Even ‘smart’ people are subject to propaganda – often more so

I just got back from an old friends college graduation party, what was notable was my friend was substantially ‘smarter’ now, and could argue intelligently, but was still completely deluded in regards to propaganda we are fed, despite arguing coherently, he still believed things like the wage gap, and proceeded to lie himself into believing it was men’s fault.

First, I just recently read something (if anyone knows the source) but essentially the argument was that some study about so-called ‘smarter’ people actually fall for propaganda more deeply, I think this was in regards to feminism in modern day but the study was based on racist beliefs, but essentially that when propaganda was hoisted on the populace, ‘everyone’ would agree with the lies like ‘all man are potential rapists’ but in reality only the educated people BELIEVED it, whereas the uneducated had hard stereotypes they fell back on, regardless of what was professed.

I had never considered this specific angle but makes sense, if you are from the south, it doesn’t matter how much progressive ideology you are fed about races, you are still going to hate blacks, hate muslims, whatever. This is not important to the argument other than that they do NOT listen to the propaganda (whatever it may be) whereas the intellectuals WILL, because its ‘logical’ ‘smart’ ‘right’ etc. It ultimately comes back to ego, they are so progressive of course everyone KNOWS men rape etc. Ironic, because if they critically examined the past they would see how fast ‘obvious’ conclusions change.

Anyway to my friend, we went to highschool together, and he was a bit younger, and on the slow graduation path, back then he was not smart. I hadn’t seen him in like 3 years easy, he’s fatter now, but I was impressed with his ability to argue coherently. This was not a guy who was intelligent, rather he was made fun of for being dumb.

Now, as many of my readers may know, I graduated with a bachelors in environmental science, and despite the hard science training I had, I have not found a job in science (which I am totally skeptical of STEM short of about the xxEx until engineering gets overrun as well) anyway, I come down VERY hard on so-called intellectuals. I find it appropriate to delineate between true hard ‘scientists’ (biology, chemistry, math, physics, ecology etc) and everything else. That means I view psychology as a dangerous pseudo-science that has endowed a large portion of females with ‘oracles’ powers us mere mortals can’t comprehend. I do not consider philosophy, religion etc a REAL major, and this is the source of the disparaged intellectuals I slam. These are the pathetic humans that make the way into middle management or HR and fuck everyone else’s life because their own is a ruin they can’t comprehend.

My friend graduated in computer science, I would say that is a hard science, based on real facts, repeatable, etc. So far so good. We start talking about stuff and he start referencing google scholar, and ‘sources’, partly I like that instead of pure anecdotal evidence, (but I do not discount anecdotal at all) but the whole ‘source’ thing is very…hipster and intellectual. He mentioned something about the wage gap, and I was thinking ‘should I say something…or just let this go?’

But I was hear to spread the truth, and this was a situation it might find ground to grow.

‘The wage gap is a lie’ –Me

(Any new readers – start with this link [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/03/nyregion/03women.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 ] from a MAINSTREAM media, actually telling the heretical fact that young women make MORE than men. 5000$ for a 30k job, pretty fucking insane)

‘Not so! If you look at x y and z source women do indeed make less than men.’ –him

‘If you control for all factors that may be true, but it is deceptive – men work more and at higher paying jobs’ – me

‘that’s because women are told they aren’t good at math. According to study z women do worse when they think it’s a math test compared to a regular test’ – him

(quick aside, if you know anything about MBTI personality theory, hard defaulting to external authority is a J trait, most man-o-sphere writers are hard P, they question established doctrine)

‘It’s problematic man, we compare someone working more, at a higher paying job, and complain about the unfairness in the ‘wage gap’ ‘ – me

He proceeded to launch into…something stunning. He made the argument that we CONDITION girls to accept ‘subservient ‘ jobs like teachers because they aren’t ‘good’ at math. He was making the argument that sexism was so pervasive, that we were conditioning our poor girls to be 2nd class citizens, regulated to being a humble kindergarten teacher.

‘I got some serious problems with your argument man, you are acting like school teachers are powerless, I am going to counter that teachers have insane power. It is men who are the victims of sexism here, they are reared by women their entire school lives, told how bad they are as boys and those females teachers aren’t spouting anti-female rhetoric that’s for sure’ –Me

‘Oh, but they are, because teachers see the studies, they know other women can’t be good at math, so they subconsciously edge girls away from jobs that would earn them more.’ –Him

The conversation ended when someone else came up, but I was stunned that there was this self-flogging by a male FOR women. I have clearly seen this type of behavior before as nearly every pathetic ‘man’ who tries to woo women with his apologetic groveling, but to see it so indoctrinated, so researched, so…non-truth, non-reality being taken as reality, and some irreality being substituted in for what was ‘wrong’ with the situation.

It is a bit hard to describe the effect this had on me, because again, the self flogging is nothing new, but this was a whole new level. Its like if someone came up to me and painted this vast picture of history and science about how all men are actually gay…its like wtf!? How is this the conclusion!?

My point here is not to attack or flame my friend, I am simply stunned at the effectiveness of intellectualism in destroying actual intellect. It doesn’t matter that even a cursory search shows the wage gap is a lie, or how about the heretical (but true) reality that my generation (sub 30) actually fares WORSE as males then our female counterparts? We live at home far higher, unemployed far higher, and make less. Where the fuck is THAT dialogue? Oh, its not convenient, women are the only victims I forgot.

It is reasons like this I cannot ever believe main stream politics, as they sure as shit know the wage gap is a lie, but both parties shovel it out like some serious social crisis as if people were getting murdered in the streets it is so bad. Hey but that’s the whole point, if we fight for things that aren’t real, then real things go un-fought.

26 thoughts on “Even ‘smart’ people are subject to propaganda – often more so

  1. Intellectuals are not more influenced by propaganda. We are influenced by different types of propaganda. The “If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes truth” type of propaganda doesn’t really affect intellectuals, but it does affect stupid people. The people in the south that you referenced are the perfect example. They hear the lie that “blacks are bad” all the time and so believe it. It would take years of “race is meaningless” propaganda 5-10 times every day to counter this.

    Intellectuals are more likely to fall for rhetorical propaganda. This is propaganda that makes an argument that seems sound. X BECAUSE Y.

    Trying to disprove X is not going to happen. You need to disprove Y. You need to disprove they WHY not the affect.

    Him – “Women do make less than men”

    You – “What causes this to be true?”

    Him – “Because girls are told they are bad at math”

    You – “How does being told your bad at math affect wages?”

    Him – “Girls are conditioned to accept ‘subservient’ jobs like teachers”

    You – “OK, wouldn’t arguing for gender equality in teaching positions do more to alleviate the issue than talking about the wage gap since the difference is female dominance in education, not different pay for the same work? Since the issue is conditioning of children don’t you think we should focus on how poorly we condition boys to deal with children as adults?”

    To effectively argue against the propaganda that influences intelligent people you need to address they WHY, not the affect. You can’t disprove “The Wage Gap” because there really is a difference in average income for men vs average income for women. The real question is WHY, and if you don’t know they WHY he’s stuck on you can’t disprove it.

    • >Intellectuals are more likely to fall for rhetorical propaganda. This is propaganda that makes an argument that seems sound. X BECAUSE Y.

      1 – Good insight.

      2 – I think intellectuals can get pulled into frequent repetitions of a big lie also. Perhaps it’s less likely, but it’s possible.

      3 – Intellectuals have been trained to argue. Thus even when we start out with a stupid idea, we can often construct an excellent argument that conceals the inherent silliness of the idea.

      • 3 I think is huge, because you become vested in the idea, I have a friend that may not initially believe something he argues, but will continue because it somehow becomes an ego thing.

        • I would disagree with two, the whole point of this post is that this rhetorical propaganda is that it hits the academics hard, because that is how they were taught to think.

          • The Rhetorical propaganda hits academics HARD. It is much more affective on intelectuals than the at nausim propaganda. The at nausim propaganda still has a very real affect, just notably less than rhetorical propaganda.

            The entire shades of grey thing is really hard to communicate sometimes.

  2. I’m sure you were being sociable, but it seems to me that you met the same dumb guy as before. Computer science isn’t science except at the highest eschelons – guys working through logic theory, data sorting research, and other concepts requiring mastery of linear algebra. Most comp-sci graduates are techs – they’re not dealing with core reality: gravity, electromagnetism, electron orbitals, virtual work, sinusoidal curves, ln or exponential functions. They’re mastering already established systems and processes. So, you were talking with somebody who’s received the kind of education high school should provide, but doesn’t, carrying a piece of paper that implies he’s mastered the fundamentals of philosophy, when he hasn’t.

    Regarding your premise, I think the intellectual – peasant dualism is specious. Many folks from whom you wouldn’t much contemplation are surprisingly reflective. My grandmother, whose only degree was for education in public schools, read voraciously and understood many subjects extensively, but she was hardly exceptional. In my opinion, many self-described intellectuals are anything but.

  3. this is also how I feel about conspiracy theorists. they are supposed to be smart, but are totally incapable of critical thought.

    critical thought is the key.

  4. I learned more about life from reading various textbooks and just books (psychology, logic, religion, social and political books) than from the STEM degree. Maybe because the Norwegian degree is just STEM subjects, the “liberal arts” year is omitted.

    Have you read psychology? Evopsych is a part of it. Of course you have to think critically no matter what you read, but it isn’t useless.

  5. Your friend is just a person of his time. Having a STEM degree or not, doesn’t seem to have an effect on whether someone will fall for cultural lies or not. Having a hard science degree in no way prepares you to think critically about social or psychological studies, and how to interpret the findings you hear about in the media.

  6. I recently went back to an old debate site I used to frequent. The subject, something along the lines of ‘has feminism helped women?’ came up.
    After I stated my opinion on “rape culture” I was told that I deserved to burn in hell (actually, a “special place in hell reserved for my kind”), a gender traitor, and “Elliot Rodger would be proud”.

    Really bizarre…the only thing I suggested after reading a story where a woman said she felt traumatized riding on the subway at night in a bad part of town with a girlfriend because a man she didn’t know had the never to utter “beautiful girls” (in a tone too soft for her friend to hear) was to not travel in a bad part of town alone at night, wearing (the skimpy outfit she described she was wearing). I also mentioned that if you have to do so, be prepared to defend yourself because complaining on the internet isn’t going to help you. This was rape enablement and victim blaming (even though she wasn’t raped, or fondled, or touched at all she felt ‘violated’) yesterday’s jokes are today’s realities.

    • Which brings up an interesting question, do you feel like you are an ‘enemy’ of feminism (meaning they will take you out, rhetorically or otherwise) or are you just neutral since you aren’t on board?

      • I think feminists hate traditional, anti-feminist women more than any other group of people.

        Especially traditional, anti-feminist mothers with sons. We need to teach our sons not to rape. If we only teach our kids to be courtious, honorable and responsible, rather than castrate them at birth, we’re part of the problem EK.

      • It’s actually very much like a religion. Presumption of innocence isn’t needed because there’s original guilt (being born male). And female “enablers” are the actual devil.
        We live in whiny culture. Whiny culture’s soldier is the pundit, and weapon the opine.

      • Because it benefits them in the short term. Long term, it doesn’t benefit anyone. Short term, it’s in their interest. Furthermore, women are emotional creatures, appeal to emotion is powerful stuff. They’ve drank from the koolaid. They believe the “rape cuture” myth. I’ve used facts, direct actual objective sources (court room transcripts released byt the FOIA, for instance on the case that generated the recent Congressional outrage), doesn’t matter….I’m a rape apologist and enabler. There’s no reasoning with that.

    • Here is a good article on what happens when you try to challenge the rape culture orthodoxy:


      The only people so willing (unless they are the ones directly impacted) to publicly throw down the gauntlet are those with nothing to lose. But most of us have a great deal to lose so cost to gains it’s not worth becoming a pariah (maybe even lose one’s license to practice medicine, lose business, ect).

  7. Can I just say what a comfort to uncover a person that genuinely understands what they are talking
    about over the internet. You certainly know how to bring a problem to light
    and make it important. A lot more people need to read this and understand this side of your story.
    I was surprised you are not more popular since you certainly
    have the gift.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s