Wanna know what you are doing wrong, Libertarians?

Ar Scion

Ar Scion

New member
Oct 27, 2009
1,627
21
0
Long Preface:

If you want an advantage in furthering your sociopolitical ideology, get academic backing. Almost every ideological position that is gaining acceptance in the US today (very likely the world), has some sort of academic backing in form of ideologically committed scientists and/or researchers in relevant fields. Typically sociology and psychology, but many of the hard sciences tie into related ideological battles, like nutrition regulation.

You wanna see how academia plays directly into the hands of politics?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/h...-with-tough-snack-and-sugary-drinks-laws.html

There you go.

I know there are probably going to be some ivory-tower worshiping ideologues who will say "...but science can do no wrong! If a study says it, it's true! There's no political influence in science! Research funding sources are not a factor in determining the outcome of the study and it's intended message for public consumption (except when cigarette companies are involved)." Amateursurgeon, I'm looking at you. :)

TLDR version: Everyone who likes to think/read about politics and influence needs to take academia seriously as a source of legitimizing their message.

On the flipside, watch how others use academia to further their political message onto you.

All in the name of "Science says it, now believe it's true".
 


Academia gets funds from the federal government. Why would they want to pay for a study favoring their demise?
 
One aspect of Cialdini's basic rules; Authority.

Believe this because these experts say so.

It's probably one of the most used weapons the left-wing media use to influence the sheeple.

There isn't a "news" story put out about the right that doesn't include some version of "many people say..." (social proof) and "experts at _________ say..." (authority) in an attempt to discredit a policy position.
 
Wish I'd known about the Ludwig von Mises Institute a few years ago. I would have totally applied for their summer program when I was still in college.
 
bodiddley nailed it, I can't improve upon that point at all.

But, it's not for lack of trying. See the Cato institute and of course Mises for our best attempts.
 
bodiddley said:
Academia gets funds from the federal government. Why would they want to pay for a study favoring their demise?
Click to expand...

Universities get funding from the government.

University graduates that end up in research positions at private labs, institutes and other organizations get funding from private companies.
 
OP is correct, but bodiddley is also, academia is part of the establishment and on the take, see: "Global Warming".

Legislation to regulate sales of food is at odds with the libertarian perspective, so if that's the kind of tip that academia is on, there's absolutely no room for libertarians.
 
zoQia.gif
 
Academia can be on whoever's tip benefits them the most.

The mistake is in thinking academia is beyond sociopolitical influence. That it's a gone case.

That they are not fundamentally people with desires, needs and wishes that cannot be met by someone other than far-left ideology.

The core mentality among professors and students alike is a sort of self-conscious, guilt-driven noblesse-oblige. What else do you think all the activism is about?

You think you can't craft a more politically libertarian message that can push the right buttons?
 
Ar Scion said:
Academia can be on whoever's tip benefits them the most.

The mistake is in thinking academia is beyond sociopolitical influence. That it's a gone case.

That they are not fundamentally people with desires, needs and wishes that cannot be met by someone other than far-left ideology.

The core mentality among professors and students alike is a sort of self-conscious, guilt-driven noblesse-oblige. What else do you think all the activism is about?

You think you can't craft a more politically libertarian message that can push the right buttons?
Click to expand...

? the problem libertarians have is not that they dont know the game the opposition plays. the problem is their stance. you cant realistically argue libertarian ideas by fucking other people up because that would be in direct conflict with your ideology.
 
charlesmartel said:
And how many thousands of years do we have temperature records for? Oops. Only about 110 years.
Click to expand...

Thermometers have only existed for a number of years, yes. A skeptic argument is that temperature changes are mainly due to natural cycles. Well, when they say this they are talking about temperature cycles that happen at least every 1,000+ years, which obviously also goes back before thermometers.

Paleoclimatology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Well as long as I can no longer be blamed for taking us over into global warming territory here again, there's more proof than just that lately. According to PNAS:

James E. Hansen, head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, declared Aug. 3 that a new study by him and colleagues Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy proves global warming is causing the extreme weather dominating the news in recent years.
Click to expand...

james-hansen-global-warming-study-537x305.jpg


The researchers charted the world’s changing temperatures over the past 30 years and found that “the extremes of unusually cool and, even more, the extremes of unusually hot are being altered so they are becoming both more common and more severe,” Hansen writes. Extreme-heat events, Hansen says, “used to be exceedingly rare.” But the study identifies a new category of events that it calls “summertime extremely hot outliers.” The researchers write that “This hot extreme, which covered much less than 1 percent of Earth’s surface during the base period [1951-1980], now typically covers about 10 percent of the land area.”

Climate scientists are usually hesitant to connect any one weather event with climate change. But the new study gets more direct, stating that:

It follows that we can state, with a high degree of confidence, that extreme anomalies such as those in Texas and Oklahoma in 2011 and Moscow in 2010 were a consequence of global warming because their likelihood in the absence of global warming was exceedingly small.
Click to expand...

So it's no longer something we can't tie to localized weather! They are saying these big events like the heat wave we're in right now are completely improbable without AGW... Yet getting more frequent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back