I agree with this view. His abuse is more blase, that’s definitely true.
Brash man with a working-class NYC disposition: “Obama literally founded ISIS” or “Obama is secretly a Muslim”
Sensible people everywhere recoil and roll their eyes. Understanding why that’s absurd is pretty easy. The people who make those arguments aren’t exactly an intellectual class, and currently lack an intellectual ‘ruling caste.’
Refined person with an articulate tone of voice, and an Ivy league law degree: “Women are oppressed everywhere, and currently make 70 cents on the dollar of what a man makes.”
Not horrific, stated by a well-educated person. Sounds reasonable, based on ‘real research.’ Comes from a sense of seemingly genuine concern and outrage for an injustice.
I used to take the stance that the first was much worse, as it is more brash and shameless. I’m not sure anymore how to measure these two against each other. I have, absolutely without a doubt, been mind-killed on this specific topic, because I personally hate charlatan lawyers who think they have the right to tell me how to live my life.
Women are oppressed everywhere, and currently make 70 cents on the dollar of what a man makes.” based on ‘real research.’
And most disgusting of all, probably doesn’t get counted as a lie. This is the problem I have with Gleb’s claim about Trump lying more—the SJWs have found ways of lying that are not technically lies.
is it the post-truth world where true facts are lies because of reasons?
The false statement is “… therefore to be fair we should multiply every woman’s wage by 10⁄7.” Instead of something like “… so to promote equality we should stop discouraging fort grade girls from studying math.”
Those look like not-even-false claims because they almost are.
I agree with this view. His abuse is more blase, that’s definitely true.
Brash man with a working-class NYC disposition: “Obama literally founded ISIS” or “Obama is secretly a Muslim”
Sensible people everywhere recoil and roll their eyes. Understanding why that’s absurd is pretty easy. The people who make those arguments aren’t exactly an intellectual class, and currently lack an intellectual ‘ruling caste.’
Refined person with an articulate tone of voice, and an Ivy league law degree: “Women are oppressed everywhere, and currently make 70 cents on the dollar of what a man makes.”
Not horrific, stated by a well-educated person. Sounds reasonable, based on ‘real research.’ Comes from a sense of seemingly genuine concern and outrage for an injustice.
I used to take the stance that the first was much worse, as it is more brash and shameless. I’m not sure anymore how to measure these two against each other. I have, absolutely without a doubt, been mind-killed on this specific topic, because I personally hate charlatan lawyers who think they have the right to tell me how to live my life.
And most disgusting of all, probably doesn’t get counted as a lie. This is the problem I have with Gleb’s claim about Trump lying more—the SJWs have found ways of lying that are not technically lies.
is it the post-truth world where true facts are lies because of reasons?
The false statement is “… therefore to be fair we should multiply every woman’s wage by 10⁄7.” Instead of something like “… so to promote equality we should stop discouraging fort grade girls from studying math.”
Those look like not-even-false claims because they almost are.
...
This smells like a nice motte-and-bailey to me, but I don’t really want to prosecute the debate here.