It’s Time for You to Speak Up

Because so many people often think as obedient members America's two political teams, those of us who are free-thinkers are commonly ostracized, scorned and censored for asking obvious questions and stating obvious facts. That is, until . . .  once in a while . . . on one-fine-day, the dam breaks and then it is suddenly appropriate to once again talk freely about a topic. I won't give many examples here because this is happening regarding almost every important national issue. Consider COVID masks and lab leaks, for example. This herky-jerky way of talking at each other is massively inefficient and the effect is to severely crimp human flourishing. It's like we are all attending Lord-of-the-Flies High School. I will offer three short points:

1. This has become an era of "truth infrastructures." Social teams, media operations, non-profit entities and bureaucracies on both the right and the left are coordinating together to maintain and defend their official narratives. The narrative much be honored, even if it lacks an evidentiary foundation and even if it contrary to the evidence. We need to push hard these days to get the team players to acknowledge obvious facts. Our public discourse now has the same dynamics that Thomas Kuhn attributed to science:

During the period of normal science, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher, contra Popper’s falsifiability criterion. As anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along with the anomalous results into one framework, is accepted. This is termed revolutionary science.

In short, we free-thinkers need to grind away forcing evidentiary pressure build up until official narratives finally pop.  Again, what a terribly inefficient way to communicate as a society.

2. There is no easy solution to this national team sport of talking at each other. We free-thinkers need to have immense amounts of stamina and courage to speak up. We are often the victims of barrages of ad hominem attacks.  We need the courage to persevere in the repeated lack of apparent progress. We also need the courage to point out the mistakes of those who we might feel to be on our "own" team. Courage is the key. Nietzsche often wrote about the relationship between truth and courage. Here are several of his aphorisms on courage:

How much truth can a spirit stand, how much truth does it dare? For me that became more and more the real measure of value. Error (belief in the ideal) is not blindness, error is cowardice.

Every achievement, every step forward in knowledge, comes from courage, from harshness towards yourself, from cleanliness with respect to yourself. ..

[T]he forcefulness with which you approach truth is proportionate to the distance courage dares to advance. Knowledge, saying yes to reality, is just as necessary for the strong as cowardice and fleeing in the face of reality - which is to say the ‘ideal’ - is for the weak, who are inspired by weakness... They are not free to know: decadents need lies, it is one of the conditions for their preservation.

Even the bravest among us only rarely has courage for what he really knows . . .

Where to we get that courage and stamina?  There are brave free-thinkings who go out there every day and they are leading the way.  Some of my favorites include Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald, John McWhorter, Sam Harris, Glenn Loury, The three hosts on The Fifth Column podcast, Abigail Shrier, Brett Weinstein, Heather Heying, Ed Snowden, Colin Wright, Claire Lehmann and the rest of the gang at Quillette, Andrew Sullivan, Eric Weinstein, New Discourses, Wilfred Reilly, Jesse Singal, Chloe Valdary, Peter Boghossian, Coleman Hughes, Bill Maher, Christina Sommers, Christopher Rufo, Benjamin Boyce, Aaron Mate, Krystal and Saagar at Breaking Points, Joe Rogan, Bari Weiss and Jodi Shaw. I'm sure that I've forgotten a couple dozen others. Bonus points to Brett Weinstein for his recent heroics. Just be brave like these people, even though you will be ridiculed and gaslit.  If you are a sincere and kind-hearted truth teller, you will often be called names. When that happens, wear those insults like a badge of honor! You need to speak up especially when no one else is speaking up, as Soloman Asch demonstrated in the 1950s.

3. Even when we know we are correct about our facts, we can't simply shout them from the mountaintops.  We also need immense amounts of patience to neutralize the tactics used by the members of America's two Team Thinkers. We free-thinkers can't just be right. We also need to be effective by picking our spots and navigating contorted arguments containing words with upside-down definitions. Why do we need to be patient?  Because our plan should be to prevail in the long run, not take snarky little shots in the short-run. Also consider that those who attack us often think that they are doing the right thing.  They are often as fired up as we are.  They are also convinced that the ends justifies the means, and the means include every logical and evidentiary fallacy in the book, though ad hominem attacks are the bread and butter. Our goals should be to recruit them to our side by showing them the error of their ways.  For the past year, I have been writing dozens of articles at this website in an attempt to patiently collect the lost sheep.

3. I am reminded of Mahatma Gandhi's quote:

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Instead of cordial civil discourse where people follow the Heterodox Academy HxA Way, Our teams push and pull to win rather collaborating as individuals to tease out truths.

In sum, each of us needs the unbridled innocent curiosity of a child, the courage of a lion, and the calm patience of a diplomat. Now get out there, tell carefully articulated truths and get called names.  Over and over.  You will be making progress and when other quiet people see you taking some hits, they will be inspired to speak up too.

Continue ReadingIt’s Time for You to Speak Up

Case Study of How Facts Keep Getting in the Way of a Good Story: Tear-Gassing Protesters or Church Photo-Op

Remember how Trump tear-gassed protestors in order clear them out to take a photo-op in front of a church in Lafayette Park? Virtually every left-leaning media outlet reported this as an absolute certainty. The only problem is that this narrative is false.

Glenn Greenwald takes us, step by step, through the June 1, 2020 false narrative, up to the new story, where old-fashioned tools called facts establish the foundation for discussing what really happened. Here's an excerpt from Greenwald's analysis:

The IG's conclusion could not be clearer: the media narrative was false from start to finish. Namely, he said, “the evidence did not support a finding that the [U.S. Park Police] cleared the park on June 1, 2020, so that then President Trump could enter the park.” Instead — exactly as Hemingway's widely-mocked-by-liberal-outlets article reported — “the evidence we reviewed showed that the USPP cleared the park to allow a contractor to safely install anti-scale fencing in response to destruction of Federal property and injury to officers that occurred on May 30 and May 31.” Crucially, “ the evidence established that relevant USPP officials had made those decisions and had begun implementing the operational plan several hours before they knew of a potential Presidential visit to the park, which occurred later that day."

The detailed IG report elaborated on the timeline even more extensively. It was “on the morning of June 1” when “the Secret Service procured anti-scale fencing to establish a more secure perimeter around Lafayette Park that was to be delivered and installed that same day.” The agencies had “determined that it was necessary to clear protesters from the area in and around the park to enable the contractor’s employees to safely install the fence.” Indeed, “we found that by approximately 10 a.m. on June 1, the USPP had already begun developing a plan to clear protesters from the area to enable the contractor to safely install the anti-scale fence” — many hours before Trump decided to go.

The clearing of the Park, said the IG Report, had nothing to do with Trump or his intended visit to the Church; in fact, those responsible for doing this did not have any knowledge of Trump's intentions

This story is not an outlier. U.S. media is constantly getting things starkly wrong. For example, See Glenn Greenwald's article on the worst ten media failures on the Trump-Russia story.

Continue ReadingCase Study of How Facts Keep Getting in the Way of a Good Story: Tear-Gassing Protesters or Church Photo-Op

Enthusiastic Racism From the Academic Left

I agree with the message of this short video. I despair of the way that "anti-racism" is being implemented in many schools. What does it tell young people who identify as "black" that we need to lower standards for all "blacks" because they, as a group, cannot cut it?  Two things:

1. This claim is false. "Black" students can cut it.  If given high-quality education and parental involvement from the start, I believe that "blacks" are every bit as capable of educational achievement as any other "color" of student. Many "black" students are high performers.

2. This quick solution sends the same pernicious message that one would expect to hear from American slave-holders in the 1850s.  This is not what students need to hear.

Let's give all students (and their families) the tools they need to succeed.  And let's not shy away from inconvenient facts, including these the fact that 69% of "black" children were born outside of marriage (compared to 30% for "whites" and "15% for people categories as Asian.  I don't bring this up to be moralistic, but only to suggest that many more "black" children lack some of the resources available, on average, to children of other "races." A two-parent household (whether or not married) can, on average, offer more resources to the children of that household.  I also suspect that in some "black" communities (not all), education is approached differently than in some other communities (of all "races). John McWhorter has discussed this different approach on occasion (see, for example, the 30 min mark here). Both of these factors (and others) need to be addressed unflinchingly so that every child, including every single "black" child, gets the resources and encouragement he or she needs to excel as a student.

Nothing I have written here suggests that we should judge any child on any basis other than as an individual.  Every child is unique and there are high achievers and low achievers of every so-called "race."

[I no longer use the term "race" or the colors referring to "races" without scare quotes.  Use of these terms is horribly imprecise, unscientific and inherently divisive.  Claiming that there are "races" is the first step on the slippery slope toward racism.  We need a two-pronged attack: 1) We need to move away from claims that there are "races," as nothing good results from this divisive term. 2) At the same time, we need to ostracize and vigorously litigate against any person or organization that discriminates on the purported basis of "race." ]

Continue ReadingEnthusiastic Racism From the Academic Left

Challenging the Black Lives Matter Grade School Curriculum

It's hard to determine what is more disturbing about this story: the dysfunctional Black Lives Matter curriculum or the reluctance of parents to speak out against what is obviously a dysfunctional and divisive curriculum. The article is titled: "‘The Narrative Is, “You Can’t Get Ahead”’: In Evanston, Illinois, a Black parent and school-board candidate takes on a curriculum meant to combat racism."

Excerpts:

"Friedersdorf: Does it rankle you, as a Black person, when people define white culture with positive stereotypes, such as showing up to places on time?

Mboyayi: That’s exactly how I feel. The education system tends to erase or mute Black people from different backgrounds and experiences. They make this assumption that all Black people are a monolith—they all speak the same way, think the same way, and conduct themselves in the same way.

Showing up on time has nothing to do with being white. It’s something that you’re taught or not taught. My father taught me at a very early age to keep my word. If you say that you’re going to be somewhere at some time, be there. What system of white supremacy was he influenced by?

Friedersdorf: You were willing to talk about all this on the record, under your own name. Other parents with concerns about the public-school system in Evanston were terrified to do so. Are they overreacting?

Muboyayi: They should absolutely be afraid because, you know, certain elements of our community are threatening to get people fired. Even if someone just poses a question, or expresses a conflicting view, you’re immediately labeled a part of the problem, a white supremacist, and people will say, “Find out where they work.”"

Continue ReadingChallenging the Black Lives Matter Grade School Curriculum

Glenn Loury and John McWhorter Discuss the Racism of Anti-Racism, as Applied to Education

The overall theme in this video is that we are not going to be able to solve problem if we are not willing to look squarely at the problem. The horrific problem we face in the U.S. is that a large percentage of black children are not fairing well in American schools. In 2019, only 20% of black children were proficient at math (compared to 52% of whites, 28% of Hispanic and 66% of Asian children). We never get to why this is happening or how to fix the problem if we deny that there is a problem. Wokeness/Critical Race Theory "fixes" the problem by pretending that mathematics is racist, in order words, by disparaging math as "white" and attempting to lower the standards. As Glenn Loury passionately points out, this is a racist move, a backhanded way of suggesting that black kids can't cut it, even though most other children all over the world can. This following video is a 15 minute excerpt of a longer discussion that one can view at Glenn Loury's Patreon Website.

Note: I hold that the term "race" is scientifically incoherent and socially divisive. Taking the view that there are "races" is the first step on the slippery slope toward racism. Categorizing complex humans as colors is grotesque, simplistic, dysfunctional and destructive. To see another person as a color is as ridiculous as believing that one can tell character by one's birthday (astrology) or by the shape of one's head (phrenology). In this article, I reluctantly refer to "races" given the current social landscape, with the hope and dream that, someday, "race" will be generally recognized to be the least interesting aspect of any human being, as uninteresting as the shape of their third toe on their left foot.

Continue ReadingGlenn Loury and John McWhorter Discuss the Racism of Anti-Racism, as Applied to Education