
That would open up a world of possibility on the ones you’re having.
I almost forget to mention one of the most important elements in his reply: Disappointment! Now that is a beautiful thing — and it’s in Thomas Sowell’s best interests (and that of his followers and all of America and the world as well): For him to feel that disappointment — and then some!
Disappointment doesn’t register with this crowd.
In over 3 years of telling this story on Thomas Sowell, that’s the first time I’ve seen a supporter express any disappointment at all. And what does it say about these people that the guy above had no trouble understanding what I was saying, but somehow countless others can’t?
Are you telling me . . .
That the Sowell supporter above and a handful of others — just happened to have a Rosetta Stone to reason through what you can’t? Would a reasonable person blow right by critical evidence at the beginning — so you can cite website style as your reason to outright reject it by the end? I hate comic books — but because I’m not keen on that kind of layout to tell a story, is that a valid excuse to say I can’t comprehend it?
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 . . .
This is a case built on concrete evidence of mathematical certainty: Supported by exhaustively detailed arguments (of which you have exactly zero chance of refuting).
But to “logic lovers” that means nothing — as defending the faith is everything.
love to use “logic” to win an argument, and then disappear before they can find out they’re wrong
Oh yeah — I know the type, all too well!
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.
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.
Sowell’s disciples have no interest in such a demanding way of life — as defending the faith is all that matters in the religious-like following around Sowell. They spread the gospel by mindlessly countering with boilerplate beliefs that have no bearing on the issues in question.
What works with them would never fly with me.
If you oversimplify an issue that clearly calls for careful examination, I know you’re hiding something. If you constantly complain about the other side and defend your own at every turn — you’re not playing by the rules you rail on others for failing to follow. Occasional criticism of your own party doesn’t qualify as having a history faithful to objective scrutiny.
Speaking of not playing by the rules . . .
Oh, how birds of a feather flock together:
Speaking of how birds of a feather flock together. It’s the same story everywhere you look. And that is the story I’m ultimately out to tell. Sowell is simply a conduit through which to tell that story (and how his role within it could be harnessed for good).
Behold your best & brightest:
Bullshitters by Definition — Destroying What You Think You’re Saving
Bullshitters
One and All . . .
And the biggest bullshitters of ’em all:
One Voice Became Two 