Part 1 of 7
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 them one-on-one? And of that group, how many have put their principles to the test on matters practically woven into their DNA?
Look 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?
When you figure that out
Lemme know — but in the meantime:
Forget the mile — I’ll settle for just putting on the shoes.
As I wrote on Without Passion or Prejudice in reference to its opening image:
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
What’s in a Name?
I changed the doc title to what I would have used had I thought of it back then:
The WMD Delusion: Timeless Deceit by Democrats & Republicans Alike
3 minutes and 33 seconds in
You’ll see I didn’t randomly inject race into a story mainly about Iraq. Nobody cared about WMD anymore (and hardly when it was hot off the press either). The Profile Principle is what prompted the doc in the first place — in observation of how people apply intellectual inquiry in one context and entirely abandon it the next:
With pride, no less!
I needed something in the title to grab the attention of my target audience on WMD — to create a sense of shared scrutiny. Alas, that goodwill goes right out the window the moment you mention anything that challenges their calcified convictions.
I would add that it’s a pretty disturbing that people who couldn’t even get this much straight — complain about “confusing” correlations at the core of America’s decline.
As I’ve said elsewhere
Anyone wanting to know the truth — would not behave in ways that ensure they never will.
For nearly 20 years
I’ve been practically spit on for following principles those same people promote on a daily basis. I needed a way of getting past their practically impenetrable force field of fallacy.
The title of The Trayvon Travesty: A Saga of Self-deception — was the best I could come up with at the time. It was key to coming up with the doc and how I was going to illustrate how both parties allow emotion to run roughshod over reason.
This even happened in hiring a videographer. The first guy I called was ecstatic about what I had in mind: Right up till the point when he realized that I’d be taking liberals to task for being in lockstep on Trayvon.
That guy was so intrigued that he was going to reduce his fee just to be involved. That call came to an abrupt end once he fully understood what I was doing.
The all-consuming certitude in his reaction was exactly what I set out to address.
I’m incredibly fortunate that he declined — as Shane Killian was magnificent on all fronts.
What I’m calling “The Trayvon Travesty” embodies the ubiquitous behavioral patterns of apologists who defend their position purely on faith — and the “Saga of Self-Deception” is the debauchery of platform politicking that has become America’s pastime.
— Richard W. Memmer: Prologue
On all-things Iraq, conservatives were in lockstep — just like liberals for Trayvon Martin. By intersecting these topics, I show no favoritism in illustrating how emotion runs roughshod over reason.
Countless works have begun with a seemingly unrelated story or analogy — only to tie in all in at the end. With the way I’ve been treated — you’d think I invented the idea.
In one glance
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.
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:
I’ve never seen anything like that before. He’s saying something of significance with it.
Props mounted on lamps. A motorized turntable (serving a practical and symbolic purpose). Surrounded by black & white outfits with silver masks.
There’s depth in the design alone — 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.
And you know things I don’t.
If you think you can you can do better at illustrating America’s decline over the last 30 years in the Gutter Games of Government, give it a go.
And I’ll be happy to show you the courtesy that so few have shown me.