11–20 of 155 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you applied it to your own beliefs? Which ones? Do you no longer believe in them?
I have. I'm not going to mention which ones as that would cheapen the general message, which is bigger than politics. And yes, I no longer believe them.
I wish once people realised this, they had the courage to apply this to their own dearly held beliefs, particularly political or social ones - how many of those are just lies repeated ad nauseum that clearly aren't true? But I think most peoples reaction is just to say "Yeah! that's totally what those other people do that our side never does because we're right.".
This realization is also deeply depressing, because it means you're doomed to repeat yourself over and over if you want to persuade people.
Let's take Noam Chomsky for instance. He gives more than a hundred talks every year for the past 50 years. He has written dozens (if not a hundred) books, given thousands of interviews. His message is always the same. Because after you've figured out what your best and most persuasive arguments are the only thing left to do is repeat yourself over and over. Every day is groundhog day.
Startups also have to learn the value of repetition. Long form sales text works, because of repetition. Long form video demos work, because of repetition. Drip email campaigns work, because of repetition. It's often better to give customers one good reason to use your product, repeated three times than to give three distinct reasons why they should purchase. Counter-intuitive, perhaps, unless you've heard this argument before.
(Diversity is strength)^64
(We're a nation of immigrants)^128
(America's was sinful before the civil rights protests)^256
(The Second World War was a good war)^512
(Only Jews and Gypsies suffered in World War II)^1048576
I don't think comparing Hillary to Hitler is that appropriate.
"His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."…
I think one needs to look at older writings to get a take that isn't designed to reinforce the constructed media narrative du jour.
Even then its hard to get decent info on this topic because its always been so morally charged. Nothing obscures reality worse than moral concerns.
Edit: I think you can also apply that description to several parties in the modern media environment.
"His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."…
-- early false statements are seen by many
-- later corrections down-thread are seen by few
-- popular promoted, true but unpopular hidden
https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/5queq5/how_high_perfo...
I wish once people realised this, they had the courage to apply this to their own dearly held beliefs, particularly political or social ones - how many of those are just lies repeated ad nauseum that clearly aren't true? But I think most peoples reaction is just to say "Yeah! that's totally what those other people do that our side never does because we're right.".
to guard against this, as soon as i am aware of a catchphrase or common talking point, i mentally deconstruct it and find the truth. frighteningly, the most commonly repeated verbiages are, should we say, misleading.
but lean a little closer, stranger, and i'll whisper the truth into your ear: the "two sides" are unequal in their abilities for evaluative thought, self righteous zealotry, and dogmatism. an honest attempt at critical evaluation will go nowhere if your evaluating apparatus is garbage.