Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Janel & Val's freestyle

As usual, their connection and passion are moving and beautiful.

Bethany & Derek

This was their freestyle on Monday night. It was the popular pick for the encore performance on last night's finale.

Tuesday, November 25, 2014

The epistemic fallacy

Here's Bryant from The Democracy of Objects, section 1.5:

"Here it is necessary to clarify what the epistemic fallacy is and is not about. A critique of the epistemic fallacy and how it operates in philosophy does not amount to the claim that epistemology or questions of the nature of inquiry and knowledge are a fallacy. What the epistemic fallacy identifies is the fallacy of reducing ontological questions to epistemological questions, or conflating questions of how we know with questions of what beings are. In short, the epistemic fallacy occurs wherever being is reduced to our access to being. Thus, for example, wherever beings are reduced to our impressions or sensations of being, wherever being is reduced to our talk about being, wherever being is reduced to discourses about being, wherever being is reduced to signs through which being is manifest, the epistemic fallacy has been committed.

Is propaganda just an illusion?

In the FB IPS forum Fractal Organism started a thread on the epistemic fallacy. I responded to his statement that "the world we create is necessarily a world of propaganda, and by extension a world of delusions and illusions" with the following:

"I disagree that propaganda by extension is delusion and illusion. See my most recent post in the Lakoff thread on the movie Mockingjay. Like in the movie [...] propaganda requires an emotional connection to motivate and inspire people to action, like framing per Lakoff. It isn't necessarily about creating an illusion but about creating embodied and emotional connection with ideas.

FO: "ok, agreed, but making something embodied and emotional doesnt necessarily take the illusion out, it just gives it tangibility."

Me: 

Monday, November 24, 2014

Mockingjay and Senator Warren

This weekend I saw part I of this ongoing Hunger Games saga. I was reminded of recent posts on progressive framing, that we need more than just the right policies but also need to frame it in such a way that it inspires and motivates people to take action. Which is precisely the main theme of this movie installment. The President of District 13, along with her propagandist-in-chief played by deceased PS Hoffman, must convince Katniss to be the figurehead of the resistance. It needs a strong character to lead and inspire people to join in the fight and Katniss is The One. The entire film is about first convincing her to accept this role, and then learn how to do it well enough to inflame people to action.

So what about Warren?

Sunday, November 23, 2014

The good 'ole days

And this guy was a Republican. They don't make 'em like that anymore.


Executive Orders

The regressives didn't like this one either.


My email to the PCCC

I referenced them in the last post and decided to contact them, enclosed below:

The progressive strategy

Stephanie Taylor, Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) co-founder, recently wrote an op-ed in the The Nation in response to the Democrats election disaster. She uses Senator Warren's style and message as an example for all Democrat campaigns, something us progressives have been trying to hammer home to a seemingly defunct and inept Party. A good sign is that Warren has recently been given a Party leadership role designed specifically for her, strategic policy adviser to the policy and communications committee. Stephanie's complete op-ed is  at this PCCC link. It is critical to winning elections and enacting the will of the people, not the 1%. You can give also give your feedback at the link and any other suggestions.

Saturday, November 22, 2014

The People's Mandate

The regressives are keen on claiming they won because the people spoke in the last election for them and their agenda. See this article on a recent poll about what the people want versus what the regressives want. As we well know, they do not match up. The question still remains on how the people could be fooled so easily to believe they were voting for representatives of their best interests when it is the exact opposite.

The people's agenda: