New Study: The Gender Pay Gap is a False Narrative

Feminism in 2019 is about beating everyone in the head with false grievances over stereotypes and platitudes, while casually accepting ideologies of hatred based on gender and race, murder of humans based on their status as a “person,” and the general transformation of the sacred female into masculine, screeching, blood-lusting, harpy hobgoblins…

feminism is social pseudo science

So what’s the real cause of the gender wage gap?

Federico Anzil
January 10, 2019

…In this article, we found that one of the main sources of the gender pay gap is the fact that, on average, women and men devote a different number of hours to their jobs, specially after marriage and parenthood.

The literature on gender pay gap is very extensive. Different papers focus on diverse causes to explain it. Two of the most mentioned reasons are gender discrimination and motherhood and gender roles.

Gender discrimination against women occurs if a woman is paid less than a man for doing the same job.

If we consider that the quantity of hours devoted to a job determines whether we consider a job to be the same as another, the data doesn’t support the idea of gender discrimination at the aggregate level.

The hourly pay rate for married women is lower than for married men on average, but a probable explanation is because the job market pays less per hour if the number of hours worked decreases, and married women tend to work less. The same pattern can be seen in almost every occupation.

Also, men tend to devote more time to work, thus acquire more experience as years pass by, and the job market pays more if the worker has more experience.

This doesn’t mean that gender discrimination doesn’t exist. Our analysis just shows that, at the aggregate level, most of the gap is not explained by gender discrimination.

Regarding the second aspect of the pay gap, societal ideas of gender roles influence the behavior of women and men. Also, biological factors related to parenthood do play a role in the creation of differences in preferences. Namely, women get pregnant and women breastfeed. These differences between sexes could be a plausible explanation of why women tend to spend more time at home versus their couples, especially after marriage and parenthood6.

To conclude and to recap, we can say that, according to our analysis, job market forces and gender preferences in relation to marital status and parenthood could explain almost all of the pay gap. Most of the gap is not the result of gender discrimination….

Read More: https://visme.co/blog/wage-gap/

Political Censorship: Facebook Purges Pages and Groups Based on Anonymous Political Hit List

Facebook was Created by DARPA

Pages purged by Facebook were on blacklist promoted by Washington Post

By Andre Damon
13 October 2018

Media outlets removed by Facebook on Thursday, in a massive purge of 800 accounts and pages, had previously been targeted in a blacklist of oppositional sites promoted by the Washington Post in November 2016.

The organizations censored by Facebook include The Anti-Media, with 2.1 million followers, The Free Thought Project, with 3.1 million followers, and Counter Current News, with 500,000 followers. All three of these groups had been on the blacklist.

In November 2016, the Washington Post published a puff-piece on a shadowy and up to then largely unknown organization called PropOrNot, which had compiled a list of organizations it claimed were part of a “sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign.”

The Post said the report “identifies more than 200 websites as routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans.”

The publication of the blacklist drew widespread media condemnation, including from journalists Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald, forcing the Post to publish a partial retraction. The newspaper declared that it “does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet.”

While the individuals behind PropOrNot have not identified themselves, the Washington Post said the group was a “collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds.”

Read More: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/10/13/cens-o13.html

Facebook Purges Over 800 Accounts With Millions Of Followers; Prominent Conservatives Vanish

Just in time for midterms, Facebook has removed 559 pages and 251 accounts they claim have been spreading misinformation and spam. Several of the pages however – some with millions of followers, were pro-Trump conservatives who had spent years cultivating their followings.

Facebook claims that “domestic actors” have been creating “fake pages and accounts to attract people with shocking political news,” reports Bloomberg.

“The people behind the activity also post the same clickbait posts in dozens of Facebook Groups, often hundreds of times in a short period, to drum up traffic for their websites,” Facebook said in a Thursday blog post.

“And they often use their fake accounts to generate fake likes and shares. This artificially inflates engagement for their inauthentic pages and the posts they share, misleading people about their popularity and improving their ranking in news feed.”

Some pages Facebook removed had large followings of real and fake accounts. Nation in Distress, a conservative meme page, was followed by more than 3 million people, according to the Internet Archive, which stores historical versions of websites and other online content. –Bloomberg

Read More: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-11/facebook-purges-over-800-accounts-millions-followers-including-conservative-meme

The Corporate Media Propaganda Information War on You

You know the drill, ownership of American media has consolidated to the point where all media is owned by one of five companies.

Those companies hold stock in every other major company from industries outside of media… like “defense” (weapons manufacturing,) or international banking, or drug manufacturing, or factory farming, or healthcare providers and insurers.

So why do we still believe ANYTHING the corporate-owned media says when it comes to issues on war, the monetary system, big pharma, food and nutrition, or health and healthcare?

Is What You Believe To Be True Actually True? Or Do You Believe Fake News

Why One Should Distrust the News

ERIC ZUESSE | 05.01.2019

Intelligent skeptics dig down like this (which can be done only online, which is why print and broadcast ‘news’ is even less trustworthy than online news), and routinely find that there’s a very selective use of ‘evidence’ that’s behind most claims, and that the reality is that the ‘news’ is often false, and, worse than that, the ‘news’ is usually false for a purpose or purposes — that the ’news’ is often fraudulent, that it is propaganda, PR, often even of the lying sort, instead of being honest and carefully verified research and reporting, such as it claims to be. Usually, it’s false because the intention is to deceive, not because Wikipedia (or whatever other news-and-public-affairs medium one happens to be considering) merely goofed. As was noted here, Wikipedia is edited, and even written, by the CIA. (Remember what a “slam-dunk” about “Saddam’s WMD” they delivered to the George W. Bush regime in 2002?) Only sources that are approved by the CIA are linked to there. Some of the sources are true, but many are not. The article on Chossudovsky was done for the CIA by an asset of the CIA, about a critic of the CIA. The CIA represents America’s billionaires, and Chossudovsky doesn’t.

Extremely wealthy people buy, advertise their corporations in, and/or donate to, public-affairs media, not in order to profit from them as owners of them, so much as in order to influence public affairs by means of them. This is one of the ways in which to grab hold not only of the government, but even of the people who vote for the government and who also buy those billionaires’ corporations’ products and services.

Trust should never be given; it should only be earned. Regarding what is public, trust is earned only rarely — and is never earned when that trust is in the major ‘news’-media (all of which are owned and controlled by billionaires and centi-millionaires who actually have interests in many corporations, including some they don’t control but only serve or else invest in). The major ‘news’-media don’t always lie, but they often lie — especially about foreign affairs, which are the main focus and concern of international corporations.

Read More: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/01/05/why-one-should-distrust-the-news.html

How the American Media Was Destroyed

…I have many times written that it was President Bill Clinton who destroyed the independent US media when he permitted 90 percent of the US media to be concentrated in six mega-corporations that were in the entertainment and other businesses and not in the news business. This unprecedented concentration of media was against all American tradition and destroyed the reliance that our Founding Fathers placed on a free press to keep government accountable to the people.

Until I read Mary Mapes book, Truth and Duty (St. Martin’s Press, 2005), I was unaware of how this monopolization of the media in violation of the Sherman Anti-trust Act and American tradition had proceeded to destroy honest reporting.

Read More: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/10/01/how-the-american-media-was-destroyed/

Hold the Front Page: The Reporters are Missing

… Although journalism was always a loose extension of establishment power, something has changed in recent years. Dissent tolerated when I joined a national newspaper in Britain in the 1960s has regressed to a metaphoric underground as liberal capitalism moves towards a form of corporate dictatorship. This is a seismic shift, with journalists policing the new “groupthink”, as Parry called it, dispensing its myths and distractions, pursuing its enemies.

Witness the witch-hunts against refugees and immigrants, the willful abandonment by the “MeToo” zealots of our oldest freedom, presumption of innocence, the anti-Russia racism and anti-Brexit hysteria, the growing anti-China campaign and the suppression of a warning of world war.

With many if not most independent journalists barred or ejected from the “mainstream”, a corner of the Internet has become a vital source of disclosure and evidence-based analysis: true journalism sites such as wikileaks.org, consortiumnews.com, wsws.org, truthdig.com, globalresearch.org, counterpunch.org and informationclearinghouse.com are required reading for those trying to make sense of a world in which science and technology advance wondrously while political and economic life in the fearful “democracies” regress behind a media facade of narcissistic spectacle.

Read More: https://consortiumnews.com/2018/09/19/hold-the-front-page-the-reporters-are-missing/

Why No One Trusts the Elites: The Real Fake News = The Lies of Mainstream “Authorities”

Is What You Believe To Be True Actually True? Or Do You Believe Fake News

Manufacturing Truth

Read More: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/12/04/the-disintegration-of-western-society/

Why we stopped trusting elites

 29 Nov 2018

A modern liberal society is a complex web of trust relations, held together by reports, accounts, records and testimonies. Such systems have always faced political risks and threats. The template of modern expertise can be traced back to the second half of the 17th century, when scientists and merchants first established techniques for recording and sharing facts and figures. These were soon adopted by governments, for purposes of tax collection and rudimentary public finance. But from the start, strict codes of conduct had to be established to ensure that officials and experts were not seeking personal gain or glory (for instance through exaggerating their scientific discoveries), and were bound by strict norms of honesty.

But regardless of how honest parties may be in their dealings with one another, the cultural homogeneity and social intimacy of these gentlemanly networks and clubs has always been grounds for suspicion. Right back to the mid-17th century, the bodies tasked with handling public knowledge have always privileged white male graduates, living in global cities and university towns. This does not discredit the knowledge they produce – but where things get trickier is when that homogeneity starts to appear to be a political identity, with a shared set of political goals. This is what is implied by the concept of “elites”: that purportedly separate domains of power – media, business, politics, law, academia – are acting in unison.

A further threat comes from individuals taking advantage of their authority for personal gain. Systems that rely on trust are always open to abuse by those seeking to exploit them. It is a key feature of modern administrations that they use written documents to verify things – but there will always be scope for records to be manipulated, suppressed or fabricated. There is no escaping that possibility altogether. This applies to many fields: at a certain point, the willingness to trust that a newspaper is honestly reporting what a police officer claims to have been told by a credible witness, for example, relies on a leap of faith.

A trend of declining trust has been underway across the western world for many years, even decades, as copious survey evidence attests. Trust, and its absence, became a preoccupation for policymakers and business leaders during the 1990s and early 2000s. They feared that shrinking trust led to higher rates of crime and less cohesive communities, producing costs that would be picked up by the state.

What nobody foresaw was that, when trust sinks beneath a certain point, many people may come to view the entire spectacle of politics and public life as a sham. This happens not because trust in general declines, but because key public figures – notably politicians and journalists – are perceived as untrustworthy. It is those figures specifically tasked with representing society, either as elected representatives or as professional reporters, who have lost credibility.

To understand the crisis liberal democracy faces today – whether we identify this primarily in terms of “populism” or “post-truth” – it’s not enough to simply bemoan the rising cynicism of the public. We need also to consider some of the reasons why trust has been withdrawn. The infrastructure of fact has been undermined in part by a combination of technology and market forces – but we must seriously reckon with the underlying truth of the populists’ charge against the establishment today. Too often, the rise of insurgent political parties and demagogues is viewed as the source of liberalism’s problems, rather than as a symptom. But by focusing on trust, and the failure of liberal institutions to sustain it, we get a clearer sense of why this is happening now.

The problem today is that, across a number of crucial areas of public life, the basic intuitions of populists have been repeatedly verified. One of the main contributors to this has been the spread of digital technology, creating vast data trails with the latent potential to contradict public statements, and even undermine entire public institutions. Whereas it is impossible to conclusively prove that a politician is morally innocent or that a news report is undistorted, it is far easier to demonstrate the opposite. Scandals, leaks, whistleblowing and revelations of fraud all serve to confirm our worst suspicions. While trust relies on a leap of faith, distrust is supported by ever-mounting piles of evidence. And in Britain, this pile has been expanding much faster than many of us have been prepared to admit.

Confronted by the rise of populist parties and leaders, some commentators have described the crisis facing liberalism in largely economic terms – as a revolt among those “left behind” by inequality and globalisation. Another camp sees it primarily as the expression of cultural anxieties surrounding identity and immigration. There is some truth in both, of course – but neither gets to the heart of the trust crisis that populists exploit so ruthlessly. A crucial reason liberalism is in danger right now is that the basic honesty of mainstream politicians, journalists and senior officials is no longer taken for granted.

There are copious explanations for Trump, Brexit and so on, but insufficient attention to what populists are actually saying, which focuses relentlessly on the idea of self-serving “elites” maintaining a status quo that primarily benefits them.

Read More: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/nov/29/why-we-stopped-trusting-elites-the-new-populism

DEBRA SOH NOVEMBER 28, 2018

A new academic journal, titled The Journal of Controversial Ideas, launching in the new year, will be peer-reviewed and offer a diverse range of viewpoints, calling upon liberals, conservatives, as well as those who are religious and secular, to submit their work. Most notably, it will allow academics to publish under pseudonyms.

Much of the response to this journal has been criticism alleging that only academics with hateful ideas would require the option to publish under a pseudonym. In truth, facts today are deemed controversial if they deviate from accepted narratives, and professors must self-censor out of fear of being condemned and losing their jobs.

Based on conversations I’ve had with colleagues still working in academia and from what I can tell about recent cases of censorship, the antagonism is primarily from left-leaning colleagues attacking other liberals. The problem has been increasing and was the reason I chose to leave the field of sex research.

In the last several months alone, multiple controversies involving academic censorship have emerged. Earlier this year, a paper by Theodore Hill, a professor emeritus of mathematics at the Georgia Institute of Technology, wrote about the “greater male variability hypothesis,” which posits that men are more variable than women along a number of traits, including intelligence, translating to a greater number of men at the high and low extremes.

After the paper was accepted in one journal and subsequently rescinded due to feminist scholars’ fears that it would be used to justify sexism, Dr. Hill got the paper published in another journal online, only to have it disappear from its website shortly thereafter. He was told the decision was not due to the paper’s scientific methods but its political implications.

In August, another controversy erupted when PLOS ONE published a study by physician Lisa Littman. She wrote about rapid-onset gender dysphoria, a growing phenomenon of girls who, out of the blue, announce they are transgender. Due to backlash from transgender activists, Brown University pulled the study’s corresponding press release, and PLOS ONE said the study had been placed under review. Considering that it underwent peer review prior to being published and other experts in the field would have scrutinized it for its methodology and content, the decision was unheard of.

These instances are indicative of a larger, worrisome trend – instead of debating contentious ideas, those in opposition to them throw words ending in “-phobic” around, shutting the conversation down and pretending they don’t exist.

Read More: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-in-academia-censorship-and-conformity-have-become-the-norm/

Google’s Social Engineering for Leftist Bias Revealed in Writing

Ever try the same search terms using different search engines to see the difference?

Google Search Results for Idiot 2018
Google Search Results for “Idiot” 2018
Duck Duck Go Search Results for Idiot 2018
Duck Duck Go Search Results for “Idiot” 2018

EXCLUSIVE: GOOGLE EMPLOYEES DEBATED BURYING CONSERVATIVE MEDIA IN SEARCH

Peter Hasson  11/29/2018

  • Google employees debated whether to bury The Daily Caller and other conservative media outlets in the company’s search function as a response to President Donald Trump’s election
  • “Let’s make sure that we reverse things in four years,” one engineer wrote in a thread that included a Google vice president
  • Google employees similarly sought to manipulate search results to combat Trump’s travel ban

Google employees debated whether to bury conservative media outlets in the company’s search function as a response to President Donald Trump’s election in 2016, internal Google communications obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation reveal.

The Daily Caller and Breitbart were specifically singled out as outlets to potentially bury, the communications reveal.

Trump’s election in 2016 shocked many Google employees, who had been counting on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton to win.

Communications obtained by The DCNF show that internal Google discussions went beyond expressing remorse over Clinton’s loss to actually discussing ways Google could prevent Trump from winning again.

“This was an election of false equivalencies, and Google, sadly, had a hand in it,” Google engineer Scott Byer wrote in a Nov. 9, 2016, post reviewed by The DCNF.

Byer falsely labeled The Daily Caller and Breitbart as “opinion blogs” and urged his coworkers to reduce their visibility in search results.

“How many times did you see the Election now card with items from opinion blogs (Breitbart, Daily Caller) elevated next to legitimate news organizations? That’s something that can and should be fixed,” Byer wrote.

“I think we have a responsibility to expose the quality and truthfulness of sources – because not doing so hides real information under loud noises,” he continued.

“Beyond that, let’s concentrate on teaching critical thinking. A little bit of that would go a long way. Let’s make sure that we reverse things in four years – demographics will be on our side.”

Some of Byer’s colleagues expressed concern that manipulating search results could backfire and suggested alternative measures.

Read More: https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/29/google-censorship-conservative-media/

Nineteen-Eighty-Four is here as Internet Censorship Silences Thousands of Opposing Veiws

facebook censorship

Internet Censorship Just Took An Unprecedented Leap Forward, And Hardly Anyone Noticed

Caitlin Johnstone  Oct 13

While most indie media was focused on debating the way people talk about Kanye West and the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, an unprecedented escalation in internet censorship took place which threatens everything we all care about. It received frighteningly little attention.

After a massive purge of hundreds of politically oriented pages and personal accounts for “inauthentic behavior”, Facebook rightly received a fair amount of criticism for the nebulous and hotly disputed basis for that action. What received relatively little attention was the far more ominous step which was taken next: within hours of being purged from Facebook, multiple anti-establishment alternative media sites had their accounts completely removed from Twitter as well.

As of this writing I am aware of three large alternative media outlets which were expelled from both platforms at almost the same time: Anti-Media, the Free Thought Project, and Police the Police, all of whom had millions of followers on Facebook. Both the Editor-in-Chief of Anti-Media and its Chief Creative Officer were also banned by Twitter, and are being kept from having any new accounts on that site as well.

Read More: https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/internet-censorship-just-took-an-unprecedented-leap-forward-and-hardly-anyone-noticed-e6ae2d8adaf2?fbclid=IwAR2o6wLOqJXsby9aWdHFrIuY208ZN4x2G2jrqC9sE89kOp2e9uxox92Qq-0

The Purge Has a New Posterchild — Zuckerberg Just Made a Crucial PR Mistake

When Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook purged the Right Wing News page they may not have known who they were messing with.

This could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

Brain Kolfage, a purple heart recipient and a triple-amputee veteran airman, was page administrator for the Right Wing News FB page.

Read More: https://www.dcclothesline.com/2018/10/15/the-purge-has-a-new-posterchild-zuckerberg-just-made-a-crucial-pr-mistake/

 

The Left Dehumanizes, Vilifies, Advocates Violence Against Their Political Opposition

Rap Sheet: ***628*** Acts of Media-Approved Violence and Harassment Against Trump Supporters

John Nolte
July 2018

When not calling Trump supporters “Nazis” as a means to dehumanize us, the establishment media like to whine about the lack of civility in American politics, even as they cover up, ignore, downplay, or straight-up approve of the wave of violence and public harassment we are seeing against supporters of President Trump.

It is open season on Trump supporters, and the media is only fomenting, encouraging, excusing, and hoping for more… The media are now openly calling Trump supporters “Nazis” and are blaming Trump for a mass murder he had nothing to do with. This, of course, is a form of harassment because it incites and justifies mob violence.

Here is the list, so far, and remember that if any one of these things happened to a Democrat, the media would use the story to blot out the sun for weeks. Remember how crazy the media went over a nobody rodeo clown who wore an Obama mask, a GOP staffer who criticized Obama’s daughters? And yet, hundreds of Trump supporters are harassed and brutalized and the media only dutifully report them, if at all. That is because the media are desperate to normalize and justify violence and harassment against Trump and his supporters.

And while the media openly encourage this violence against us, the media also campaign to disarm us, to take away our Second Amendment right to defend ourselves.

This list will be updated as needed. Back-filling it will be an ongoing project…

Here is a video channel dedicated to documenting the dozens and dozens of assaults against Trump supporters.

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2018/07/05/rap-sheet-acts-of-media-approved-violence-and-harassment-against-trump-supporters/

Liberal America has a political violence problem

Albert Eisenberg
July 2017

…Nobody is directly responsible for a shooting except the shooter, and nobody throws a brick except the person who picks it up. No side has a monopoly on political violence. There are loonies at the fringes of every political movement — mentally ill, perturbed and paranoid — who can be stirred toward violence or dissuaded from it.

But when we have Democratic senators accusing political opponents of murder, when our college campuses descend into assault zones for conservative speakers (or those who defend them), when our major cities become playgrounds for far-left rioters and the news media gloss over it, we move toward a more violent and fractured society, not a safer one….

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-liberals-antifa-violence-20170718-story.html

“This Is Only The Beginning” – Antifa Vandalizes NYC Republican Club

In a gesture that was intended to put New York City Republicans “on notice,” members of Antifa vandalized the Metropolitan Republican Club building, located on NYC’s Upper East Side, breaking windows and doors and defacing the facade with “anarchist” symbols, according to the New York Times.  In a note left with the vandalism suggested that the damage to the left at the scene, the vandals declared that the attack was related to  a planned appearance by Gavin McInnes, the founder of the Proud Boys, a conservative group that has publicly battled with leftist groups at rallies, protests and demonstrations across the US.

 

The Corporate Media is Misleading and Dividing the People with False Narratives and Selective Facts

Carefully Selected News Stories to Manipulate

The Mainstream Media: A Tool to Destroy the U.S.

A deliberate attempt is being made by the MSM (Mainstream Media) to destroy the remaining fabric of American society and force the country’s disintegration and absorption into a global government.

Jeremiah Johnson
October 22nd, 2018

The Media does not want a “good” society: they want a degenerate society that is either cowed into compliance, or so focused within and upon all its filthy acts that it does not care what goes on around it. Such leads to submission and enables control.

The Media has blinded the people by showing them what they wish to see: themselves. The Media has purposefully, deliberately lowered the standards. The Media (inclusive of Hollywood, mind you, and the movies and television) have presented aberrant behaviors and actions that denigrated and destroyed the former social fabric. They have enabled others of their ilk (Communists in Politics and in Business) to foster a new “Third World” society, including the abolition of the middle class and the ending of where government is the final answer and solution to all problems.

Read. Read the “Communist Manifesto,” and the Planks of Communism, and you will see in print what was written decades ago, that is happening here and now in the U.S. Read Alexander Sozhenitsyn’s works to see what happens at the “final tipping point” of the full-blown change of a nation into a Communist totalitarian society.

And read the newspapers, the magazines, and the like: it will all jump right out at you. We are at a tipping point where the economy is not stable, where there are many elements that could turn into tremendous social conflicts and upheavals domestically, and the rest of the world is little by little “decoupling” from the Petrodollar and reliance upon American markets. Throughout all of this, the Media has been there to make it worse, to skew the news, and to force societal transformation and paradigm shift through its propaganda toward a Communist society and the relegation of American sovereignty toward global governance.

Read More: http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/the-mainstream-media-a-tool-to-destroy-the-u-s_10222018

The Globalist Pravda Network Reveals its True Face

It is clear that there is a deep sickness at the heart of the media. The whole point of its existence is to investigate incidents, to go where the facts lead it, and to serve ordinary people by attempting to report and reveal what is true. And above all that, it is to act as a check on the overweening state, so that it does not feel that it has carte blanche to do whatsoever it wishes.

But the handling of these two major cases has shown perhaps more than ever before that it has no intention of doing these things. It will not investigate, it has no intention of revealing inconvenient facts, and it cares little for the truth. And above all, instead of acting as a break on the state and on Government recklessness, its chief concern now appears to be doing the bidding of a very powerful group of Globalists, defending and advancing their diabolical agenda, regardless of what is and what isn’t true.

What should we call such a media that seems to have little or no regard for the truth, and which collectively serves the interests of the Global elite? Mainstream? Globalist Pravda Network seems to me to be a more accurate description.

Read More: http://www.theblogmire.com/from-the-skripals-to-douma-the-globalist-pravda-network-reveals-its-true-face/

Welcome to Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four

Remember when words like “liberal” meant classical liberal like the Founding Fathers? Now it means Neo-liberal… or global-communist/social-Marxist.

Remember when being on “the right” meant conservative, and not far-right like a Nazi?

Remember when “nationalism” meant patriotism and not racism?

Truth is the New Hate Speech
Truth is the New Hate Speech

How The Left’s War On Words Manipulates Your Mind

Words can now literally be defined with their antonym. We are a hair’s width and an ounce of stupidity away from ‘war is peace, freedom is slavery.’

….It starts with misusing words or defining them based on circumstance rather than objective meaning. The entire purpose of defined language is to hold constant meaning so others can understand. Situational use starts to condition how people feel about words, building up a new connotation.

The classic example is the word “liberal,” which the far-left co-opted. It was adopted because of its positive connotation, and used as a cover for imposing greater leftist control under the guise of liberty. In reality, there is nothing liberal about failing to protect life, burdening individuals with regulations and taxes, or forcing individuals to provide services to others. This is no accidental misnomer, but strategic messaging to influence people. Who doesn’t want to support a policy that is “progressive,” “pro-choice,” or “affordable”?

When the word cannot be flipped, other words are sometimes added to suggest a new meaning. In the case of firearms, the new popular phrase is “assault rifle.” Webster’s Dictionary was happy to update its definition to help nudge society in the right direction. The effect is a stronger connotation, which plays on people’s emotion and visceral reactions to the phrase….

Read More: http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/01/lefts-war-words-manipulates-mind/

This article just reinforces it’s own bias, so for clarity on my own position, I changed the last quoted phrase, in brackets, from “Trump Administration” (that was presented by the author w/out examples or evidence and therefore made her own point about spreading baseless bias) to “our political climate,” because that would better explain the fact-free positions of consensus politics on both sides of the aisle.

Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds

New discoveries about the human mind show the limitations of reason.

….Surveys on many other issues have yielded similarly dismaying results. “As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding,” Sloman and Fernbach write. And here our dependence on other minds reinforces the problem. If your position on, say, the Affordable Care Act is baseless and I rely on it, then my opinion is also baseless. When I talk to Tom and he decides he agrees with me, his opinion is also baseless, but now that the three of us concur we feel that much more smug about our views. If we all now dismiss as unconvincing any information that contradicts our opinion, you get, well, [ the current political climate. ]…

Read More: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds

How The Guardian Fulfills George Orwell’s Prediction of ‘Newspeak’

Eric ZUESSE | 19.04.2018

…Another story in the April 15th Guardian was “Pressure grows on Russia to stop protecting Assad as US, UK and France press for inquiry into chemical weapons stockpiles” and this one pretended that the issue is for “Russia to stop protecting Assad,” who is the democratically electedand popular President of Syria, and not to stop the invasion of Syria since 2011 by US and Saudi backed foreign jihadists to overthrow him. Furthermore, as regards “press for inquiry into chemical weapons stockpiles,” the real and urgent issue right now is to allow the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) into Douma to hold an independent and authoritative investigation into the evidence there. Russia pressed for it at the U.N. Security Council and the US and its allies blocked it there. But the OPCW went anyway — even after the US-allied invasion on April 14th — and this courageous resistance by them against the US dictatorship can only be considered heroic.

That type of ‘news’-reporting is virtually universal in The West, among the US and its allied governments, which refer to themselves as ‘democracies’ and refer to any Government that they wish to overthrow and replace by their own selected dictator, as ‘dictatorships’, such as these regimes had referred to Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, Syria forever, and Ukraine in 2014….

Read More: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/19/how-guardian-fulfills-george-orwell-prediction-of-newspeak.html