From Heather McDonald, one of those pesky well educated people who thinks reality should have some say…
YouTube has already taken this video down for breach ‘community standards’, which is why there is a link here instead.
This is what happens when narrative trumps reality. We are fooled. And we are the easiest people to fool when we think we are being virtuous, acting as champions of the supposedly downtrodden. That’s why all of us need a reality check from time to time, to allow reality to arbitrate our beliefs about it, and to stop presuming a narrative can be believed first because it makes us feel good about ourselves and then have reality submit. That’s not how reality operates – it is, in fact, delusional thinking – but it is how faith-based thinking leads away from what’s true.
tildeb
Questionable Motives 
I still remember when Google’s corporate motto was “Don’t be evil”.
Now they routinely demonetize, shadow-ban and delete accounts that dare to question the official narrative. Ditto for Twitter and Facebook. It’s the equivalent of electronic book-burning. Thankfully, alternative forums like BitChute have sprung up to give voice to the disenfranchised.
https://reclaimthenet.org/best-youtube-alternatives/
“When you tear out a man’s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” ― George R.R. Martin, “A Clash of Kings”
Comment by Ron — August 10, 2020 @ 11:15 am |
Thanks Ron.
Comment by tildeb — August 10, 2020 @ 11:18 am |
Dear tildeb and Ron,
Heather Mac Donald has been (deemed to be) biased, misguided and misinformed on many fronts, in spite of her credentials and regardless of whether she should be censored or not.
Here is an excerpt from an article entitled “Words Which by Their Very Utterance Inflict Injury: College students urging the punishment of speech that “wounds” risk silencing the causes they support”, published at https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/words-which-by-their-very-utterance-inflict-injury/523344/
In any case, I have been trying to analyze the costs and fallouts of extreme partisanship and diametrical opposition to shed some light on these thorny issues in my post entitled “Misquotation Pandemic and Disinformation Polemic: Mind Pollution by Viral Falsity“, which has been continually expanded. Quoting my own writing from this said post as follows:
You are welcome to give me your feedback at the comment section of my said post. In addition, please feel free to inform me if or when you think that I should include or incorporate some piece(s) of information, findings, statistics, critique and/or analysis into any of the twelve section(s) of my said post.
Happy June to both of you!
Yours sincerely,
SoundEagle
Comment by SoundEagle 🦅ೋღஜஇ — June 8, 2021 @ 6:32 pm |
Here’s a post by Jerry Coyne at Why Evolution is True about some of the effects on local business in Portland by the CHAZ occupation. Take note of the role of antifa and ask yourself what it might FEEL like to be targeted by the mob… not just directly by armed protestors but later put on a blacklist as a ‘KKK sympathizer’ because you tried to stand up to criminal and destructive behaviour on your premises. That’s the chilling effect of the Woke movement has in real life on real people causing real harm that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any version of social justice but its opposite injustice and everything to do with empowering by our tacit and sometimes active support of Orwell’s Big Brother. This is how this blank cheque support of BLM looks like in action and it comes about by trusting narrative over reality. The politics of it – Left or Right – is a diversion. Trusting the narrative first – having a religious kind of trust called ‘faith’ – leads here.
Comment by tildeb — August 10, 2020 @ 12:05 pm |
Several points: notice how the counter argument to MacDonald’s data driven assessments is not an argument: it is moral pronouncement against her character using as many emotionally laden charges of prohibited discrimination as possible. That’s a clue.
Free speech is a fundamental and necessary legal right for a liberal democracy. That’s why it’s under such profound attack. The goal of Critical Race Theory (CRT) is to destroy liberalism – the legal equality of individuals – and replace it with a Marxist model of equity between groups. Rather than install a dictatorship of the proletariat after destroying the bourgeoisie, the CRT model is to install a dictatorship of the anti-racists (who have coopted the term ‘progressive’ with a regressive ideology) over the racists, all of whom just so happen to be white. To accomplish requires the destruction of liberalism, the legal equality and autonomy of all individuals. So the legal understanding of what free speech actually is matters. Anti-racists must destroy this value systemically by changing the law to favour equity over equality. Whacking away at each liberal principle one chunk at a time using justifications like ‘tolerance’ and ‘respect’ and ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ and other judicial words as if motivated only by social justice and improved treatment of victimized groups. Free speech is targeted so that speech can be legally subjected to vague ‘hate’ laws that themselves are based on ‘causing violence’ that looks identical to hurt feelings and offence (the Brits have written something like 200,000 non-criminal citations against those dastardly fascists who have caused ‘offence’). So the understanding of what free speech is places the right of free speech between impeding and compelling the speech of others… constrained by using speech to harm the same right of others. That’s a fundamental key stone liberal principle that must be torn down to achieve the right to determine ‘correct’ speech, compelled speech or silence, and that’s what we’re seeing today with the CRT goal to foster self-censorship in the name of all kinds of noble sentiments. The use of counter charges such as the accusation of racism is a tactic to use what is presumed to be free speech to undermine its use in criticism against CRT. That’s why it’s currently unconstitutional. But we see this mob bullying tactic clearly used – and to effect – against people like MacDonald not to respect what’s true but to to avoid having to deal with the data that stands in conflict with the claims carefully selected by those trying to promote critical race theory.
Comment by tildeb — June 8, 2021 @ 11:15 pm |