Group- Think

I have wondered for some time if there is a bunker somewhere in an undisclosed location (let’s ask Joe Biden- he knows), where there are troll- like little liberal roaches, failed Dungeons & Dragons web users who ravenously consume potato chips and power bars, all while parroting the lastest talking points disseminated by Emanual & co. It seems there are perhaps ten of them, all out of shape, with acne and other skin problems related to a lack of sunshine- I think Rimbo and friends keep their little Computer attack dogs in shackles, or perhaps have them on mind- altering drugs- how else to explain the blind adherence to illogical and unworkable talking points.

The first key to understanding the cadre of mindless drones the WH has on computers, is the limited language they use.

They remind me of high school freshmen, so eager to fit in that they all eagerly use the same  words, as if they are the keys to the secret club that they so desperately want to belong to. This is truly an echo chamber, and it doesn’t seem to be a big deal to these little lilliputian minds that they all parrot the same words- “Howler” is one biggie- everyone on the left uses this word as if- (maybe Barry used this word at one time- lets do the same)- this word carries some magical connotation. (“This word renders conservatives powerless- use this one as much as possible.”)

It doesn’t seem to matter what publication one reads- if it is liberal, it will have these words “liberally” sprinkled throughout.

Or, “Roasted”- perhaps these liberal critics of logic once worked at a Quiznos, and can’t get that word out of their mind- now, that word bounces around the echo chamber that is their collective mind. I can’t wait for one of them to slip and ask if we want fries with that lack of logic, or we want to supersize that argument.

And then there are the biggest echo words- “racist” and “bigot”- if you poke one of these invertebrates with a stick, it will automatically bark one of these two words, like a trained seal without the cuteness ( more like a six foot leech that feeds off of taxpayer money).

At this “Undisclosed” location, like the whacko scientists Holdren and Emanual are, they are developing a new lifeform- a computer supergeek, capable of writing illogical party talking points at super speed. They then plug them in and let them counter the conservative blogs using limited language, groupthink, and fueled by massive infusions of gummy worms and Jolt Cola or Red Bull.

Logic is useless against them- it just bounces off of their misshapen heads, covered with the  electrodes that Holdren and Zekie boy have surgically implanted. They even give these poor life forms names and a false history. Perhaps they allow some of them to believe they can actually tune a piano and herd goats- a rather dubious duo of talents, but then if that’s what it takes to keep them complacent, oh well. For others, the implanted memories need not be that complicated.

I fear for our Republic when there are so many captive mind slaves employed by the WH- I mean, how can one stand against the combined mind power of these people when they equal a 100 watt bulb? Can we fight these masters of illogic? Will we withstand the blind adherence of party line propaganda? The total verboseness of their writings? A dysentery of nouns and adjectives?

Will we simply lay on the floor, gasping  from laughing at their weak arguments? I know I will.

Because now I can tell, the opposition is few, but vocal.

And I can handle vocal- I can use the humor.

Bring it on, mindless drones.
Blake

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

12 Responses to “Group- Think”

  1. Greg Robie says:

    Morning Blake,

    I would, again (thought it HAS been a while), recommend the research Jonathan Haidt is doing on morality. Liberal morality is, ironically—given the affect of intellectual hubris liberals wear as a badge of honor, mathematically simpler than conservatives’. As someone who would likely be labeled as liberal by the conservative extreme, if I substitute Rove for “Emanual & co,” your critique makes as much sense for the previous administration as it does for the present one.

    If you what to find value in always being right, but differently—such that something other than a moral divide in “we the people” is effected and nurtured— Haidt’s work provides a new framework for considering our social conundrum. Analyzing our differences in how best to “correctly” frame social discourse might turn up some surprises—not unlike that the Weathermen and Goldwater crowds discovered later on in life: common concerns where held, but viewed so differently (morally) that such did not feel possible—at the time.

    Motivated reasoning substitutes feelings for thinking. The non-rational “logic” of such “thinking” becomes visible for all but those who are lost to it . . . liberal AND conservative extremes, alike.

    • Blake says:

      The polarization of both extremes is of course, disturbing, but when extremists from the liberal side begin barking, I find no logic that is worthy of consideration- all sound and fury- and a lot , A LOT of invective, rather more than the other side- I am guessing their arguments run out of logic sooner- I could be wrong- perhaps they are bred with that liberal strain of Tourettes.

    • Blake says:

      Do keep in mind I have, as everyone else, a perspective. So do they, but I try, I really try not to hurl invective , instead arguing my position. They might not like my position, but I will still try to keep making the point, rather than just give up, as they seem to, and play the race card, a losing strategy from the start.

      • Greg Robie says:

        If you check out Haidt’s work regarding morality it shows that from a “liberal” position/perspective—moral meme—playing the “victim” card is a logical (albeit non-rational) strategy. From the moral perspective of the extreme right, such a strategy, and the moral sensibilities it appeals to—and particularly in times like these (when the Constitution is being twisted as it is—to say nothing of basic accounting rules in regards to the financial sector), such “whining” is morally repugnant. Such “barking” (and I like the pun) is just so much hot air. Darrel, who I asked what his solution was to AGW the last/first time I was an active commenter at this blog demonstrated this when he said he didn’t address that, but preferred to slap you down the arguments against AGW made in this blog.

        What I observe both of such “sides” have in common is “hot air.” From my perspective if looks like it feels otherwise due to how the dynamics of motivated reasoning can fool us into not being aware that we are not being rational. In any event, once we become trusting of (addicted to) a particular iteration of motivated reasoning, it becomes a self-reinforcing dynamic within a parochial meme (such as Darrel’s “Free Thinkers,” and parochial groups you, appeal to which support your perspective.

        In any event, the framing that we are stuck with—that of arguing (for a) perspective, rather than that engaged in a common search for truth is—as Haidt’s modeling points out—an iteration of the extreme liberal moral meme. That conservatives have embraced such suggest we heterosexual males have all—left and/or right oriented—had to learn some hard lessons in marriage counseling! ;)

        Regardless, isn’t the “disturbing” polarization you identify as a feeling that indicates, something is amiss? If so—and like counseling—trust of the “other” has to be a disciplined action, at least at the outset until one starts to see what one does not trust in a different light. If so—and like the discipline one embraces when serving in the military—one trusts the orders of ones commanding officer, at least until such starts to be part of a pattern/policy that violates the US Constitution and/or rules of engagement.

        • Blake says:

          Greg- we argue from a perspective that fits what we perceive to be right- if that conforms to a specific viewpoint shared by enough people, than you verge on group- think.
          If that goes farther, such as everyone using the same flash words, than it does indeed become group- think, and you become no better than a parrot.
          This is true no matter what side a person is on.
          If however, your viewpoint runs parallel to another, this does not necessarily indicate group- think, but a shared POV, which can diverge at any time.
          A good example might be Christianity- there are commonalities, but almost every branch of this faith has their own POV- this is not group- think, but only shared (partially) POVs.
          Now, as far as “trust” of the other side, that’s a hard one- first, both sides have to agree on rules of civilized behavior and discussion.
          I have tried that and it did not go well for very long before the detente was broken- not by my side, this time- but the point is valid nonetheless.
          The other side (liberals) are violating the US Constitution- this is precisely why I get upset- I get that they won the election, but they should be doing what they want to do WITHIN the framework of the Constitution, not doing an end run around the rules.
          And it does no good to say, “Well, the other party did it,”- that is a childish excuse, not a valid reason.
          hey should be showing us how much better than the other party they are- instead, they are showing us how they can outdo the other party in terms of piggishness, and abuse of power.
          It’s not a pretty sight.

  2. Darrel says:

    BLK: I really try not to hurl invective>>

    DAR
    Amazing really, considering that the vast majority of the content, all of your posts, including the above, consist of nothing but insults/invective.

    And that’s unfortunate.

    D.
    ——————
    invective

    1. vehement or violent denunciation, censure, or reproach.

    2. a railing accusation; vituperation.

    3. an insulting or abusive word or expression.

    • Blake says:

      Not so Dar- your side is the intellectually bankrupt side, hurling insults- your side is guilty of #s 1- 3 repeatedly-
      And I did not say I have not, I only said I TRY- but you libs can tax my patience and drive me to retaliatory invective- something that for me is a last resort, but for those of your stripe, simply the easiest way for you to believe you are superior.

      • Blake says:

        And if you read the sub- heading, you would see the words humor, AND opinion- I get to express both and nuts to you if you do not like that.
        I can and will express my opinion all day and night.
        The fact that you had your sense of humor surgically removed ( I understand that is a requirement to be liberal- you have to take yourself so serious) is an impediment to understanding the intent of this post, but fret not- some conservative, if you ask nicely, will be glad to explain “humor” to you.
        They may begin slowly, like asking you to look in the mirror for a funny- and work up to intellectual humor.
        You CAN be saved- for just one dollar a day, you can sponsor this unfortunate liberal and give him the greatest gift of all-
        A Sense of Humor.

  3. Adam says:

    Blake, somehow lacking all capacity for logic and reason himself and showing no sign intellect whatsoever, hopes we still believe his assertion that it is in fact liberals who are the intellectually bankrupt side, not he and his fellow conservatives. That’s rich.

    Fill up the thread with some more of your anecdotal evidence you pass off as logic, Blake. That’s always fun.

    As for a sense of humor, it’s good to note you’re a barrel of laughs, Blake. But I’m not laughing with you, I’m laughing at you.