Posted on 09/21/2016 2:58:35 PM PDT by SFmom
How is the divide between truth and authenticity affecting this presidential cycle?
So we have this culture where you understandably value the people you perceive to be truth-tellers in order to avoid liars and manipulators—and then what? The best way to manipulate a crowd very quickly becomes explicitly arguing that everyone who disagrees with you is a lying manipulator.
I call this hyper-sincerity. There were versions of it in ancient Athens and we have our own version now. We see it most clearly in speakers who claim their opponents are full of rhetoric and that they alone can be trusted in a world of power-hungry, self-interested liars. Hyper-sincere speakers often use simple language, signaling a lack of sophistication that tells their audience that they can be trusted.
A hyper-sincere speaker can say one thing that deeply resonates, and that puts them on the side of the people, as opposed to being on the side of the rhetoric-filled politicians. That’s what Trump did when he said, “the system is rigged.”
His point was that he alone of the upper leadership class is willing to tell the truth about how the system is rigged. That resonated with many people because that’s what they already feared—and here was someone in a position of power admitting it. So he seems like a straight shooter, someone you can really trust to tell you what’s going on, when all these other politicians are just full of fancy excuses and busy with their million-dollar fundraisers.
But then the claim to be a straight shooter becomes all there is—he says what he thinks, no matter what. Even if it’s not true in the end. Even if it’s ethically problematic. The most important thing is that there is no filter because that’s the source of a straight shooter’s trustworthiness.
(Excerpt) Read more at mtholyoke.edu ...
He’s telling the unvarnished truth and they don’t want it talked about.
I’m not “smart” enough to understand his deep and obvious superior intellect.
All I know is what baseball bats are good for and that we’re losing our country to moochers, f.ggots, losers, morons, leftists, communists and cowards.
This article succinctly details what the old media monopoly has been doing for 50 years— lying to and manipulating the public.
What gibberish. Reading this gives me a headache.
Um, professor--you might want to get your nose out of your socialist academic journals and observe the real world for a while. Try to put your own biases in the background while you do so.
Trump was not calling the system rigged as if he is some guru who claims to have insight into some secret world that he is now revealing to us, the unwashed masses. Rather, he was stating a truth that millions of people see for themselves every day, and people love him for the fact that he says what we all know and the elites refuse to acknowledge.
When a politician can compromise national security in such a way that would land any ordinary citizen in prison for decades, but skates completely scot-free, how are ordinary citizens supposed to perceive that?
When the media, who are supposed to inform us, instead pick, reject, or alter stories to make them fit a pre-existing narrative in support of an unpopular agenda, what are ordinary citizens supposed to think?
When the citizens vote for candidates who promise to fix the many and growing problems of bloated and corrupt government, but all that happens is continued progress towards a kind of government they reject, what conclusions do you expect them to draw?
The system *is* rigged, Ms. Professor. And if you didn't live in an echo chamber but were in touch with regular citizens, you would know that. And you would understand Trump's appeal. He is campaigning on a platform to rid the government and country of progressivism, and we support that.
Donald Trump: Underminer of Truth Leftwing Canards
There fixed it.
Well, perfesser, what do we do if the system is, in fact, ludicrously rigged.
Someone has to stand up and point out that these emperors and empresses are naked.
It probably ain’t going to be carried out perfectly. Digging out from lies upon lies isn’t easy or an exact science either. But it’s vastly preferable to perishing in a morass of nothing but lies.
The author, Keely Savoie, does not cite one example of Mr. Trump telling a lie. Her words are gibberish.
From the time the Clinton Foundation, or any other organization (including her marriage to Bill) in which Hillary was a principal first took money from a foreign government (whether she was then still a Senator or whether she was Secretary of State), the Constitution of the United States has instructed us not to trust Hillary Clinton:Hillary Clinton has stood in violation of that provision because the House of Representatives never acted to authorize her to be in that position. You or I would not need permission from Congress to accept such money - but you and I never had and never will have the access to foreign princes which Hillary’s offices have put her in position to have. Without even troubling to investigate the Foundation, we know that she never asked Congress, “Mother, may I?” for any - let alone all, as we have every right to expect foreign government donations obtained by the Foundation or by her partner, Bill. Why should she not required, for starters, to divest herself of any and all such funds????
- Article 1 Section 9:
- No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
Say what you will about the Republican Party, its leadership is entirely innocent of any intention to nominate Trump - so if there be any qualm about Trump, the Republican Party does not have its fingerprints on it. The Democrat Party, OTOH, has its fingerprints all over the nomination of a candidate who is constitutionally disqualified, corrupt, has a history of being caught out in lies in public to the detriment of good order - and, apparently, keeping the public in the dark about substantive health issues.
If this Prof were mine, I’d drop the class so fast and I would let her and her boss know why. Students need to bitch more.
The legal answer doubtlessly is in the technicality that the Clinton Foundation isn’t Hillary and Bill. But the way it works to pay Hillary and Bill sure looks like a money laundry to Hillary and Bill.
:: The best way to manipulate a crowd very quickly becomes explicitly arguing that everyone who disagrees with you is a lying manipulator ::
So, Professor, Trump thinks Hillary is a lying manipulator. Prove him wrong instead of rhetorically categorizing him.
And, the Donald often makes a pretty good case that this is the case.
Another thing we see from the Donald is an evolution of positions as well.
It’s jarring, all the absolutist talk we sometimes hear from Donald, even words he has to partly eat afterwards. But a blunt soul who acts out of an actual concern about what is correct in the absolute is a lot better than one who puts you to sleep with nothing but weasel words so that he doesn’t say anything useful either right or wrong.
Well stated eDM.
The attention paying public is no longer in thrall
to the academic cadres of liberal thought.
Just imagine if instead of John McCain we had had a
Trump/Palin ticket, but I suppose the time just was
not ripe for it.
How is the divide between truth and authenticity affecting this presidential cycle?
The only reason there would be a divide between
truth and authenticity would be if one was a duplicitous
individual. As we see most liberals are in order to
further their agenda.
Read her vitae. She has no Academic backgound there
The description of her “work” is fraught with gibbrish, left field comparisons of unrelated authors and social phenomena. She is a paid loon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.