Generational Dynamics World View

[pbrower2a]

(05-17-2021, 09:02 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

Quote:** 17-May-2021 World View: Horn's Puppetmaster

(05-16-2021, 01:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: >   So why back one group of extremists over another group with a
>   similar profile? Frankly, the Israelis are burning through their
>   legitimacy at a prodigious rate. Soon, even their advocate will
>   have to agree, and then what?

I don't know who you're referring to, but I'm just reporting what's
going on.  People who hate Israel think I'm pro-Israel, and people
who hate the Palestinians think that I'm pro-Palestinian.  But I
see both of them heading for a war that will be cataclysmic for
both of them.

OK, so you are as objective as anyone about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

But not on American politics:

Quote: David Horn
[quote pid='77046' dateline='1621190573']
>   Or why you're so OCD that you can't focus on anything outside your
>   narrow view of the world. Seeing Fox News as anything other than a
>   propaganda bullhorn for the extreme right is telling.

I write articles about what's going on in the whole world.  You
Democrats see nothing but your hatred for 75 million Tea Partiers and
Trump supporters.  So you have the obsessive, bigoted "narrow view,"
not me.

Mass delusions are nothing new, as with the long-held commonplace view that the Earth is flat. 

In general, Trump support is closely connected to Tea Party ideology. Tea Party ideology, like all other ideologies, are based upon moral precepts that the rest of Humanity may not share. I associate Tea party pols with their voting habits, and that is where one finds their moral universe. In practice that means that unless it involves some personal vice not favorable to the enrichment, pampering, and indulgence of existing elites (they are against drugs; they seem to stand for sexual restraint except for procreation; they seem to support a populist American white culture compatible with plutocracy; they act as if no human suffering can ever be in excess so long as it supports the will of economic elites who have God's Chosen Role of lording it over the rest of Humanity -- at least in America for now. 

It is easy to see why many people find this agenda troublesome or offensive. It is maximal cruelty within a capitalist context. Maybe the way to get the highest possible level of economic growth is to compel people to work longer and harder under harsher discipline with the enrichment of economic elites as the objective until
we have so much prosperity that economic inequality becomes irrelevant. If it takes the building of castles and palaces so that all families not in the elite can live in tract houses with a car for everyone holding a job in the garage, and have high-quality diets, then trickle-down economics might work. The problem is that trickle-down economics usually ends with an economic meltdown due to the imbalance of wealth and poverty. 

81 million voters, slightly more than 51% of the electorate, voted for Joe Biden. You may consider the vote of a Trump supporter more precious... but 51% is slightly higher than the proportion of the total vote that Ronald Reagan got in 1980; nobody thought that Ronald Reagan, whether one liked him or not at the time, was legitimately the President of the United States. Yes, Trump got elected in 2016 with less than even a plurality of the vote because he got the "right" votes. He got his chance, and about 81 million people voted against him. Trump lost the Electoral College in 2020 by losing the electoral votes of five states that he won in 2016.

The Electoral College is so designed that the States elect the President and the People does so only indirectly. This had its virtues when  some states were for all practical purposes single-Party dictatorships (almost all former Confederate states) in which a large part of the populace was effectively denied the vote. The Democratic Party, at least in the former Confederacy, was anything but Democratic. 

Quote:(David Horn's)  characterization of Fox News is completely wrong, but how would
you even know, one way or the other?  You have no idea what's going on
in the world (except, ironically, for the information you get from my
articles).  All you know about the world is what you get from the
heavily censored state media, like CNN.  You know nothing except what
your Democrat Party Puppetmasters want you to know.  You say nothing
except what your Democrat Party Puppetmasters want you to say.

Here is a left-right array of news sources on bias, if not quality:




If something is not in the center, take heed. Raw news from FoX News Channel is not too bad because raw news is difficult to manipulate (that explains how AP and Reuters wires are so well respected as definitive), but its analysis is suspect. See also CNN.  FoX News is much more analysis than straight, raw news.

For quality:

In the gray circle is genuine news There may be bias depending upon the constituency of the news source (obviously the Wall Street Journal skews to the Right because its readers are heavily investors and managers, the latter more in private industry but it is a reliable source on what it covers). CNN is of marginal usefulness as a news source even if it lacks an extreme bias.

Center-directed news analysis is rare. Most people want their analysis to fit their beliefs, and there is nothing in the center comparable to Slate or the Weekly Standard. Such does not sell. I could imagine someone trying to aggregate left and right opinions with some attempt at synthesis. I could also imagine journalistic and commercial failure, including a quick bankruptcy. The Economist does get away with that, but it is a British publication, and British publications are tailored for a market that hardly exists in the USA.

At the bottom row, the red triangle, is garbage. It includes extreme positions for people of strong bias (Palmer Report, Breitbart) and such worthless noise as the Daily Mail (British junk) and such supermarket tabloids as the National Enquirer  that people often dismiss as "the maid reads it" or "some handyman left that behind". The absolute worst is the insane world of Alex Jones' Infowars.  

Quote:So your puppetmaster say, "Puppet Horn, go forth and say that Fox News
is a propaganda bullhorn for the extreme right!  Do it now!"

I don't need any puppet-master to tell me that FoX News is of suspect reliability as a news source. There may  be less fecal material in the purported world of news, most notably Infowars, that will rot a brain.  FoX News is best understood in the character of a sign that says "Road Under Construction; travel at your own risk" which often indicates repaving or new paving.  If you really must use that road to get home, then expect to have a car with tar on it or lots of little dents from loose gravel. 

Quote:You don't even know what that means.  But why should you?  You're just
Puppet Horn.  Puppets like Puppet Horn just have to mouth the words
they've been told.  They have no need to understand them.

So you say, "Yes, Puppetmaster, yes sir!"

And you go forth and say, "Fox News is a propaganda bullhorn for the
extreme right!"

And even though that sentence is totally meaningless to your
indentured brain, you say it anyway, because you're a good puppet.
You're The Great Puppet Horn!

A general warning: it is not the persons who are the issue here. It is whether some area in the world is becoming particularly dangerous with the leadership there or elsewhere clueless and hence likely to make catastrophic blunders. Maybe we can do little about some thoroughly nasty situations.

FoX News is an oxymoron. Sometimes it is correct but almost never uniquely correct.
[/quote]