Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info

zarathustra

Subscribe to zarathustra's blog Subscribe

Menu

Special Features

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Reddit user topd0g: In 1967, Guy Debord wrote his seminal work, The Society of the Spectacle[1] , in which he described how the majority of society has become alienated from their own lived experiences: "The spectacle is not a series of images but a social relation among people, mediated by images." Basically, in the modern day it has become possible to manufacture the narrative that the average person uses as a lens to interpret the going-ons of daily life. The manufacturing process is some combination of mass media, socialization, careful PR management, biases, etc. in different proportions. I contend that it is much more enlightening to understand Ferguson, Missouri through Debord's theory of Spectacle. read more


Saturday, September 27, 2014

perhaps nobody consciously intended to set the world on fire, but we're on guard for ebola-carrying islamists nonetheless.


Wednesday, September 24, 2014

The utter lack of interest in what possible legal authority Obama has to bomb Syria is telling indeed: Empires bomb who they want, when they want, for whatever reason (indeed, recall that Obama bombed Libya even after Congress explicitly voted against authorization to use force, and very few people seemed to mind that abject act of lawlessness; constitutional constraints are not for warriors and emperors)...

Continuously creating and strengthening enemies is a feature, not a bug. It is what justifies the ongoing greasing of the profitable and power-vesting machine of Endless War.


Monday, September 22, 2014

For sheer infantilisme – the French word captures it best – I dare readers to wade through the following claptrap without a snort of disbelief...

Most immediately shocking was the Obama fantasy world which Kerry, in his clod-hopping, schoolboy way, represented. Anyone who has studied Syria from afar, let alone those who go there, know that the fictional "moderate opposition" – supposedly deserters from the Syrian government army – does not exist.


Comments

let's reflect on, first of all, corky's immediate lashing-out in the form of #191. he lashes out with sexist, mysoginistic ad hominem in response to legitimate questioning of the democratic party.

(some progressive *snicker!*)

moving on:

"It was apropos the hysteria"

"Funny hysteria"

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.

"You know, I never really knew why the general public referred to far lefties as "pants-wetters" until I found out here."

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

"There are problems, lots of problems, and we pretty much know what to do about most of them; there are good progressive policy ideas for most of them."

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

"So, given their track record in such things, why should anyone listen to them now?"

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

~~~

there's plenty more to dissect, and it's easy to pull apart in just a few minutes like I have.

keep this link in your back pocket for posters you continually encounter under a bridge, like corky:

Dailykos' Gentleperson's Guide to Forum Spies

Drudge Retort
 

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable