John Oliver's brilliant skewering of liberal hypocrisy

[George H. Smith]

Remarkable....

http://www.thedailys...ivil-disservice

Ghs

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

George,

I was going to post this one, but then got busy. I'm glad you put it up. But I came across a way to embed it, so I'm giving it below.

Believe it or not, this thing hit Real Clear Politics (where I got the embed code): "Daily Show" Exposes Liberal Columnist's Hypocrisy On Civil Discourse

<div style="background-color:#000000;width:520px;"><div style="padding:4px;"><embed src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:video:thedailyshow.com:405874" width="512" height="288" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" base="." flashVars=""></embed><p style="text-align:left;background-color:#FFFFFF;padding:4px;margin-top:4px;margin-bottom:0px;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;"><b><a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-12-2012/civil-disservice">The Daily Show</a></b><br/>Get More: <a href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/'>Daily Show Full Episodes</a>,<a href='http://www.indecisionforever.com/'>Political Humor & Satire Blog</a>,<a href='http://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow'>The Daily Show on Facebook</a></p></div></div>

It is very, very funny.

But then I reflected.

It didn't appear to me that Froma Harrop, the president of the National Conference of Editorial Writers, is being a hypocrite in the sense of being deceptive (with double standards) because of a payoff she refusese to contemplate. This cuts deeper. It's epistemological. That poor sucker is actually so certain of her conceit that she literally can't think critically, not even to horse around.

This is where I believe neuroscience hits ethics. I think Harrop has meditated on her own imagined superiority so long that her brain's neuroplasticity has created a neural pathway of the kind normally reserved for certain things like you fall down, not up, and your burn your fingers on hot stoves, not room temperature ones, and things like that.

I think she has literally mutilated her brain through focused mental repetition of a value judgment.

And the implications of that is not so funny...

Michael

[9thdoctor]

That was good. It made me think of a quote:

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

[caroljane]

That was good. It made me think of a quote:

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

Which non-a propos brings to mind a quote about the "memoirs" of defeated or retired politicians:

"There's nothing like losing a good government job to bring out a man's literary talent"

-Will Rogers

[syrakusos]

Still chasing "liberals" while denying that you are "conservative." I thought that Objectivists were "radicals for capitalism" and that the elevation of natural law over tradition separated libertarians from conservatives. Again, I point to F. A. Hayek and Milton Friedman as self-identified "liberals."

On OrgTheory, an academic blog about sociology and economics, Prof. Fabio Rojas, wrote about the intersection between Ron Paul and racists here. One of the commenters replied: "Libertarianism and racism make perfect compliments. Many libertarians are “race realists” who think that unfettered market forces will result in a racial hierarchy with black people at the bottom." If you do not know what he is referring to, then goto YouTube and listen to as much of "LIbertarian Realist" as you can stand. You can also find this racist on Rebirth of Reason (relegated to Dissent, gratefully), as "Brad Trun." Prof. Rojas is not making this up. If you would use the label "liberal" in this way, then do you accept being called a "conservative" and therefore being associated with racists? I will be blogging about this mysefl later in the week.

Funny as it was, it was not an example of "liberal hypocricy" but of one person's views. I think that MSK comes very close to identifying the mental processes here. But, goto her website, and see what Froma Harrop herself says about the Tea Party being economic terrorists. Whether or not she (or F. A. Hayek) is a "liberal" the label "economic terrorist" was used against Bernard von Nothaus for his Liberty Dollar coins. I suggest that while our society is complicated and not likely to closely track an Atlas Shrugged scenario, that as advocates and practitioners of capitalism, the successful publicity of the Occupiers suggests that we could be put in the One Percent of scapegoats in a Krystalnacht coup.

[George H. Smith]

Still chasing "liberals" while denying that you are "conservative." I thought that Objectivists were "radicals for capitalism" and that the elevation of natural law over tradition separated libertarians from conservatives. Again, I point to F. A. Hayek and Milton Friedman as self-identified "liberals."

Hayek and Friedman sometimes called themselves classical liberals, but both understood how misleading the unqualified term liberal would be if used by free-market types today. Hayek discusses this problem in The Constitution of Liberty -- as does Friedman in (I believe) Capitalism and Freedom. In my forthcoming book from Cambridge, Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism, I have a chapter ("Liberalism, Old and New") on the hijacking of the label "liberal" by statist types during the late 19th century.

I'm not certain if I have addressed your point because I'm not sure what your point was supposed to be.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Funny as it was, it was not an example of "liberal hypocricy" but of one person's views. I think that MSK comes very close to identifying the mental processes here. But, goto her website, and see what Froma Harrop herself says about the Tea Party being economic terrorists. Whether or not she (or F. A. Hayek) is a "liberal" the label "economic terrorist" was used against Bernard von Nothaus for his Liberty Dollar coins. I suggest that while our society is complicated and not likely to closely track an Atlas Shrugged scenario, that as advocates and practitioners of capitalism, the successful publicity of the Occupiers suggests that we could be put in the One Percent of scapegoats in a Krystalnacht coup.

Double standards are legion among modern American "liberals," and Harrop is a prime example. Call this what you will; I call it "hypocrisy."

I read Harrop's article. It is the usual claptrap, to the effect that her incivility was supposedly justified.

Harrop cites H.L. Mencken, but Mencken never headed a crusade for "civility." That's the difference -- aside from the obvious fact that Harrop is no Mencken.

Ghs

[Brant Gaede]

George,

I was going to post this one, but then got busy. I'm glad you put it up. But I came across a way to embed it, so I'm giving it below.

Believe it or not, this thing hit Real Clear Politics (where I got the embed code): "Daily Show" Exposes Liberal Columnist's Hypocrisy On Civil Discourse

<div style="background-color:#000000;width:520px;"><div style="padding:4px;"><embed src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:video:thedailyshow.com:405874" width="512" height="288" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" base="." flashVars=""></embed><p style="text-align:left;background-color:#FFFFFF;padding:4px;margin-top:4px;margin-bottom:0px;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;"><b><a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-12-2012/civil-disservice">The Daily Show</a></b><br/>Get More: <a href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/'>Daily Show Full Episodes</a>,<a href='http://www.indecisionforever.com/'>Political Humor & Satire Blog</a>,<a href='http://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow'>The Daily Show on Facebook</a></p></div></div>

It is very, very funny.

But then I reflected.

It didn't appear to me that Froma Harrop, the president of the National Conference of Editorial Writers, is being a hypocrite in the sense of being deceptive (with double standards) because of a payoff she refusese to contemplate. This cuts deeper. It's epistemological. That poor sucker is actually so certain of her conceit that she literally can't think critically, not even to horse around.

This is where I believe neuroscience hits ethics. I think Harrop has meditated on her own imagined superiority so long that her brain's neuroplasticity has created a neural pathway of the kind normally reserved for certain things like you fall down, not up, and your burn your fingers on hot stoves, not room temperature ones, and things like that.

I think she has literally mutilated her brain through focused mental repetition of a value judgment.

And the implications of that is not so funny...

Michael

Oh, this is generally true all over the map. What is required is for the next generation to replace the one dying off. People are mostly not mentally plastic enough to switch gears significantly or they have too much invested in what they do and are. Youth is always coming in. What is the state of American youth? The ongoing economic smash and crash is going to educate them right along with their student debt, the anchor around their necks.

--Brant

head for the hills

[Reidy]

He's amusing, and he gets credit for avoiding an O'Reilly-style shouting match, but she's such an easy target that I hesitate to call it brilliant.

[9thdoctor]

Prof. Fabio Rojas, wrote about the intersection between Ron Paul and racists here. One of the commenters replied: "Libertarianism and racism make perfect compliments. Many libertarians are “race realists” who think that unfettered market forces will result in a racial hierarchy with black people at the bottom."

Yeah yeah, and I posted a David Duke video on another thread in which he “endorses” the Tea Party. And there were Jews who were early supporters of Hitler.

[George H. Smith]

He's amusing, and he gets credit for avoiding an O'Reilly-style shouting match, but she's such an easy target that I hesitate to call it brilliant.

As I see it, Oliver's "brilliance" was not in exposing Harrop's self-serving inconsistency -- that part was indeed easy -- but in how he emphasized her denseness in grasping his point about her inconsistency. This happens in the latter part of the video, as Harrop repeatedly fails to understand that Oliver is talking about her.

If Harrop's inability to understand Oliver's point had not been so unflattering to her, I would suspect that that part of the video had been scripted, so improbable does it seem. It makes her look like a fool, far more than the inconsistency does.

Ghs