Hyperbole: Think about it like this...

[wasted]

2 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

'sittin' in a chinese stew, view my disinfatuation'   Y'know, the more I think about it the more I think that song was about you.  Lucky, no ones ever written a song about me.  My older brother made up a limerick ones but thats about it

Yes I inspire bitches. 

[Len Cnut]

12 minutes ago, wasted said:

Yes I inspire bitches. 

The biggest bitch apparently   Just kidding, somewhere in my heart I love the big ginger moob-monger really.

[J Dog]

36 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I hated that for so long that song was his most known track when he was on some fuckin' hardcore shit generally throughout his shit, NWA, Death Certificate, AmeriKKKas Most Wanted, Lethal Injection...and what blows up?  Today Was A Good Day, ugh.

True. Fuck Tha Police or Bow Down is more the wasted style 

[wasted]

1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

The biggest bitch apparently   Just kidding, somewhere in my heart I love the big ginger moob-monger really.

Well if anyone asks I have no idea what that song is about. 

[Len Cnut]

1 minute ago, wasted said:

Well if anyone asks I have no idea what that song is about. 

‘I know that im a closet case, watch my disenchanted face’, thank you man, you’re a paradigm of cynicism!

[wasted]

5 minutes ago, J Dog said:

True. Fuck Tha Police or Bow Down is more the wasted style 

Ninety-nine baby I’m on the grind baby

[wasted]

15 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

‘I know that im a closet case, watch my disenchanted face’, thank you man, you’re a paradigm of cynicism!

It’s about Slash isn’t it?

[Len Cnut]

6 minutes ago, wasted said:

It’s about Slash isn’t it?

No, shut up, its about you

[wasted]

7 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

No, shut up, its about you

Everything is about me, I’m you’re friend, you’re father n ur confidante. 

[Len Cnut]

22 minutes ago, wasted said:

Everything is about me, I’m you’re friend, you’re father n ur confidante. 

I've never seen such an effortless transition into Goldie Mack ever   You should check that film out if you haven't btw, The Mack.

[wasted]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I've never seen such an effortless transition into Goldie Mack ever   You should check that film out if you haven't btw, The Mack.

Return of the Mack: Part Deux. 

[Len Cnut]

20 minutes ago, wasted said:

Return of the Mack: Part Deux. 

He was a right bellend, Mark Morrison, you should see some of the things he got collared for, carrying a tazer gun and then sending a double to do his community service for him   They say when he returned to nick the cell block was singing ‘Returnnnn of the twat’ as they walked him to his cell   I seem to recall hearing he was going to sign to Death Row at one point.

[J Dog]

Return of the Mack. I have no idea why but I still to this day like that song 

[Len Cnut]

14 minutes ago, J Dog said:

Return of the Mack. I have no idea why but I still to this day like that song 

Was it a big noise in America in 95 like it was here?

[soon]

16 hours ago, wasted said:

To me that is way liberal or the product of meth induced shchizophrenia, people have near death experiences and come back with stories of aliens telling them life is not real. I toy with the idea of life being a simulation. Ayn Rand is all about objective truth right? 

What is this speaking too, specifically? (from two pages back when I posted obama clip)

16 hours ago, wasted said:

This has always been a debate around postmodernism. On the one hand having shifting intrepretations and irony means that you can’t really have a revolution because there is no set reality. So that in a way is inherently conservative.

Post Truth is manifesting in ways that mark it as being separate from Post Modernism. Post Modernism provided tools that were a threat to racism, or like the good example you give about the patriarchy. Whereas Post Truth claims one cant discern racism or locate evidence of a patriarchy. Obama is speaking to Post Truth here, not Post Modernism.

16 hours ago, wasted said:

In terms of hyperbole, there’s a lot of misunderstanding. Almost taking things the wrong way, hard to say if on purpose or not. But there’s little effort to see where someone else is coming from. The worst is assumed I guess. The issues are pretty complex and you have to take in various perspectives. Even though I’m pro choice, I get that for some that abortion is killing a baby. So I don’t think that comes from a bad place. Then factor in religious beliefs then how can I enforce my idea on them? To me hyperbole really stops people thinking because it makes them overreact and everyone is on a war footing. 

I cant follow your point on media hyperbolic's because we engaged on that subject and then all of a sudden you claimed that the hyperbole you were speaking of was not network news but "a celebrity." For me it would also be a distortion - an exaggeration - to give any weight to some random celebrity apparently calling Trump a "nazi."

I also dont follow where the hyperbole is at play in referencing the variety of opinions on reproductive justice?

 

[J Dog]

23 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Was it a big noise in America in 95 like it was here?

Yeah it was pretty big. One of those songs that got played constantly. Never heard of Morrison before or since over here though to be such a big hit.

[Len Cnut]

4 minutes ago, J Dog said:

Yeah it was pretty big. One of those songs that got played constantly. Never heard of Morrison before or since over here though to be such a big hit.

He was sort of a one hit wonder here too, which happens a lot in England, especially people from the London area.  What you gotta realise is that its some grimy lads and girls, get a bit of money and local celebrity and they go nuts, hes someone i thought could’ve made a big noise in America but never did, a lot of streets trouble and general fuckery hindered his career.  Miss Dynamite is another one, though not my kinda music she had a kinda streetwise Alicia Keys thing going for her but never made it past that one hit, I guess some people just ain’t cut out for that shit

i feel like that coulda been big stateside.

[soon]

Ms Dynamite has fans in Canada. She appeals to Earth Mother types. A herbalist turned me on to her. I love what Ive heard and had an album way back. I cant remember if her lyrical content maybe was 'outside' ?

[wasted]

9 hours ago, soon said:

What is this speaking too, specifically? (from two pages back when I posted obama clip)

Post Truth is manifesting in ways that mark it as being separate from Post Modernism. Post Modernism provided tools that were a threat to racism, or like the good example you give about the patriarchy. Whereas Post Truth claims one cant discern racism or locate evidence of a patriarchy. Obama is speaking to Post Truth here, not Post Modernism.

I cant follow your point on media hyperbolic's because we engaged on that subject and then all of a sudden you claimed that the hyperbole you were speaking of was not network news but "a celebrity." For me it would also be a distortion - an exaggeration - to give any weight to some random celebrity apparently calling Trump a "nazi."

I also dont follow where the hyperbole is at play in referencing the variety of opinions on reproductive justice?

 

The networks cover these stories but then don’t really explain why Trump probably isn’t a nazi. They choose not to present certain contexts to support their bias. They let that word be used unchecked. They choose the stories. Although a certain word is being tossed around they let it ride. They do it with Alt Right Antifa rallies. There’s about 600 people there? They hype it up, make it seem more significant than it is. They stoke the fires for sure. They did it with N Korea. We on the brink of nuclear war! 

I can’t see the Obama clip. But he wasn’t exact transparent himself. What he says about Post Truth is probably correct. But he won’t following his own advice. 

What I’m saying is Post Truth is a postmodern symptom, the idea of that comes from a destabalizing of central cultures. You can disagree or not like the idea of it. 

What I was probably saying is that Post Truth is not really new, in human history we have always believed things that weren’t necessarily true. Like Trump getting elected on things that weren’t true. Or getting lied into war by Bush. But going back to the start of time. The world was flat for while there.

This is without getting into the nature of truth. I was saying that human’s have always been a Post Truth species. Not that truth can’t be settled on ever, just fake news has always been about in some form. 

The other tangent about simulation is that there’s this idea that we have built our culture around right and wrong, true or false. But the driving force is fear. You can use videogames as the metaphor. As in you are in control of how you react. So let’s say a racist has these ideas, why does he have them? Because he believes such and such is the truth and he is right. Take that away. Take the truth network away. The reason he believes those things is really fear. And that can be a useful way to look at things. If you have a problem don’t look at what’s true or what you believe, look at what you are afraid of. In a way that’s post truth. 

I think you might be thinking what I said about Post Truth is directly connect to Simulation theory. Kind of related maybe. 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by wasted

[DeadSlash]

16 hours ago, arnold layne said:

I hate to bring Trump into this, but it got really bad around Trump came into politics. The media, for good or for worse, really despises Donald Trump.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I think he is a complete twat, but as of right now (and I understand we are walking on thin ice) George W. was worse. Killing thousands of our own soldiers in wars we had no business being in and crashing the economy was, well, horrible.

 

I think Trump has definitely exacerbated the situation, but he didn't create it.  People have been calling BS on the Media for a long time, at least 20 years.  Trump certainly didn't invent that problem as some people seem to believe.  What he DID do was troll the media and the left into a froth where people are saying "fuck it" and not even pretending to be impartial.  The best point on this I've heard was "If these ultimately false Trump stories are truly just mistakes, why is there never a mistake in the other political direction?"  This really ties into the topic for me because you DON'T need hyperbole to demonstrate Trump is an asshole, all it does is weaken your credibility.  CNN has been reporting that Trump is having a nervous breakdown and leaving the White House 'In the next few weeks, according to sources.'  for over a YEAR.  If you report something is going to happen this week for 52 weeks in a row and it doesn't happen, people tune out.

Global warming is a victim too.  By saying we would all be underwater by 2015 might have made you a lot of money in the early 2000's, but it destroyed your credibility now.  It had the opposite effect as intended.  2015 came and went, nobody needed a snorkel, so people find it easier to conclude it was all a hoax.  I mean we still have polar bears, drinking water and icebergs.

 

There are two horrible things happening to discourse in America right now:  

1. People are being encouraged to freak out rather than debate.

2. Media is celebrating freaking out as the ultimate proof of virtuous ideas.  The madder someone is, the more right they must be.

1+2 = Nobody will ever change their fucking mind.  On any given topic, one side runs away crying and is told on twitter and cable news how brave and right they are.  The other side concludes there is no opposing argument, since the response was running away ranting and raving.  Both side both still think they are 100% right, and they haven't discussed a goddam thing.

The media is also really into race baiting because it's big numbers.  Sports media doesn't show every idiot that runs on the field, or more idiots would run on the field to get on TV.  But if you want to get on TV, say some shit about the "master race" and no matter how worthless and irrelevant you are in real life, you get the top of the 24 hour news cycle until there is a shooting.

[wasted]

The news stations are run by advertizers, so they don’t care what is being said as long as the numbers are good. 

As much as the media hate Trump, the advertizers love him because people tune in to see whatever he’s saying. If the media hate him it’s because he’s rendering them pointless. They keep going with stories because they sell not because they believe they are true. 

 

[soon]

11 hours ago, wasted said:

The networks cover these stories but then don’t really explain why Trump probably isn’t a nazi. They choose not to present certain contexts to support their bias. They let that word be used unchecked. They choose the stories. Although a certain word is being tossed around they let it ride. They do it with Alt Right Antifa rallies. There’s about 600 people there? They hype it up, make it seem more significant than it is. They stoke the fires for sure. They did it with N Korea. We on the brink of nuclear war! 

I can’t see the Obama clip. But he wasn’t exact transparent himself. What he says about Post Truth is probably correct. But he won’t following his own advice. 

What I’m saying is Post Truth is a postmodern symptom, the idea of that comes from a destabalizing of central cultures. You can disagree or not like the idea of it. 

What I was probably saying is that Post Truth is not really new, in human history we have always believed things that weren’t necessarily true. Like Trump getting elected on things that weren’t true. Or getting lied into war by Bush. But going back to the start of time. The world was flat for while there.

This is without getting into the nature of truth. I was saying that human’s have always been a Post Truth species. Not that truth can’t be settled on ever, just fake news has always been about in some form. 

The other tangent about simulation is that there’s this idea that we have built our culture around right and wrong, true or false. But the driving force is fear. You can use videogames as the metaphor. As in you are in control of how you react. So let’s say a racist has these ideas, why does he have them? Because he believes such and such is the truth and he is right. Take that away. Take the truth network away. The reason he believes those things is really fear. And that can be a useful way to look at things. If you have a problem don’t look at what’s true or what you believe, look at what you are afraid of. In a way that’s post truth. 

I think you might be thinking what I said about Post Truth is directly connect to Simulation theory. Kind of related maybe. 

 

Thanks for your clarifications and interesting take on things.

Imo, it would be a mistake to directly link Post Truth to any pre-existing frameworks of thought just because it maybe appears to some to have a few similar characteristics. We can likely map it, but i do not believe that its lineage will be directly linked to any honest, healthy, academic schools of thought. One might lean into the comfort of "theres nothing new under the sun" at this juncture but of course a modern US prez who is both ignorant of the Constitution and openly hostile to the free press is in fact new, for instance. That the Oval Office is being operated like a children's nursery, with adults removing any sharp object the toddlers find is new. I think that emergent cultural phenomena related to the Trump era is also possibly "new."

I would agree that fear is at the heart of Post Truth. And fear certainly plays a central role in our subconscious and even in our inner monologue. I think fear is a feature that really makes a clear distinction from PoMo and Post Truth in that to deconstruct, in part, requires one to face down our imperfect society and come to terms with how we are both reflective of it and reflected in it. This is to say, its bold. It wants to understand the fear you are eloquently describing. The Tribalist fear that uses Post Truth as a tactic and/or strategy is very disinterested in facing down any of that. Western Chauvinism is a brash, chest thumping conclusion. It concludes that it has mastered 'order.' It utilizes Post Truth to box out anyone who raises questions about the perfection of White Male Dominance in creating Western Democracy. It does not want to explore the pillars of Self and Society it only seeks to destabilize discourse. So, I would view them as opposing forces. 

The presence of fear doesnt indicate a lack of reflection or the rejection of outside critiques though. Not always. Fear of this Regime is well founded. Granted visceral fear cannot stand as the crux of a debate, but I wouldnt want to leave it unsaid that fear is not always synonymous with ignorance. If fear prompts an examination of the evidence and the conclusion produces anger, then so be it. It's just that, as I think you are saying already, that process isnt often taken leaving only fear and anger. Much of which cannot justify itself. Therefore anger is now demoted from a 'useful tool' down to 'dudes a tool.'

But in the words of Zach De La Rocha: "Your anger is a gift!"

 

 

[soon]

Interesting podcast from Canada's Public Broadcaster. Speaks to media coverage of Trump. Michael Enright speaks with David Bromwich, professor of English at Yale University. 30 mins in length.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/the-swamp-part-1-the-enduring-power-of-trumpism-1.4807121

 

[wasted]

13 hours ago, soon said:

Thanks for your clarifications and interesting take on things.

Imo, it would be a mistake to directly link Post Truth to any pre-existing frameworks of thought just because it maybe appears to some to have a few similar characteristics. We can likely map it, but i do not believe that its lineage will be directly linked to any honest, healthy, academic schools of thought. One might lean into the comfort of "theres nothing new under the sun" at this juncture but of course a modern US prez who is both ignorant of the Constitution and openly hostile to the free press is in fact new, for instance. That the Oval Office is being operated like a children's nursery, with adults removing any sharp object the toddlers find is new. I think that emergent cultural phenomena related to the Trump era is also possibly "new."

I would agree that fear is at the heart of Post Truth. And fear certainly plays a central role in our subconscious and even in our inner monologue. I think fear is a feature that really makes a clear distinction from PoMo and Post Truth in that to deconstruct, in part, requires one to face down our imperfect society and come to terms with how we are both reflective of it and reflected in it. This is to say, its bold. It wants to understand the fear you are eloquently describing. The Tribalist fear that uses Post Truth as a tactic and/or strategy is very disinterested in facing down any of that. Western Chauvinism is a brash, chest thumping conclusion. It concludes that it has mastered 'order.' It utilizes Post Truth to box out anyone who raises questions about the perfection of White Male Dominance in creating Western Democracy. It does not want to explore the pillars of Self and Society it only seeks to destabilize discourse. So, I would view them as opposing forces. 

The presence of fear doesnt indicate a lack of reflection or the rejection of outside critiques though. Not always. Fear of this Regime is well founded. Granted visceral fear cannot stand as the crux of a debate, but I wouldnt want to leave it unsaid that fear is not always synonymous with ignorance. If fear prompts an examination of the evidence and the conclusion produces anger, then so be it. It's just that, as I think you are saying already, that process isnt often taken leaving only fear and anger. Much of which cannot justify itself. Therefore anger is now demoted from a 'useful tool' down to 'dudes a tool.'

But in the words of Zach De La Rocha: "Your anger is a gift!"

 

 

There’s a distinction there, there’s postmodern philosphers, schools of thought (that vary quite a bit) and the postmodern age that inspired them. I would say Post Truth is a postmodern symptom, being born out of internet, access to multiple sources. The destabilizing of accepted truths that confuse nuaced arguments, not that simply things don’t exist, but more that how or why they exist can come into question, to wave them away and double down or shutdown opinions doesn’t work. 

With the truth being so easily manipulated in the past, I suppose people are more open to a truth that benefits them. Theoretically it seems to be what Baudrillard predicted, an ocean of signs without clear origins form a sort of holographic reality, I think he called it hyper-real. 

In this kind of environment, a demogogue or Trump type character can appeal to people’s emotions and feelings. So it’s whether you accept post truth as a reality or not. Looking at it, it looks like it is. Trump was able to convince people that the media manipulate the truth and the system only followed the constitution when it felt like it. There was enough hypocrisy to ruin Hillary.

Tump could be open because it’s what a lot of people believe and there’s evidence falling out of the sky. We’ve got history books of what presidents were really saying/doing. 

I think it’s more that the pomo world has lead to better understanding of say the patriarchy, but it has also led to criticisms of some findings. So it’s much more subjective and unstable than before. It leans more to post truth, but there are ways to deal with it. 

In a way a believed truth is only background to the manipulation of fear. Trump plays on well established fears of terrorism, N Korea. Not because they are legit real threats but because it justifies military spending. The flip side can be said of criticisms of Trump, in a post truth world, they play on the fear of what Trump will do which probably aren’t going to happen, to try to get back the power. Truth is pretty disposable and ephemeral, so it’s not something that can be used effectively. Fear is really much more effective. 

For example we get those inside stories of Trump being a big baby in WH, eating McDonald’s watching Magnum PI in his Simpson’s pjs. Maybe, maybe not. But if you then say this guy has his finger on the Nuke button. Suddenly there’s a fear to react to. Get him out of there. We still don’t know or care if that is true. The fear outweighs the truth. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 10, 2018 by wasted

[soon]

9 hours ago, wasted said:

There’s a distinction there, there’s postmodern philosphers, schools of thought (that vary quite a bit) and the postmodern age that inspired them. I would say Post Truth is a postmodern symptom, being born out of internet, access to multiple sources. The destabilizing of accepted truths that confuse nuaced arguments, not that simply things don’t exist, but more that how or why they exist can come into question, to wave them away and double down or shutdown opinions doesn’t work. 

With the truth being so easily manipulated in the past, I suppose people are more open to a truth that benefits them. Theoretically it seems to be what Baudrillard predicted, an ocean of signs without clear origins form a sort of holographic reality, I think he called it hyper-real. 

In this kind of environment, a demogogue or Trump type character can appeal to people’s emotions and feelings. So it’s whether you accept post truth as a reality or not. Looking at it, it looks like it is. Trump was able to convince people that the media manipulate the truth and the system only followed the constitution when it felt like it. There was enough hypocrisy to ruin Hillary.

Tump could be open because it’s what a lot of people believe and there’s evidence falling out of the sky. We’ve got history books of what presidents were really saying/doing. 

I think it’s more that the pomo world has lead to better understanding of say the patriarchy, but it has also led to criticisms of some findings. So it’s much more subjective and unstable than before. It leans more to post truth, but there are ways to deal with it. 

In a way a believed truth is only background to the manipulation of fear. Trump plays on well established fears of terrorism, N Korea. Not because they are legit real threats but because it justifies military spending. The flip side can be said of criticisms of Trump, in a post truth world, they play on the fear of what Trump will do which probably aren’t going to happen, to try to get back the power. Truth is pretty disposable and ephemeral, so it’s not something that can be used effectively. Fear is really much more effective. 

For example we get those inside stories of Trump being a big baby in WH, eating McDonald’s watching Magnum PI in his Simpson’s pjs. Maybe, maybe not. But if you then say this guy has his finger on the Nuke button. Suddenly there’s a fear to react to. Get him out of there. We still don’t know or care if that is true. The fear outweighs the truth. 

 

 

 

 

 

Our conversation has turned into the 3rd hour of an acid trip! Where concepts like 'fear' and 'truth' shed there previous meanings, but the new meaning hasn't yet been uncovered. 

Im no expert on the subject, but have always been drawn to more moderate PoMo voices, like Derrida. The idea of seeing some good and even putting useful things together for the greater good. Still not sure where that manner of thinking bridges with Post Truth (hey, wanna call it PoTru?). The main difference in our application of the two frameworks is that I do not see PoMo as destabilizing. Not in the real world application that is. The reason why is that to apply a PoMo analysis to patriarchy one must be able and willing to address the reality of a patriarchy. We've been talking deconstruction vs destabilization. In my view the willingness to acknowledge something exists before unpacking it is lightyears more connected to reality than the PoTru lie that one cannot know these things like patriarchy exist. That is destabilizing in the real world.

I agree that Trump is a symptom not a cause of the unraveling of truth. Im not yet on side with the majority who agree that "Trump says what people were thinking" though. Not totally. When I watch his faithful applaud and belly laugh at his nonsense. Theres no way people want to say things he says because they make no sense and are random musings on things like hairspray. No way people think all that mumbo-jumbo - its impossible! 

When I see Trump speak to his faithful I am reminded of WWF wrestling (Which Trump had storylines in, no less). So then Id ask if people enjoy WWF because it plays out what they want to say and do? I really, really do not think that people want to dress in florescent thongs while breaking a table over the back of someone while exclaiming "You used to be my friend, Freezer Bag Bandit!!" Many certainly dont appear to want to hit the gym daily. To me Trump is still a WWF storyline and people like those independent of it acting our their inner thoughts. The only things that I think apply as 'giving voice to the people' is his bigotry.

These people are assholes who fear a world where not everyone in a movie is white . They fear the machinations of the Federal Government as much for their inability to comprehend it, as they do for valid reasons. Here comes a guy that will provide his own comic relief, say nothing smart about governance and gives voice to bigots, including White Nationalists.

How fear drives one away from truth and not towards it is something I can grasp on one level but not quite 'get.'