Propaganda in Everyday American Life

Dec 2016
4,637
2,383
Canada
#41
The KKK link was merely an example of linguistic misbehavior.(this coming from someone complaining about "vague" terminology!)
Where did I state that "deep state" or "mainstream media" was in the link?
If someone raises a topic and the OP has only one link, I expect that linked article to cover the issue....otherwise, why weren't there more links? More likely that your intentions were propagandistic from the start, and you wanted to leave a narrative that "deep state" is an imaginary term with no evidence to support the counter-narrative that entrenched, high-level government employees, working in tandem with agency dependent corporations( especially those in and out of gov. work and private business that was set up to do the dirty work for that dept.......is there a better example of deep state connection than Ed Snowden's former employer - Booz Allen Hamilton, whose only client is the NSA, and who's director moved back and forth between running Booz Allen and the NSA several times during his career?
Your explanation of the "deep state" really only underscores my point-- it is a vague and indefinable entity that only conservatives seem to understand and that knowledge is intuitive; similarly, your explanation of MSM is nebulous and inherently contradictory ( Faux news is not MSM but Huff Post is?). The Hate Media (Limbaugh network) is NOT mainstream media but NPR or NBC is "mainstream media"?
And "linguistic misbehavior" isn't vague?
Overall, I find your rant to be a nice demonstration of the "flight of ideas" and "free associations" that is often seen among conservatives. It certainly seems like you have a lot of issues to work out.
So much academic political and psychological analysis has come from a liberal pov. that most of us on the left didn't realize that liberals are just as bad at using reason and logic to understand and study issues as anyone on the right Until 2016 happened! And Democratic leadership...who thought they had done what they do every four years: talk left in the primaries and early stages of the excessively long election process, and then yank away all the promises by convention time and have or make the leading (sheepdog) opponent to the favored...and as we learned through Wikileaks - predetermined candidate for president, rally behind and endorse the winner and exhort all of his supporters, contributors and followers to support and vote for the hated, despised, undeserving winner!

According to the plan, as witnessed by so many past elections where a 'radical' sheepdog leads all the stray, frustrated, angry sheep back to the pen for voting day, the left is supposed to fall in line and "vote blue, no matter who" without receiving more than token or meaningless concessions from the party leadership. But, this time as we can see with Trump landing in the White House, the plan didn't work! Why?

Well, instead of being logical and rational and reasoning....as liberals claim to be doing, they turned even more hysterical, unbalanced and went totally in denial of any attempts by those who had their best interests at heart (Thomas Frank for one) to do a rational analysis of the process, WHY a horrible choice for candidate was forced on the left-leaning independents and even Democratic Party members, and...according to one book on the Election Night disaster that sounds plausible: Robbie Mook led the brainstorming session that decided to immediately find and target a likely scapegoat and use their allies in MSM to amplify their accusations. At first, they didn't even get to Putin or the Russians, it was James Comey...in case anyone still remembers; BUT Comey was forced out by Trump early, so he became part of "the resistance" and a bogus document created by a hired Democratic Party operative created "The Steele Dossier." And then it was Putin blackmailing Trump and the Russians hacked into the Democrats' email servers. And the subjects of all of the illegal activities and pure stupid, inept behavior by Clinton and staff was never mentioned again on CNN, NBC, or the other media flagships of the Democratic Party.

But, for some reason, you and so many other centrists wedded to the Democrats and the liberal status quo, think you're going to convince us all that it's only conservatives and those on the right who are irrational and prone to believing conspiracy theories and other counter-factual information.......................................................................try again!
 
Nov 2018
2,596
1,212
Montana
#42
If someone raises a topic and the OP has only one link, I expect that linked article to cover the issue....otherwise, why weren't there more links? More likely that your intentions were propagandistic from the start, and you wanted to leave a narrative that "deep state" is an imaginary term with no evidence to support the counter-narrative that entrenched, high-level government employees, working in tandem with agency dependent corporations( especially those in and out of gov. work and private business that was set up to do the dirty work for that dept.......is there a better example of deep state connection than Ed Snowden's former employer - Booz Allen Hamilton, whose only client is the NSA, and who's director moved back and forth between running Booz Allen and the NSA several times during his career?

And "linguistic misbehavior" isn't vague?

So much academic political and psychological analysis has come from a liberal pov. that most of us on the left didn't realize that liberals are just as bad at using reason and logic to understand and study issues as anyone on the right Until 2016 happened! And Democratic leadership...who thought they had done what they do every four years: talk left in the primaries and early stages of the excessively long election process, and then yank away all the promises by convention time and have or make the leading (sheepdog) opponent to the favored...and as we learned through Wikileaks - predetermined candidate for president, rally behind and endorse the winner and exhort all of his supporters, contributors and followers to support and vote for the hated, despised, undeserving winner!

According to the plan, as witnessed by so many past elections where a 'radical' sheepdog leads all the stray, frustrated, angry sheep back to the pen for voting day, the left is supposed to fall in line and "vote blue, no matter who" without receiving more than token or meaningless concessions from the party leadership. But, this time as we can see with Trump landing in the White House, the plan didn't work! Why?

Well, instead of being logical and rational and reasoning....as liberals claim to be doing, they turned even more hysterical, unbalanced and went totally in denial of any attempts by those who had their best interests at heart (Thomas Frank for one) to do a rational analysis of the process, WHY a horrible choice for candidate was forced on the left-leaning independents and even Democratic Party members, and...according to one book on the Election Night disaster that sounds plausible: Robbie Mook led the brainstorming session that decided to immediately find and target a likely scapegoat and use their allies in MSM to amplify their accusations. At first, they didn't even get to Putin or the Russians, it was James Comey...in case anyone still remembers; BUT Comey was forced out by Trump early, so he became part of "the resistance" and a bogus document created by a hired Democratic Party operative created "The Steele Dossier." And then it was Putin blackmailing Trump and the Russians hacked into the Democrats' email servers. And the subjects of all of the illegal activities and pure stupid, inept behavior by Clinton and staff was never mentioned again on CNN, NBC, or the other media flagships of the Democratic Party.

But, for some reason, you and so many other centrists wedded to the Democrats and the liberal status quo, think you're going to convince us all that it's only conservatives and those on the right who are irrational and prone to believing conspiracy theories and other counter-factual information.......................................................................try again!
You know, the best statements in a discussion are brief, to the point and rational.
You haven't given me not much to work with as your rant is hard to relate to the topic of this thread.
 
Dec 2016
4,637
2,383
Canada
#43
You know, the best statements in a discussion are brief, to the point and rational.
You haven't given me not much to work with as your rant is hard to relate to the topic of this thread.
How long is the Wikipedia entry for "Deep State?" You started a thread based on a vacuous and undefined narrative, and didn't like being called on it! Now, go engage in "linguistic misbehavior" with someone else!
 
Nov 2018
2,596
1,212
Montana
#44
How long is the Wikipedia entry for "Deep State?" You started a thread based on a vacuous and undefined narrative, and didn't like being called on it! Now, go engage in "linguistic misbehavior" with someone else!
I started a thread to discuss the obvious issue of jargon, primarily from the Right, which is accepted without question as self-evident. A "vacuous and undefined narrative" exists but not by me. It exists because that is actually the subject of this thread. Apparently even mentioning that certain tortured dysphemisms (the opposite of euphemisms) exist in the language of conservatives is difficult to discuss. Mostly these words and phrases are code and trigger words best understood by those who do not really think through whether they have clear definitions and possibly to identify membership in a group, like a shibboleth. This imprecision probably re-enforces the idea that the "secret group" (like the KKK), alone, understands " the truth".
 

Similar Discussions