Techniques of Propaganda (1949)

When America had something to be smug about.

PR is literally just propaganda. Everyone has PR, so everyone else needs PR, whether they want it or not.
If it tugs on feelings, especially guilt, it’s propaganda. They shouldn’t need to sink that low if they have a genuine point. It’s the same with frivolous lines e.g. get back into the kitchen was never funny, because women have always influenced elections. You’ve just turned away one vote to your opponent. Republicans don’t get this, everyone you reject is a Dem win.
Just as often, there are neutralizations of any dissent.
The classic one is a thought-terminating cliche. Exactly what it sounds like.
Transfer is ad hominem.
Card stacking – misquoting, cherrypicking, sharpshooter fallacy etc.
Testimonials exploit the Halo Effect. It’s the opposite of what SJWs try, guilt by association (and guilty until proven suitably progressive). There’s a witch trial vibe of suspicion.
Plain folks are a kind of cheerleader effect for the average voter, Joe Public. There is a lure toward a false consensus, negating the need to argue or debate from an honest position or with the burden of proof. It’s pretending there’s a bandwagon, hoping the network effect makes it so. Perception studies show how vital popularity is, or the perception thereof, to what the individual thinks of as their personal opinion. These are stubborn when set but can only be based on the information they’re exposed to.
The great part of this fake news is how it started – with the BBC.
Now people have a neologism for the concept, they’ll be on the lookout for propaganda. Problem is, the Old Media are the ones pumping out most of it.
For Corbyn they tried this, including a hategoat, like a scapegoat but for people you’re meant to hate (think the villain you boo in a pantomime). People pointed out the Boomers in the table video were likelier to vote for Corbyn, actually, and he was one himself.
The purpose of propaganda is control. It’s manipulation via the heartstrings.
“To do something, to believe something, or to buy something.”
Plenty of men are wary of the first but the latter escape them. A fool and his money.
2. Look for negative evidence. Things that make their position look bad or the speaker to feel bad.
Why do you think they never teach how to spot this in state schools?

If they have different motivations or end goals to you, if they aren’t intellectually honest, you probably shouldn’t agree with them. To deny group-level interests are innate and real is ludicrous. What they want opposes you. The political is personal, that’s why votes are one each.

Leftism would’ve never gained traction without the spotlights of Hollywood making it seem cool and happy. Yes it’s a lie if you look at say, the data, but how many people do that? A minority of high-info voters.

Don’t listen to the manosphere on women

It’s like asking an SJW about being a stay-at-home mother, they avoid it and they’re hostile so if you wanna marry with kids do not ask a group of perma-bachelor genetic suicides.
They might be good on other topics, like finance and hobbies, but they project all their failures away on this little one so it’s completely 180 ass-backwards wrong. You get male spinsters in their 30s demanding a 17yo Russian virgin they couldn’t even pull at the male physical peak, 18.
It’s the core topic they go on because they’re secretly obsessed (like the MGTOWs on female websites) about but it reminds me of the men who visit hookers and insist they’re good with women. Maybe because in many cases, that is them. They’re too stupid to know the women they solicit are whores. Do you want advice from that guy?
Consider the common complaints – women ruin everything (cue rattle throw), we have data proving it and state spending favours women.
Why?
Well, they ignore all the data they don’t like, do not seek out data which might prove their false faith false and fail to account for the male half of the fucking equation e.g. men don’t marry so women get pregnant out of wedlock, the rise of deadbeats and imagine if we stopped spending on women. Aside from being literally sexist because women pay taxes, no more free birth control. Would this make them happy, or sad?
I don’t think it takes a genius to figure that one out.
No free STD shots for men and no abortions for the consequence dodgers.
Happy or sad?
I think they’d riot, frothing at the mouth, right alongside the ghetto.
And they’re just as bad as the feminists, for producing children and then wishing to murder them rather than spend time and money caring for someone, it’s a damaged human you’re dealing with.
So they don’t really hate single mothers, it’s the narcissism of small differences, many produced them by failing their spouse (if you lead the house, alpha man) and divorcing. They’re just the male equivalent of the angry feminazi who wants more money for themselves and narcissist who wants all other groups to suffer, a bitter shell of a person with a thin sense of esteem and cheap ideas. As you might notice, that selfishness is the root of their problems.

You can’t ask an inferior person about how to be better than average.
Emphasis on You Go Girl?
Emphasis on You Go Galt.
~It fits!
The men need a woman like a fish needs a bicycle!
The free market cost of fucking around is a shotgun wedding, you stupid motherfuckers. Please explain how you plan to dodge in that case.


Would this make them happy, or sad?
If the Government stopped bailing out their dick.
I agree, we should stop bailing everyone out. Starting with men, because their gender role is provider.
I have a game where friends screencap me interesting Youtube comments.
Right click to open image and delete anything after a ? to see full size.
Inspired by a man’s post, sent to me by a man.

~~~slowest of claps~~~

Someone looked for negative evidence! A man of humility/quality!

Manning up refers to a series of useful actions, not text game scripts.

Ruined narcissists are only contented if they ruin those who come after them. They burned out, as player burnout widely attests, it’s a dead-end and so they now crawl like worms after women young enough to be their daughter or grand-daughter? They encourage vulnerable young men to do the same, under the guise of loving them and saving them from their instincts. Like the 70s feminists do with women.

The sexual revolution was for men because sex is all the low quality men wanted. They’re now pajama boys, porn addicts and general wastes of space creating nothing of civilizational value. 

If you only associate with the trashy women, 1. you are trash people, you don’t get to use the word degenerate as a pejorative and 2. you have no right to comment on non-trash, which is the majority if you look at say, the stats on US college sluts (only 20-30%). For the same reason you don’t ask a fat person for exercise advice.
The data they hide is the data that shows they lie.

Irony at Nyan Thousand

It’s a metaphor, ya dope. It doesn’t even exist in the most abstract form per se. It’s part of a stage theory, on every level: lifespan, evolution and brain development,.

Remember, top level has no memory. That’s how we know the rest exist.

Empiricism 101.

It’s like if I advocated for ravens thinking they were literally like writing desks.
This is literally a false (conception of) consciousness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness

Stupid fucking atheists.

There is no thought in consciousness, only the result of it. The product: I think this. You must begin another loop of reference to feedback any way to explain that. The thought process is unconscious. We know alternate states exist in medicine because MRI and anesthesia. Fucking STOP.
The Self, too, is unconscious in root. What do you think therapy is???!

“Conscious awareness” of WHAT, exactly?
It’s like saying there’s no ocean, only the surface of the bloody ocean, because humans can’t touch the bottom!

Stupid people are completely product-driven, too much consciousness, not enough process.
The stupid cannot introspect. How does introspection even happen without an unconscious? But they’re still urge-driven. Well, by golly-gosh gee whizz, I wonder where those urges could possibly come from?

FYI CBT is hilarious and tragically flawed as a modality.

This quote about humility from an atheist tickles me, the opposite of triggering.
Materialism is the opposite of abstract but you’re no dualist?

I guess doing real work would be too hard?

Hey, you forgot your

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis

you and AGW, pick one up for them too!

You’re not science, fam!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

If you have feelings for others e.g. family, you know Dennett’s bigoted view of the human experience is backward bullshit. It doesn’t even work if all humanity were extreme spergs, characterized by low affect and empathy, the highly self-involved and callous, since the fears/phobias/urges drive them more than the rationalizations that follow. We have studies on this – people can explain away any old shit they do consciously, it lies.

Video: Islamic inventions

Check out Islamophilia.

The virus is so two-faced and patronising. Well, infantilizing is the literal term.
>”I invented everything!”
>”Of course you did, baby!”

It’s trendy to pick on Afrocentrism.
But to be truly on the edge, Islamocentrism.
Because stealing Greek manuscripts is the same as writing them.

Even IF.

IF.

That were true.

What the fuck happened?

Why is Islamic Dark Ages a term? Not during the European Middle ages, I mean the cultural shift to ignorance way beforehand.

Why do you resist reformation and basic science, like the earth revolving around the sun?

What have all your geniuses been doing for centuries (when you didn’t murder them on record) for over a millennium?

Why did white people have to invent the Scientific Method? NW Europeans, not even all white people!

Where were you?

Why do you still have Third World problems? Couldn’t your people have fixed these?

Why did you lose when we finally fought back against conquest in the Crusades?

Why did so many empires fall?

Why do you rely on the evil West for primitive 101 things like water supply?

Bestiality? At the very least, less incest. Not eradication, look at our Queen marrying her cousin, just less.

What’s the deal with the very current phenomena of child rape? Even little boys?

Where’s the self control in your young men?

 

You can’t take a culture that values lying and expect it to be intellectually honest.

A scientific society isn’t just something you can claim. It shows.

Where is the IQ data?

Video: Dunning-Kruger

FFS.

Conformity, signalling and confidence itself have nothing to do with this effect.
I love how the video itself misexplains. You can look up the papers.

It’s 2 things – 1. lower IQ assuming everyone is their level. The more quant side. The big find you cannot deny.
2. People inept on a task assuming it must be easy or they can already do it. Example: scrutiny or being good at sex.

This effect is an impersonal test of ability and specifically performance. Self-report differs, but it always does. To some extent people need to be delusional or depressive realism kicks in. The problem is the depth and extent to which is impacts anything else, including memory.
Stupid people have false memories of what smarties said BECAUSE they didn’t understand them.
That is the big take.
They suck on IQ in part because they cannot interpret the question. This is why tests exist. Again, this is why the testing concept exists.
Deep down, they suspect this, and THAT is why they do not link (like this video does not link to a single fucking thing).
It works in reverse, they think they can communicate, a performance task, when they objectively cannot.
The distance of subjective and objective performance is easier to garner on more objective topics and skills.
These types of video stop at wikipedia, and do not link any papers. I won’t because I’ve read so many and each concludes something subtly different. Yet they didn’t link a single thing and had no reason not to. It’s hilarious.
This is like the Schrodinger’s Cat of psychology, basically almost everyone gets it wrong for personal reasons – a false performance which proves the effect. Acting like you get it – and you never read the paper, any paper. Never genuinely understanding something. This is the scary part, most of the talkers know nothing about the subject and their sentences are taken as valid opinions.
I don’t blame normal people for this effect, average 100 IQ-ers. It also involves a lesser known ‘cognitive dissonance’, the two are often mentioned in tandem by scholars who know. *cough cough*
Humility is punished as stupidity, so the average, feeling the distance and squeezed in the middle, pinched by category, will usually arrogantly feign, hoping to wing it. The winging it they know, although this disconnects to their knowledge that isn’t -knowledge on the topic. Later, they misremember, false memories are yet another topic and these are highly related but distinct, no wonder normal people can’t cite them.
Misconceptions are not lies, lying to third parties is still a lie and they chose never to check, there’s no cover for that.

They’re bluffing, the bad boss who can’t do their own work for example.

Referencing my first point, low IQ people have shitty metacognition. They don’t know, but they don’t know that. They cannot argue for this reason, especially with a person who has new and scary opinions. They can never be controversial and basically marry the ‘accepted’ and ‘settled’ information in a society. They have no weapon to draw and you can see by some rude comments where this comes in here. Their ego is attached to appearing to people, a way other people have never perceived them. It’s funny because they assume everyone is stupid as they are, another assumption of shitty metacognition that can’t properly read other people either. Hence stupid people online are confused for autistic, the autistic too have shitacular metacognition.

They can’t think and they don’t know what to think.

They pretend they definitely know what they think.

What to do, apart from read around every angle and the original science articles where available?
Note: 99/100, a newspaper will not link to the original science journal paper. They don’t want you to know the truth and possibly disagree with them.

By comparison, I rarely use myself as an authority unless I’m giving a firm opinion. I mean, that’s why you’re here, my take.
I ask a lot of questions. This implies I do not know.
I allow comments that insult me and provide new information. No bubble. The bitchy ones embarrass themselves.
There is a range of references, from other blogs to newspapers to journals.
I do not hide resources I disagree with, on the contrary, I want people to read them, safe in the knowledge other intelligent people will see what I did. Plus it’s fun to mock.
I link papers but not too much.
Nobody’s going to read 200+ links.

Be realistic.

It’s ok to say you dunno.

What cultural appropriation?

That’s so disrespectful.

She was a monarch and she was murdered.

What’s next, Diana?

You gonna open with a slow-mo car crash?

American trash whore bloggers, plugging their shitty products (always the same dozen or so brands) and abusing our history to do it. These girls always trowel it on to hide their hideous real features as well, especially the nose. But they’re too vain to suck it up like the Jewish girls and get a nosejob. Sure, fine, lecture us on ‘real beauty’ from behind 17 layers of silicon….

Meanwhile, here’s what Marie really looked like.

Wear all the makeup in the world, you’ll never be 1% as naturally alluring as this woman.
Kills you, don’t it? If white women are so flawed, why u constantly trying to look like us, dress like us and name your kids like us?

This tart up top isn’t fit to lick the Queen’s boots, this is completely abhorrent to anyone who reads.
Marie and her husband weren’t actually responsible for the French Revolution, it was Louis XV and his debauchery. He was initially called The Beloved but reviled by the time he died, as people found out what a degenerate manwhore he was. Everyone despised him. Among his many crimes against morality was to kidnap nubile daughters, almost always against the parents’ will, have them locked up- and rape them.
http://world4.eu/madame-de-pompadour-political-power-general-influence/

“The foundation of that infamous establishment where Louis XV kept young girls, whom he had in many instances caused to be forcibly taken from their parents…”

You wanna talk about rape culture?
Dissolute monarchs completely deserved the block.
Marie is mentioned at the end. She never wanted to be Queen. Back up, hoe.

Do a French-inspired look, fine, we don’t give a shit. We can just laugh when you fuck it up because Europeans don’t use a fifth of the makeup of parvenu Nouveau-Americans.
Do not perpetuate lies about good people. Have you Americans lost all respect for the dead?
Looking at the way you treat statues (you might as well dig up dead bodies like we did Cromwell, ‘cept he deserved it) I’m thinking so.

Why do non-whites think it’s OK to rip off our history?

And who in their right mind wants cornrows and tacky patterns anyway?
You have yours, we have ours. That was the deal.

The whole Princess culture is strictly European, other cultures might’ve borrowed it but the closest is the Empress system of Asia or perhaps the geisha (who were prostitutes, the world is laughing at you if you imitate that).

It’s a repetitive thing where they lie with their camera and lighting choice and STILL dial up the contrast until they look white. I was shocked when the camera tracked on her real face, and that’s minus just the thick cack-handed makeup.

Warning: cack-handed makeup is always ugly makeup.

BTW, those white phenotype contacts lenses are always creepy.

Always.

Asian and black girls keep brushing on freckles now too.

Oh, so it’s fine for everyone else to racebend?

WTH.

I have another post I mostly wrote where I go into what’s really wrong with the ‘beauty community’, namely that men are allowed to dictate to women how we should look, what is feminine today: that we should look like men trying to be women.

However, a second and almost equally virulent issue is ripping off various ‘influences’ and acting like it’s okay to cosplay real, dead people. These people would reee if we pointed out Beyonce’s talentless thunder thighs but apparently they can rob the dead for cosmetic tips but there’s no equality.

???

Like, we are (free) to buy fake tan, but not (free) to buy skin lighteners in the West.

They’re allowed to be sold to non-whites though, who don’t actually need them for medical reasons, unlike white people. We’re allowed brighteners, which are close but don’t really work on white skin.

Anyone racebending looks stupid.

Anyone.

You cannot look a different race.

It’s forensic, you cheap-looking slappers.

Update: This girl isn’t even attractive by the standards of her own race/country.

She’s no Nutan.