Journal Mike Hawk's Journal: Differences 4
How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin. -Ronald Reagan
Slow your roll MH, this post isn't about communism. This post is about being taught what to think versus being taught how to think. Its a little bit about extracting ideology to real world application. It also touches on what I like to call bumper sticker understanding. The inability to think about a situation in terms that are too big to be a slogan on a bumper sticker: "No war for oil", "Wage peace", etc.
The two posts that brought this concept to the forefront of my attention again were: This one in which Prof. Reynolds puts forth a point, really a quip, about Prof. Churchill looking like a stereotype. This quickly evolves into a long post about the angry left and the view that it is self-destructive and defeating to behave this way. He provides numerous links to other opinions, including dissents. Notice the complete ideas, dissenting views, and the depth of information and examples both from history and recent history. But mostly notice the links.
Contrast with the reply from Mr. Zuniga. No links; not even to the post to which he is referring. No dissenting opinion. (Its moderated negatively and removed if you try to post some in the forums.) Just one-liners from the Dean wing of the DNC. He doesn't even really refute at what Prof. Reynolds was getting. His reply obviously stemmed out of the "screw them" bit in Prof. Reynolds' post, tagging him as part of the situation the professor was describing. The point was fringe elements of both parties and Mr. Zuniga tries to turn it into a post about the war.
I hope the difference is clear. One site wants to tell you want to think. One site wants to be an echo chamber. One site doesn't want you to use your critical thinking and common sense. One site doesn't want you to hear rational opinion from the other side. One site only operates in points that will fit on a bumper sticker. This is not a comment on the abilities or intelligence of the writers. The writing styles reflect on the intended readers and the effects intended there on.
One site wants the audience to read their opinion and adopt it exactly without question. The other wants to provide their opinion and influence the audience, but also provides the tools to formulate the audience's own.
What's my point? I don't know. I just happened to read these two blogs and this is how it came together in my mind. I want to extrapolate this and apply it to every democrat/leftist out there, because that is how all the loudmouths sound and behave, but that isn't fair. And plenty of republicans/rightists do this too. But it was just striking to me that Mr. Zuniga replyed in what was just about the worst possible way to Prof. Reynolds' post, and then his forums ran wild with him.
P.S. Not too much coverage of the Iraqi election over at the dailykos. Must be going VERY well.
P.P.S. As of 3:00 PST, nothing on slashdot either.
Slow your roll MH, this post isn't about communism. This post is about being taught what to think versus being taught how to think. Its a little bit about extracting ideology to real world application. It also touches on what I like to call bumper sticker understanding. The inability to think about a situation in terms that are too big to be a slogan on a bumper sticker: "No war for oil", "Wage peace", etc.
The two posts that brought this concept to the forefront of my attention again were: This one in which Prof. Reynolds puts forth a point, really a quip, about Prof. Churchill looking like a stereotype. This quickly evolves into a long post about the angry left and the view that it is self-destructive and defeating to behave this way. He provides numerous links to other opinions, including dissents. Notice the complete ideas, dissenting views, and the depth of information and examples both from history and recent history. But mostly notice the links.
Contrast with the reply from Mr. Zuniga. No links; not even to the post to which he is referring. No dissenting opinion. (Its moderated negatively and removed if you try to post some in the forums.) Just one-liners from the Dean wing of the DNC. He doesn't even really refute at what Prof. Reynolds was getting. His reply obviously stemmed out of the "screw them" bit in Prof. Reynolds' post, tagging him as part of the situation the professor was describing. The point was fringe elements of both parties and Mr. Zuniga tries to turn it into a post about the war.
I hope the difference is clear. One site wants to tell you want to think. One site wants to be an echo chamber. One site doesn't want you to use your critical thinking and common sense. One site doesn't want you to hear rational opinion from the other side. One site only operates in points that will fit on a bumper sticker. This is not a comment on the abilities or intelligence of the writers. The writing styles reflect on the intended readers and the effects intended there on.
One site wants the audience to read their opinion and adopt it exactly without question. The other wants to provide their opinion and influence the audience, but also provides the tools to formulate the audience's own.
What's my point? I don't know. I just happened to read these two blogs and this is how it came together in my mind. I want to extrapolate this and apply it to every democrat/leftist out there, because that is how all the loudmouths sound and behave, but that isn't fair. And plenty of republicans/rightists do this too. But it was just striking to me that Mr. Zuniga replyed in what was just about the worst possible way to Prof. Reynolds' post, and then his forums ran wild with him.
P.S. Not too much coverage of the Iraqi election over at the dailykos. Must be going VERY well.
P.P.S. As of 3:00 PST, nothing on slashdot either.
Completely agreed, except for one item (Score:2)
And I agree on the difference between thinking for yourself and being told what to think.
However, I'd point out that the Angry Left and the Angry Right actually are very much the same people- and they have something in common. They were told what to think in school, and they now know what they were told to think was completely and
Re:Tinfoil helmet (Score:2)
Uh, isn't that the very meaning of capitalistic competition? You aren't paranoid if everybody IS out to get you.
No point in arguing (Score:1)
You have your views on the state of the universe, and these have been proven to me quite immutable. But the average man sitting in his space bitching about things is not the angry left or angry right that matter in this context. They don't have the face time and bandwidth to present themselves as representing others or to do any damage. People like Mr. Zuniga do. He worked professionally for the Dean campa