Conflating A Subjective With An Objective – The Root Of All Propaganda?

31
663


After many decades of lies and deception, the right have become increasingly adept at using propaganda to achieve their political objectives. The most obvious system of propaganda is religion, which uses mythology to try to instill ethics into an unsophisticated population – an absolutely terrible idea. We don’t need ethics – good and evil don’t exist, (unless we’re talking about evil republicans and wholesome democrats). All of these absolutisms imposed upon us by conservatives are designed to control what we do and think. But progressives know better – we don’t need any stinking rules! Society functions much better without them.

At the root of all this propaganda, I believe, is the masking of a subjective term as an objective one, or vice versa. Take for example the term “gender” which we all know now is a subjective concept, determined by how you feel. Conservatives pretend that this is a biological term and that it is fixed and cannot be changed – a total lie! Millions of people have been convinced that gender can be objectively determined at birth, even though science says that it’s a social construct! Clearly gender, race and species are all subjective terms, which describe how people feel and what they choose to identify as – they have no grounding in biology or the physical world. 

Possibly the worst piece of propaganda of all though is the idea that some actions are “good” and others are “evil”. There is no such thing as good and evil! Good and evil are just concepts used to control what people should and shouldn’t do. Progressives NEVER tell people what they should and shouldn’t do! Sure, we condemn people morally, but we have no consistent system of ethics and will completely flip flop based on the accredited narratives we are fed. For example, we were against Bush’s wars in the Middle East, and we protested about these, but we weren’t against Obama and Hillary’s wars in the Middle East – these were humanitarian interventions! So we didn’t just create some magical concept called “evil” and cast all unjust wars under that banner. We changed our minds based on the prevailing narrative!

Now let’s consider some true objective terms. Consider the word “accredited” – now that’s an actual objective term. If an idea or narrative is accredited, it is approved of and promoted by the vast majority of experts and global leaders, and cannot be disputed. “Accredited” is a universal term, grounded in reality, just like “the greater good” and “the will of the people”. If it wasn’t, then wouldn’t it be silly to have a publication called “The Accredited Times”? If accredited was just a matter of opinion, then people could choose whether to recognize our accreditation or not. But the narratives we promote are approved by the majority of experts and power-brokers, and therefore people must accept them as universally accredited.

“Equality”, “fairness” and “tolerance” are also objective terms with no subjective element. If these were truly subjective terms, people might accuse us of trying to impose our own subjective preferences on others by masking them as moral standards! Do you really think progressives would do this?

The right seriously needs to reform its ways and stop seamlessly conflating subjective and objective terms in order to mask their true agenda. This is the 21st Century, and we know better than that. It’s time for conservatives to start living in the Current Year and realize that there is no such thing as absolute truth (including this statement)!

littleshoppinlucy
littleshoppinlucy

Oh wow, you make so much sense MDB. I’d love to live in an objective reality where feelings come first 🙂

Pbier

This article is so true for me; what’s true for you isn’t always my truth but it is on this occasion!

trav777

It’s true unless you’re a bigot or a right-wing hater…

The notion of objective truth is racist because it was invented by white people.

Marinated Le Pen
Marinated Le Pen

Although this article is sarcastic in tone, there is no such thing as absolute truth. The reason is simple, but hard to understand for many people. Our ability to perceive extremes is limited, and we usually flip when encountering an extreme.
So a normal person, when he becomes an “elected leader” behaves as an eunuch, simply following the orders of his handlers, for there is no truth other than what is shown to the eunuch. If the eunuch laughs at the extreme scenario presented and the accredited solution, xe will lose the next elections or worse. It is the same with military generals, soldiers, central bankers, supreme court judges, religious leaders, MSM news editors, etc.

Pbier

“Although this article is sarcastic in tone, there is no such thing as absolute truth.”

Some critics might say in response that this is an absolute statement in itself, thus discrediting your own argument. They might also say that you are merely a slave to the spirit of the times, which says that everything is relative (what is true to me might not be true to you…), that you have become and represent the established view whilst purporting to be a ‘free thinker’, and that a dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.

However, as the article says, there clearly is no such thing as absolute truth, which you have skillfully proven for all people, places and times by use of the eunuch leader example.

Marinated Le Pen
Marinated Le Pen

One doesn’t need to be a free thinker or philosopher to come to that conclusion.

Let us assume the holiness of the Catholic Church. The Church (like Bush Jr) rails against moral relativism. It thinks it terms of moral absolutes, of good and evil.
We know lots of unsuspecting children were abused by the priests. This happened at much higher rates than what you would see in a normal population. So Catholic priests promoting moral absolutes, were more evil than those who believed in moral relativism. The Catholic Church is therefore unholy. Moral absolutism is extremism!

Pbier

There are several flaws and leaps of logic in your argument. No-one is denying that the abusing priests were/ are evil (although the word ‘evil’ suggests reference to a moral absolute…), but this is a separate question to the ‘holiness’ or otherwise of an institution. As I understand it, the Catholic Church’s (controversial for many, misunderstood by most) claim to ‘holiness’ is certainly not derived from how its members behave!

As progressive playwrite Oscar Wilde said, ‘The Catholic Church is for saints and sinners alone. For respectable people, the Anglican Church will do.”’

Ihaveatruthache
Ihaveatruthache

You logical syllogism is beyond reproach. Are you, by chance, a scholar of the Great Karl Marx and the Illustrious Comrade Vladimir Lenin?

Marinated Le Pen
Marinated Le Pen

Organizations like the UN, ICJ, ICC that deal with moral absolutes are at the forefront of much of the mess in this world.

If you don’t deal with moral absolutes, then you can handle better, criminals who are fans of Marx, Lenin, or Stalin.

trav777

Ummm…take this shit up with Aristotle. Cuz, again you’re wrong as fuck. Don’t let it stop you.

Marinated Le Pen
Marinated Le Pen

I would have done that, but Aristotle is dead. I could have created an idol of Aristotle and talked to myself (like the team at AT). But Anon says idol worship is against God’s commandments.

IThinkThereforeIAm (ITTIA)
IThinkThereforeIAm (ITTIA)

This article really got me thinking about the unfortunate pigeonholes our backwards dark aged society has placed on different groups. Take for example the Victoria’s Secret company and how they not only use photos of scantily clad anorexic women to define a propagandist view of beauty, but to also cash in and make their capitalistic buck.

Marinated Le Pen
Marinated Le Pen

The day you get a whiff of nastiness behind “Victoria’s Secret”, you’ll run away from all that.

Ifeelwarmallover
Ifeelwarmallover

That is why the settled science of Global Climate Change is irrelevant. We feel as though the climate is changing and effecting third world countries and that should be the end of it. What is truly settled truth, is our feeling about climate change. So called “objective science” is just a tool of the oppressors.

hungrypirana
hungrypirana

A train wreck of a story!! MDB’s ‘god’s-eye’ view of the universe puts boorish progressives and a bloated leviathan above liberty and freedom, and the idea of me pursuing my own truth such as drinking beer, chasing bitches, reading Nietzsche and RESISTING his ilk.

richandrenee

How dare you come on here with your misogynist hate-speech. Just who do you think you are to criticize the much loved and well respected MDB.

You’ve got a lot of growing up to do hungrypirana.

trav777

Your truth may not be truth if your truth does not match the accredited narrative.

What MDB is trying to say is that people, in general, should STOP looking to find out for themselves what is right and wrong, true and false, and TRUST the consensus accredited narrative. Trust the authorities so long as they are progressives.

Be like the intellectuals who spearhead a communist movement…they always live long, prosperous lives of progressivism after the revolution succeeds.

richandrenee

It’s ridiculous how they resist the mainstream narrative. They cause themselves untold mental anguish fighting it in their narrow wee minds.

It’s heaps easier just to be happy and know that the inclusive and progressive world government that gives us the universal income is coming and that will be the end to all inequality, poverty, climate-change, and wars.

wpDiscuz