Putin to Lavrov: "I've got to listen to this idiot? He still thinks we're going to let him just bomb Syria into oblivion. As if."
Lavrov: "Yeah, well, I've had to listen to his nonsense a lot more than you have. But he's really going to crap his pants when he finds out that the coup in Turkey has failed. Just think of Erdogan coming to Moscow to kiss your ass when Kerry talks. It helps to pass the time."
The United States really is the land of the Stupid. Isaac Assimov, the great SF writer, long ago wrote how a venomous strain of stupid permeates American social life, based on the premise that my stupid is as good as your smarts.
Anyway, for those bored with the United States of Atrocity, we now have this thread. The United States of Stupid.
Because if there's one thing that a bully hates, then it's laughing in his face.
The Power of “Nyet” by Dmitry Orlov
recommended by Canadian Patrick Armstrong (former Sov era Canadian diplomat)
What's changed is that Russia, in particular, has been saying "Nyet". And the Empire is apoplectic ... and confused.
A beached, rotting whale. What a perfect metaphor for the good old USA!
Happy Trails!
Or calling him "shorty". In some places that will get you killed.
The cult of ignorance in the United States: Anti-intellectualism and the "dumbing down" of America
I hate to sound elitist but for the sake of perceptions of truth?
Whatever the levels of ignorance of a public, it is to its leadership and intellectuals we must look for directions...let's face reality most people prefer to engage in personal family and perhaps community life, worklife? It's always a minority, more spiritually oriented, politically and intellectually oriented...not to say they are better in a ny way, just that this is their focus......
so what is happening of course is the corruption of this minority...the forms of such corruption must be examined in detail!
The systems forms of corruption must be discreditted!
The US is filled with ill-informed imbeciles. The land of stupid,for sure.
But Canada is catching up.
The problem, iyraste, is when that leadership plays on ignorance, and dismisses evidence as elitist. There is a big difference between being a populist and kneecapping Statistics Canada because you don't want to have to be challenged by reality.
I'd add that that is not a problem specific to the U.S. They boys in that pic are masters of it. They have gone as far as beating people up at funerals to pretend an army does not exist.
Yeah, I have to agree somewhat. When the US drops a big steaming pile, Canada emits a cute little fart.
from the Psych Today piece upthread ... some quotes ...
- "Journalist Charles Pierce, author of Idiot America, adds another perspective: “The rise of idiot America today represents--for profit mainly, but also and more cynically, for political advantage in the pursuit of power--the breakdown of a consensus that the pursuit of knowledge is a good. It also represents the ascendancy of the notion that the people whom we should trust the least are the people who best know what they are talking about. In the new media age, everybody is an expert.”"
- "The American Association of State Colleges and Universities report on education shows that the U.S. ranks second among all nations in the proportion of the population aged 35-64 with a college degree, but 19th in the percentage of those aged 25-34 with an associate or high school diploma, which means that for the first time, the educational attainment of young people will be lower than their parents;"
- "Catherine Liu, the author of American Idyll: Academic Antielitism as Cultural Critique and a film and media studies professor at University of California. The very mission of universities has changed, argues Liu. “We don’t educate people anymore. We train them to get jobs.”"
- "We’re creating a world of dummies. Angry dummies who feel they have the right, the authority and the need not only to comment on everything, but to make sure their voice is heard above the rest, and to drag down any opposing views through personal attacks, loud repetition and confrontation."
The MSM (generally) and the current US Presidential campaign provide vivid proof of this claim.
- " we’re directed towards trivia, towards the inconsequential, towards unquestioning and blatant consumerism."
This is an implicit criticism of our capitalist social arrangements. The consumer and (movie) star culture, which sells nonsense, (Chris Hedges actually calls this an addiction to nonsense), short circuits thinking and replaces it with titilation, emotional reactions, and apathy.
I think this means that the elites have, by and large, failed in their duties to lead properly. For me, this means that new leadership is required ... from outside the current (failed) leadership. And if you know my posting here, then you know that I look among socialist-minded people for that sort of leadership.
Perhaps this is one, effective way to argue for socialism; not simply as a "better alternative" but as an alternative to the failure of current elites. More traction and all that.
Got into a chance conversatioin with a USA citizen the other day at the coffee shop. He was a young man I would say in his early thirties. In any case, he overheard myself and my coffee companion discussing the US election, and joined in. He was very definitely not a Trump supporter.
The conversation ranged a bit, but at some point I mentioned Tom Paine, one of the most important people in the founding of the USA. This fellow had never heard of him.
Courtesy Wikipedia:
This gentleman had never heard of it, and he was one of the good guys.
How are you on 18th century Canada, Rev? Or even 19th? Are you familiar with Lord Elgin's role in democratic reform?
We aren't all historians, and lack of education is not the same as lack of common sense. Falling for that trap is just as bad as anti-intellectualism.
duplicate post. My bad.
This has also happened to me, and more than once, even among University-educated American friends.
Gore Vidal wrote, or said, long ago that "We live in the United States of Forget. Nobody remembers anything." He's right. Edited to add: I think if people had read Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States," or similar books, then they wouldn't miss out on such a critical protagonist for US independence as Tom Paine. His book/pamphlet "Common Sense" is still worth reading ... and its influence on US thinking prior to 1776 was critical. But perhaps this "silencing" of dissident history is no different in Canada? How many Canadians know social history of this country and the role of rebels and radicals ... and rabble.ca-ers?
In the late 90s, when Joe Clark was doing his second stint as PC leader, I met a Canadian who didn't know that Clark had been Prime Minister in the 70s. Granted, this guy would have been a toddler, at most, when Clark was serving, but still. A person would have to have read almost nothing about recent Canadian history, or even then-current events(since Clark and his background were often discussed in the news), to be totally unaware of his prime ministership.
I also had a debate on-line a few years back with a Canadian who was telling American posters that the Charter was superior to the Bill Of Rights, because Charter decisions can never be over-ruled. When I drew his attention to Section 33, he didn't seem to have heard of it, but eventually replied that if a legislature tried to invoke notwithstanding, the courts wouldn't allow it.
In their endorsement of Hillary Clinton, the Globe and Mail echoed the sentiment that the US may be kinda stupid:
The pamphlet that Paine wrote was the most important document in the founding of the United States. Surely everyone knows about Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. Well, Tom Paine was at least as important as those two in US history. He single-handedly turned the revolutionary war from "no taxation without representation' to 'screw your representation, we'll make our own country'. If you read Paine's "The Rights Of Man" you will see much of his thought reflected in the US constitution.
So Tom Paine was very important in the founding of the USA in two ways. First, by convincing the colonists to break away completely from Great Britain, and secondly by inspiring a good part (if not a major part) of their constitution.
The question isn't why would they remember him, the question is how could they forget him.
I suggest it is the same phenomenon as the United States of Stupid, except in the case of Tom Paine I believe they actively want to forget him. Partly at least, for his intellectual rigour.
There have been a number of Lord Elgin's, some who gained their marbles, and some who lost theirs, but no Lord Elgin was as important to the founding of Canada as Tom Paine was to the USA.
There was one Lord Elgin in Canadian history.
And nah, not important at all. All he did was back up Canada's first democratic government in the face of a right-wing anglo mob that went so far as to burn our parliament building and threaten to hang the prime minister.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellion_Losses_Bill
Baldwin and Lafontaine's govenment created Canada as an independent nation. It was far more significant than the business contract that was signed 18 years later. If it isn't remembered, perhaps it is because it was our nation standing up to power.
They destroyed Elgin's carriage with stones when he drove to give that law royal assent. He refused to have it repaired, and continued to use it throughout his tenure tas a reminder of what had happened.
But really, what does it matter if some Canadians or Americans aren't up on old white guy history? For a lot of people it is not their history, after all, and it says nothing about their intelligence.
And really, it is far more important that they have some familiarity with how things work here and now.
This is an asinine comment.
No it's not.
You should maybe take a history course at SFU. You could be taught by Andrew Heard, who wrote a paper on Canadian independence, and somehow accomplished that without Lord Elgin's name coming into it once.
CANADIAN INDEPENDENCE
But perhaps we're talking about two different Canada's.
How can you justify a comment that an entire society who (for the last 70+ years at least) has attracted some of the brightest minds in hundreds of fields and some of the most famous scientists (Albert Einstein, Nicola Tesla) and intellectuals actively wants to forget someone due to their intellectual rigour? Where other people might say "Americans try to forget {public figure X, Y, Z] due to {owning slaves, public drunkenness, poor moral role model}", you're actually suggesting Americans want to forget this man because he was smart.
This sort of casual, off-base disparagement of an entire group of people is a sure way to senselessly alienate those who belong in that group.
If you don't believe me, ask "BernieBros," those "misogynistic white males" who don't like Clinton "just because she's a woman," how they feel about Bernie endorsing Clinton.
ETA: http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/PMCMS/mvnubhjx9ewotwzo3o9vxg.png
No, what I am talking about is that someone can be able to recite history backwards and forwards and remain clueless about what is going on here and now, and by contrast someone can be uneducated and have a very good understanding of who has power and control and who does not.
Don't get me wrong, I think a knowledge of history is a very good thing, but being able to recite the dates and names - particularly the names most wrapped up in the national myth - doesn't really mean too much. One can do that and still be as thick as a post. Hell, the teapartiers think all those boys made America because god told them to. So how much does knowing Tom Paine's name really mean?
This is kind of like a segment of Mercer's Talking to Americans. Fun for a laugh, but it really means nothing. And if one is fool enough to think that because of anecdotal stuff like that we (or anyone) are actually smarter than them, who's the real fool here?
And yeah, that's why they invented jazz. To show us how stupid they are.
I was reading a collection of essays by Stephen Jay Gould, and stumbled across something pertinent to this discussion.
For those unfamiliar with Gould, he...
So what I stumbled across was from a collection of his monthly essays published in 'Natural History' magazine. The particular article was an examination of Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein', and it's treatment by Hollywood. In the article he had this to say.
That comment made me wonder how much of the satisfaction of wilful ignorance of the USA citizenry is a result of exactly what Gould says, a 'sense that the American public cannot tolerate...intellectual complexity'.
By the way, Gould wrote 300 essays for Natural History magazine, and many of them are in a series of collections. Well worth the time to read.
But that's exactly the point. They can recite the names of many, but the single most important name in the American Revolution is expunged. Why would that be, I wonder?
You've already paraded your ignorance of Canadian (and American) history. Stop now, while you still have a shred of cover for the paucity of your knowledge.
From an article posted upthread:
I guess you missed that...
Are Americans really Anti-Intellectual?
The single most important name? Now you know that's not true, and you are actually begging the question here.
Look, most who weren't seriously into history in school probably don't know the names (never mind what they did) beyond Washington, Jefferson and Franklin, and even then it is because they see the names on streets and money and schools. More probably know Paul Revere's, Betsy Ross's or Benedict Arnold's names than John Adams.
So who is the most important person to someone focused on political theory is not the necessarily the most important person to someone who learned basic history.
In any case, someone not knowing your favourite revolutionary's name does not them stupid any more than anyone from another country raised on their own national myths and not knowing important background.
(edit)
And in case I wasn't clear enough with the point of my exercise, you are not a stupid person either, yet you were unfamiliar with a very important Canadian figure who played a critical role in our history.
According to the Georgia Department Of Education, the Social Studies performance standards for the state include...
"Explain the importance of Thomas Paine's Common Sense to the movement for independence".
(section SSUSH3, near the top)
I also found a few elementary schools named after Thomas Paine, including one in New Jersey where the newsletter is called Coomon Sense. And when I studied American literature at university, the textbook, published by that radical underground bookseller Random House, contained generous selections from Paine's writing.
Pesky, besides the guy you met at the restauurant, what is your source for saying that Thomas Paine has been purged from the American consciousness?
Yeah, that's kinda part of my point, if I didn't state it on the last page. One person, even many people, not knowing the name of an historical figure doesn't mean that the historical figure has been flushed down the memory hole. Just that they don't recall everything they learned in school.
I'll grant that Thomas Paine doesn't have the status of Jefferson, Washington, or even Franklin, in the American pantheon. But this might have more to do with the fact that his role was largely as a theoretician, rather than as a soldier or politician.
Sure, but I am sure you don't recall every lesson from your school years.
And "expunged" is a good word. Your last question raises a somewhat more complex question than "does not knowing about Tom Paine mean you are stupid"?
I am sure the Georgia Department of Education doesn't really want students to read so far into Paine's message about independence, the state, and religion that they have a full understanding of it. Just enough so they get the bit about Britain (and maybe nowadays, Washington) being the enemy.
Gotcha. Agreed, and agreed.
(edit)
And of course there are the "Sovereign Citizens" who can quote Paine, Jefferson, and the rest of them backwards. That makes them geniuses, I suppose?
http://publius-sovereignty.blogspot.ca/
We've basically got a "United States is evil" thread, and now we've got a "United States is stupid" thread. Is it time for "The United States of Lazy"?
I've got this photo of an obese Walmart shopper in a scooter, stocking up on FunYuns, that I'm dying to post.
C'mon Magoo. You know as well as the next person that both threads - on the endless and horrific violence in the US OT1H, and on the astounding and flabbergasting Herculean stupidity OTOH - have such rich, generous, and ample evidence that these are, literally, threads that will never want for fresh contributions, to the end of our days.
What's more American than an act of senseless violence? Applause for same? You're just not getting into the spirit of this at all.
PS. If a Fun Yun is an automatic weapon, then why not go ahead?
Why not?
Feel free, but there isn't actually anything progressive or productive at all about making fun of how stupid and violent other people are.
Aside from the fact it is a complete crock of shit, how does it make you any better than the things you are pointing out, if that is what you focus your energy on?
Is that your enlightened, non-violent, and intelligent alternative?
Comedy mocks the imperfections of the world and thereby re-charges our spirits by holding out the possibility of a better world. I beg to differ.
In fact he was also a soldier and a politician. He volunteered in the Continental Army, and later became Secretary of the Committee of Foreign Affairs in Congress.
Theoretician? Well, all I can say is there's not really any reason for Canadians to know Tom Paine, so ignorance of him in Canada is more or less forgiveable.
For those who want to know more, here's an article form the BBC News
Who was Thomas Paine?
So Thomas Paine will stand on his own, without my support.
But there is a measure that is very real, and of an intellectual nature, by which we can gauge the USA. That is the general belief in evolution, the single most important theory in the biological sciences. Without evolution, nothing in the biological world makes any sense. So one would think that the nation whose industry depends so much on science would find strong support for the theory of evolution amongst the general population.
As of June 14, 2014, some 42% of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago. Only 19% of respondents below believed that humans have evolved without the guidance of god.
Belief in Creation in the USA
This definitely sets the USA apart from other industrialized nations. In an older review of belief in evolution (2005) which polled all the countries of Europe (except Russia), the USA was second lowest, next to Turkey.
However, I will admit this is not your garden variety stupidity. It is something far worse, that is, wilful ignorance. A while back I read a book called "Darwiin on Trial" by a USA lawyer named Phillip E. Johnson. I can't remember the exact phrase, but in that book he said words to the effect that he would rather be wrong about evolution, than to abandon his faith.
Now there is a relatively sophisticated thinker who tosses away the greatest unifying principle of biology so he can proclaim his faithfulness.
What do you call that?
I call it being an idealogue, which I agree is more dangerous than being stupid. Though in part that is because idealogues can sometimes be very intelligent.
I have to say I'm not sure I buy this shibboleth any more than I do your Tom Paine one. Are you saying the entire middle east is inhabited by stupid people? Never mind that some modern proponents of creationism are quite educated, it isn't a valid indicator of cognition and intelligence. Not one that any psychologists are likely to put much stock in, anyway.
Probably good news for ikosmos, because there are Russian numbers, and they aren't too different from the American ones. Too bad that century of atheism didn't hold.
https://ncse.com/news/2010/06/creationism-russia-005566
I don't have a link for this, nor time to go fetch one (since my coals are nearly heated), but wasn't it some American Xtians who asserted that the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter was exactly 3? Because their God would never make it an irrational number?
Found a couple of "dumb xtian" pages about it, and it is actually a bit more substantial than that. It was waved around by anti-religious literalists who think it is proof that the bible has mistakes in it:
https://answersingenesis.org/contradictions-in-the-bible/as-easy-as-pi/
but I didn't find any believers actually claiming they think pi equals 3. There were some hoaxes, though :
http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/pi.asp
Hey, if you go into something convinced that certain people are stupid, you are likely to fall for any nonsense about them.
Besides. Considering the rest of us use shorthand to round it off to two decimal places, rounding it off to a whole number isn't technically false.
Very well. Here's one where pi = 3.2. I don't feel like that takes a lot from my point.
I guess my thinking was that this should be up to mathematicians, not theologians.
There's no need to go with 8 decimal points of accuracy if your ruler is only good for two.
That's a far cry from "my God would never, ever..."
You just summed up the American election perfectly.
Now I am curious.
Did anyone ever say that? the 1897 bill doesn't seem to be based on religion at all.
And Cody. I agree that it applies (like how some people will believe anything about Hillary or Trump, depending on your camp), but I am talking about how gullible we can be in talking about them. It's like the myth that people actually believed the earth was flat. Well, a myth until Alex Jones came along, that is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
Agnotology: the cultural production of ignorance...
An American named Robert Proctor has made a study of this. And there's plenty of data close at hand ...
Sorry, the context was clear and I wasn't intending to derail. I just found it striking how easily a couple of words could be switched to apply to "Trump supporters," "Clinton supporters," "Brexit supporters," or "Bernie supporters."
In fact I could have even just said "You just summed up politics in a nutshell."
When you believe your ideological opponents (and/or their supporters) are evil (stupid/heartless/racist/etc), it becomes easy to believe anything about them.
Yup, and the media, and the internet, including a fair chunk of it right here.
Time was you could have a political disagreement with someone without reflexively thinking they are stupid and evil and that all their sources are lies and they make no valid points whatsoever.
And on the flip side, when it comes to the stuff you want to believe I suppose it is easier to just agree with people that they are talking about the devil, and not bother to have to read their material to see if it in fact makes any sense.
And not trying to squelch your thought on it either. Just clarifying.
What shibboleth was that?
Are you kidding?
Belief in creationism as some assumed marker for stupidity.
Well, I wouldn't call it a marker for stupidity, but it certainly does indicate something drastically different about the mental functioning of creationists. They have abandoned all empirical evidence in favour of an ancient system of myths. That's not stupidity, but it is something pretty terrifying to me.
Pages