Most Americans don’t read 1 book a year nor search out alternative journalism, which might explain why so many citizens complied with the insane, society-wrecking guidance of faux experts.
If some readers don’t buy the propaganda in MSM articles, they probably can’t post rebuttals as most newspapers no longer offer Reader Comments or, if they do, they are moderated (meaning contrarians' views won’t get published) ... and/or comments can only be made by paid subscribers. Also, as far as I can tell, newspapers no longer publish critical letters-to-the-editor.
(Come to think of it, I sent a letter to the editor to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel … and they didn’t publish it).
Since our local once-a-week newspaper sold to a new buyer, the editor wants to "hear all sides"... And the business has reversed course and is growing again.
The irony here...before covid I was an avid "book" reader. During and after covid I am down to one or 2 per year due to the amount of reading/ researching I do on Substack and other newsletters/platforms. The amount of time I spend reading and connecting the dots is far more now than ever in my lifetime. I find I cannot discuss many topics with most people in any meaningful way, because they have no in depth knowledge on many subjects. Those people are only to be found in the cyber world I guess. At least they are out there, like you Chris .
Good point. I'm in the same boat. I read fewer books because I spend so much time searching for and reading articles on the Internet. Still, I've already read many excellent Covid books.
"I cannot discuss many topics with most people in any meaningful way, because they have no in depth knowledge on many subjects". That sums it up perfectly for me. I worry sometimes that I have retreated from "real-life" relationships to live in a Twitter/Substack world, but they are the only places I can find like-minded thinkers. All of my pre-covid friends seem to have gone over to the dark side.
Same here. I used to read all the time, but almost strictly fiction. Now, it's maybe 5 or 6 fictions per year, and tons of Substack. I also find few people with any depth of knowledge.
I wish I could go back to reading just fiction.
I wish I could go back to my pre-2020 life. Everything seems tainted to me these days.
Bill comments "America has become a nation of shallow thinkers." Exactly. I used to hear some propaganda in the mainstream media and think to myself "Americans are too smart to fall for that." I never think that any more.
I once tried to write a novel and never finished. Maybe one day I'll finish it. Of course, now a days you can self-publish books. I was a freelance journalist whose articles rarely if ever got published ... so today I simply self-publish on Substack.
It's hard to write long form like a book when you are used to writing blog posts, as I have for almost two decades now. (And this was a non-fiction book on the TEA Party and not a novel.)
In this case I did self-publish after trying for a few months to get an agent or publisher interested in the idea. It's hard if you don't already have a name in something else.
Ironically, about a year ago I serialized the book, a chapter at a time, on my Substack.
I trained my ears to listen to a text to speech engine (around 430 words per minute). It sounds like noise to most people it's so fast. You couldn't talk that fast. I've used several programs over the years but right now am using a free one called Balabolka.
A failure to think. The single most important responsibility we have to be a free people. Not thinking is where evil comes from, the banality of evil.
Many here are familiar with Hannah Arendt's work "The Origins of Totalitarianism" that Mattais Desmet drew heavily from in his pandemic-era "The Psychology of Totalitarianism." Arendt had many other notable works that speak to our times. Including:
Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship, Hannah Arendt, 1964
For a person who is *thinking* it's hard to not see hallmarks of dictatorial authority, totalitarian authority, as being what is descending on the world. And from where I'm sitting - and thinking - what she describes as our personal responsibility is worth taking note of. Perhaps this work of hers is worthy of deeper examination by the likes of Mattais Desmet and others with wide reach, as we stand on the precipice of something very dark and perilous, very totalitarian in comprehensive ways that Hitler and Stalin could've only dreamed of. We have an obligation to THINK, a *duty* to think, or we will lose it all. And the body count will dwarf all prior body counts under totalitarianism combined. Technological advances, and all.
"But although most people are culpable of great moral crimes, those who collaborated were not, in fact, criminals. On the contrary, they chose to follow the rules in a demonstrably criminal regime."
"People like Eichmann were not criminals and psychopaths, Arendt argued, but rule-followers protected by social privilege. “It was precisely the members of respectable society,” she writes, “who had not been touched by the intellectual and moral upheaval in the early stages of the Nazi period, who were the first to yield. They simply exchanged one system of values against another,” without reflecting on the morality of the entire new system.
Those who refused, on the other hand, who even “chose to die,” rather than kill, did not have “highly developed intelligence or sophistication in moral matters.” But they were critical thinkers practicing what Socrates called a “silent dialogue between me and myself,” and they refused to face a future where they would have to live with themselves after committing or enabling atrocities. We must remember, Arendt writes, that “whatever else happens, as long as we live we shall have to live together with ourselves.”"
"She writes: “If the ability to tell right from wrong should turn out to have anything to do with the ability to think, then we must be able to ’demand’ its exercise from every sane person, no matter how erudite or ignorant, intelligent or stupid, he may happen to be.” Thinking does not belong to some rarified world of professional thought, and indeed thinking removed from the world, can turn people away from what is unfolding right in front of them."
"But Arendt averred that it would be a “serious mistake” to forget that even totalitarian regimes “command and rest upon mass support.” The Nazi regime’s right to prescribe behavior (i.e., its authority) and its ability to act in concert (its power) depended on the continued support of relevant sections of the population. In this perspective, mass atrocities became possible because large parts of the German population came to accept that the Nazis had a right to rule."
Hannah Arendt, a German-born Jewish-American philosopher, emphasized the importance of personal responsibility in the face of dictatorship. In her essay “Personal Responsibility under Dictatorship” (1964), she argued that individuals living under totalitarian regimes have a moral obligation to resist and refuse to collaborate with the authorities, even if it means suffering the consequences.
Refusal to Participate
Arendt contended that individuals should not participate in morally reprehensible activities, such as reporting fellow citizens to the authorities or engaging in propaganda, even if it means risking their own lives. She believed that such actions would compromise one’s moral integrity and contribute to the perpetuation of the totalitarian system.
Maintaining Moral Autonomy
Instead, Arendt advocated for individuals to maintain their moral autonomy by refusing to participate in activities that violate their conscience. This stance requires acknowledging the inherent dignity and worth of human life, even in the face of overwhelming oppression.
The Banality of Evil
Arendt’s concept of the “banality of evil” (introduced in her book “Eichmann in Jerusalem”) highlights how ordinary individuals, rather than monstrous villains, can perpetuate evil through their thoughtless and obedient actions. She argued that this banality is a result of individuals surrendering their moral judgment and critical thinking to authority.
Responsibility and Obedience
Arendt criticized the concept of obedience, arguing that it obscures individual responsibility and moral agency. She believed that individuals should not blindly follow orders, even if they are issued by a legitimate authority. Instead, they should exercise their critical faculties and make moral judgments about the actions they are asked to perform.
Conclusion
In summary, Hannah Arendt’s concept of personal responsibility under dictatorship emphasizes the importance of individual moral autonomy, refusal to participate in morally reprehensible activities, and the rejection of obedience as a moral principle. Her ideas continue to influence contemporary debates about ethics, politics, and human rights, particularly in the context of authoritarian regimes."
Not many can do individual moral autonomy. I read a WW2 memoir where an American soldier was ordered to execute a prisoner. He did so and afterwards said his conscience was clear because he was ordered to do so. I also read where a German soldier whose unit was ordered to execute villagers refused. He was placed with the villagers and executed. The account I read was the look on his face was righteous or beatific.
Btw, if anyone thinks the Dukes of Hazzard was repudiated because it was supposedly racist, think again. It showed a couple good ole boys, never meanin' no harm, thinking. And standing up to corruption, bad governance. And the authoritarians of today couldn't exactly have that model out there for others to get any bright ideas from. Like James Dean's "Rebel Without a Cause" persona that was larger than life, many who embraced the ideas and imagery just a couple decades ago, an iconic hero to many, an icon unceremoniously dismissed and forgotten by those born since the 1990's.
Obedience. Preferably the blind variety. Unthinking. That's what makes the cut in this social/cultural era of totalitarianism.
I never thought Dukes of Hazard was anything other than a couple of good ole boys standing up. I never really watched the show but I was aware what it was about. Good ole boys are the best frankly.
The thing about obedience to authority, I was very dismayed early in the plandemic to read things like this re. the forced injection for the military- if uncle sam tells you to take the injection, you take the injection and things about the injections along those lines from active duty members.
A couple of times I replied if orders conflict with conscience or autonomy or religious belief you must refuse. That is a God given right. An experimental injection can't be ordered. Never got an answer.
There's a lot of psychological priming that is done via entertainment, media. Like all white men are stupid in television and commercials today. Every single commercial is all disproportionately people of color. It's across all mediums, sports, weather, history, action-adventure, comedy, etc. Even the latest Star Wars and other movie series have reimagined characters that check the DEI boxes. Same goes for ideas on culture, academia, obedience. It's very calculating and calculated. Becomes very obvious when you start paying attention...thinking. But if just along for the ride it doesn't stand out, most just drink it in and by repeated exposure are normalized to a reality from tv/social media that's different than the reality outside our own doors.
Courage and moral absolutes are a difficult and rarely followed path. Is why the lyric "home of the brave" accompanies "land of the free" in our national anthem. Without enough brave, righteous, beatific souls no land can be free.
I seriously doubt very many contemplate what the lyrics mean. Same with the pledge of allegiance. It's all mindless rote like the haitian school kids I observed sing song repeating their lessons.
The idea that we need a teacher to learn, or that we need a doctor to be healthy, is a fairly recent phenomenon. Both ideas are the source of a multitude of mischief.
Same here in Canada , except being what was formerly known as Canadian , I find myself apologizing for finding the time and inclination to read a wide variety of topics . Like you Bill ,I don’t care that I’m not an expert but the reality is ,I read more than most and have opinions about a lot of issues . When it comes to medical stuff , I research like crazy because I get the system ,having been a nurse for20 years in my youth - you do learn a few things after all that time . I found a wonderful engineer who was pivotal in my addressing a health issue that we both had and then ,because of him ,I was able to avoid big pharma capture . I could start a library with all my Covid related books and also those of CJHopkins who no doubt will be facing jail time - by those fair minded German authorities - after the second attempt to vilify him for his book writing and opinions as a satirist. Of note these days , I frequently get the comment that I am interesting to speak with : funny when everyone thinks the same thoughts ,how you can stand out in the crowd as being interesting 😂 even as an older geriatric! Keep writing Bill , you are helping me to stay awake and alert .
There is the trend of people being loudly, arrogantly wrong about something, never admitting to any reservations or doubts, and going on social media to wage battle for their position.
That's not the behavior of someone who spends a lot of time sitting quietly and reading.
Thank you for a thoughtful and important post. It is difficult to determine whether the growing aversion to reading books is a cause of our country's rapidly decreasing intellectual capacity or a symptom. Consider how many interactions you have daily with others that show a stark resemblance to trying to communicate with someone dealing with substance addiction. They lack interest in important topics, are slow/unable to process and comprehend information, seem to be struggling with some inner dialogue more than the present conversation, and consistently exhibit behavioral choices based on pure emotion, devoid of rational thought. I would offer that these folks are indeed intoxicated (and indoctrinated) by their electronic over-consumption and any human interaction that doesn't mirror their virtual experiences is, at best, an annoyance and, at worst, a "traumatizing" experience. Philo Farnsworth, the farm boy who invented the television, refused to ever have one in his home, much to the chagrin of his children. Another example of his brilliance, I would argue.
One of the dangers of information gathering in the age of propaganda is that even the statistics we read are often skewed. We might do better looking around at our own environment and the people in it. A lot of us still read and a lot of us still converse. But we do tend to stick together. That makes us less obvious to people who aren't reading anymore or aren't talking to each other anymore.
We all came about the conclusion that Covid was a hoax by different routes. In my case the recommendations for masking, distancing and frequent cleaning hands made sense. I wear a mask when sanding, I stay way from people passing wind and it has been known that hand washing has reduced disease for almost a couple of centuries. However my wife was smarter than me and had more free time and she and her BFF dug into the vax when it came out and figured out it was no good. I still remember when she came to me and said we're not taking that sh_t! I said agreed. I wasn't going to be the first guinea pig anyhow as I don't trust government. My mistake is not realizing at that point that the MSM had been bought. I had already switched from CNN to FOX as there definitely seemed to be something weird going on with CNN. I would have eventually taken the vax if I didn't clue into the problems so I will be eternally grateful to my wife and her BFF. I don't read fiction but I do read several thousand pages of technical literature each year so to me it is not the amount of reading that one must do to be aware rather it is reading material that educates the reader in protecting their own life which could be fictional stories including tales of older generations or like this book on Biology that I just bought that talks about how the body works so I have a reference book. It was recommended by someone on substack as to their source of realizing the Covid sham was bogus.
I bet'cha that Biology book tells you what mRNA does in the human body. I also bet'cha it tells you how your own mRNA can make mistakes, too. Therefore, it's always a great idea to add some foreign mRNA into the mix, isn't it? (Not at all.)
I haven't cracked the book open yet. Its about a thousand pages. I am looking forward to skimming a few chapters pertaining to DNA, cell function, etc.
Cutting room floor text:
If some readers don’t buy the propaganda in MSM articles, they probably can’t post rebuttals as most newspapers no longer offer Reader Comments or, if they do, they are moderated (meaning contrarians' views won’t get published) ... and/or comments can only be made by paid subscribers. Also, as far as I can tell, newspapers no longer publish critical letters-to-the-editor.
(Come to think of it, I sent a letter to the editor to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel … and they didn’t publish it).
Since our local once-a-week newspaper sold to a new buyer, the editor wants to "hear all sides"... And the business has reversed course and is growing again.
That's awesome! I hope it keeps up the momentum!
The irony here...before covid I was an avid "book" reader. During and after covid I am down to one or 2 per year due to the amount of reading/ researching I do on Substack and other newsletters/platforms. The amount of time I spend reading and connecting the dots is far more now than ever in my lifetime. I find I cannot discuss many topics with most people in any meaningful way, because they have no in depth knowledge on many subjects. Those people are only to be found in the cyber world I guess. At least they are out there, like you Chris .
Good point. I'm in the same boat. I read fewer books because I spend so much time searching for and reading articles on the Internet. Still, I've already read many excellent Covid books.
I'm in the same boat. But in aggregate, if you're learning from what you read on the Net, it's worth many books.
https://substack.com/@laura634109/note/c-72301846?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=4kvtf1
I couldn't open that.
Ditto!
I miss reading books. But I have no time. It all goes to Substack or dozens of other folks I follow.
🙌 Bingo!!!
Reminds me of the NIRVANAnet™ tagline, "I used to read books. Now I read .qwk files.".
"I cannot discuss many topics with most people in any meaningful way, because they have no in depth knowledge on many subjects". That sums it up perfectly for me. I worry sometimes that I have retreated from "real-life" relationships to live in a Twitter/Substack world, but they are the only places I can find like-minded thinkers. All of my pre-covid friends seem to have gone over to the dark side.
Same here. I used to read all the time, but almost strictly fiction. Now, it's maybe 5 or 6 fictions per year, and tons of Substack. I also find few people with any depth of knowledge.
I wish I could go back to reading just fiction.
I wish I could go back to my pre-2020 life. Everything seems tainted to me these days.
Thank God for Bill and the Substackers.
Sounds like a band:)
Bill comments "America has become a nation of shallow thinkers." Exactly. I used to hear some propaganda in the mainstream media and think to myself "Americans are too smart to fall for that." I never think that any more.
If people think reading a book a year is hard work, try writing (and marketing) one. I enjoyed doing it, but I don't know if I would ever do it again.
I once tried to write a novel and never finished. Maybe one day I'll finish it. Of course, now a days you can self-publish books. I was a freelance journalist whose articles rarely if ever got published ... so today I simply self-publish on Substack.
It's hard to write long form like a book when you are used to writing blog posts, as I have for almost two decades now. (And this was a non-fiction book on the TEA Party and not a novel.)
In this case I did self-publish after trying for a few months to get an agent or publisher interested in the idea. It's hard if you don't already have a name in something else.
Ironically, about a year ago I serialized the book, a chapter at a time, on my Substack.
"Self-publish"... Do you mean like thru Amazon?
I couldn't think of anything I'd want to write about if you held a million dollars in front of my face. 😔😢 One more thing I can't do.
I read around 300 pages per day and have done so for the last 25 years.
If you can do that with the internet, I salute you.
I probably come close to that...on substack.
How do you manage to read that volume a day? What's your secret?
I trained my ears to listen to a text to speech engine (around 430 words per minute). It sounds like noise to most people it's so fast. You couldn't talk that fast. I've used several programs over the years but right now am using a free one called Balabolka.
A failure to think. The single most important responsibility we have to be a free people. Not thinking is where evil comes from, the banality of evil.
Many here are familiar with Hannah Arendt's work "The Origins of Totalitarianism" that Mattais Desmet drew heavily from in his pandemic-era "The Psychology of Totalitarianism." Arendt had many other notable works that speak to our times. Including:
Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship, Hannah Arendt, 1964
https://grattoncourses.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/responsibility-under-a-dictatorship-arendt.pdf
For a person who is *thinking* it's hard to not see hallmarks of dictatorial authority, totalitarian authority, as being what is descending on the world. And from where I'm sitting - and thinking - what she describes as our personal responsibility is worth taking note of. Perhaps this work of hers is worthy of deeper examination by the likes of Mattais Desmet and others with wide reach, as we stand on the precipice of something very dark and perilous, very totalitarian in comprehensive ways that Hitler and Stalin could've only dreamed of. We have an obligation to THINK, a *duty* to think, or we will lose it all. And the body count will dwarf all prior body counts under totalitarianism combined. Technological advances, and all.
https://www.openculture.com/2017/01/hannah-arendt-on-personal-responsibility-under-dictatorship.html
"But although most people are culpable of great moral crimes, those who collaborated were not, in fact, criminals. On the contrary, they chose to follow the rules in a demonstrably criminal regime."
"People like Eichmann were not criminals and psychopaths, Arendt argued, but rule-followers protected by social privilege. “It was precisely the members of respectable society,” she writes, “who had not been touched by the intellectual and moral upheaval in the early stages of the Nazi period, who were the first to yield. They simply exchanged one system of values against another,” without reflecting on the morality of the entire new system.
Those who refused, on the other hand, who even “chose to die,” rather than kill, did not have “highly developed intelligence or sophistication in moral matters.” But they were critical thinkers practicing what Socrates called a “silent dialogue between me and myself,” and they refused to face a future where they would have to live with themselves after committing or enabling atrocities. We must remember, Arendt writes, that “whatever else happens, as long as we live we shall have to live together with ourselves.”"
Evil Comes From a Failure to Think
https://www.goethe.de/ins/us/en/kul/wir/tid/22701370.html
"She writes: “If the ability to tell right from wrong should turn out to have anything to do with the ability to think, then we must be able to ’demand’ its exercise from every sane person, no matter how erudite or ignorant, intelligent or stupid, he may happen to be.” Thinking does not belong to some rarified world of professional thought, and indeed thinking removed from the world, can turn people away from what is unfolding right in front of them."
https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/obedience-and-political-affairs-2014-11-17
"But Arendt averred that it would be a “serious mistake” to forget that even totalitarian regimes “command and rest upon mass support.” The Nazi regime’s right to prescribe behavior (i.e., its authority) and its ability to act in concert (its power) depended on the continued support of relevant sections of the population. In this perspective, mass atrocities became possible because large parts of the German population came to accept that the Nazis had a right to rule."
Brave AI's Overview:
"Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship
Hannah Arendt, a German-born Jewish-American philosopher, emphasized the importance of personal responsibility in the face of dictatorship. In her essay “Personal Responsibility under Dictatorship” (1964), she argued that individuals living under totalitarian regimes have a moral obligation to resist and refuse to collaborate with the authorities, even if it means suffering the consequences.
Refusal to Participate
Arendt contended that individuals should not participate in morally reprehensible activities, such as reporting fellow citizens to the authorities or engaging in propaganda, even if it means risking their own lives. She believed that such actions would compromise one’s moral integrity and contribute to the perpetuation of the totalitarian system.
Maintaining Moral Autonomy
Instead, Arendt advocated for individuals to maintain their moral autonomy by refusing to participate in activities that violate their conscience. This stance requires acknowledging the inherent dignity and worth of human life, even in the face of overwhelming oppression.
The Banality of Evil
Arendt’s concept of the “banality of evil” (introduced in her book “Eichmann in Jerusalem”) highlights how ordinary individuals, rather than monstrous villains, can perpetuate evil through their thoughtless and obedient actions. She argued that this banality is a result of individuals surrendering their moral judgment and critical thinking to authority.
Responsibility and Obedience
Arendt criticized the concept of obedience, arguing that it obscures individual responsibility and moral agency. She believed that individuals should not blindly follow orders, even if they are issued by a legitimate authority. Instead, they should exercise their critical faculties and make moral judgments about the actions they are asked to perform.
Conclusion
In summary, Hannah Arendt’s concept of personal responsibility under dictatorship emphasizes the importance of individual moral autonomy, refusal to participate in morally reprehensible activities, and the rejection of obedience as a moral principle. Her ideas continue to influence contemporary debates about ethics, politics, and human rights, particularly in the context of authoritarian regimes."
Not many can do individual moral autonomy. I read a WW2 memoir where an American soldier was ordered to execute a prisoner. He did so and afterwards said his conscience was clear because he was ordered to do so. I also read where a German soldier whose unit was ordered to execute villagers refused. He was placed with the villagers and executed. The account I read was the look on his face was righteous or beatific.
Btw, if anyone thinks the Dukes of Hazzard was repudiated because it was supposedly racist, think again. It showed a couple good ole boys, never meanin' no harm, thinking. And standing up to corruption, bad governance. And the authoritarians of today couldn't exactly have that model out there for others to get any bright ideas from. Like James Dean's "Rebel Without a Cause" persona that was larger than life, many who embraced the ideas and imagery just a couple decades ago, an iconic hero to many, an icon unceremoniously dismissed and forgotten by those born since the 1990's.
Obedience. Preferably the blind variety. Unthinking. That's what makes the cut in this social/cultural era of totalitarianism.
I never thought Dukes of Hazard was anything other than a couple of good ole boys standing up. I never really watched the show but I was aware what it was about. Good ole boys are the best frankly.
The thing about obedience to authority, I was very dismayed early in the plandemic to read things like this re. the forced injection for the military- if uncle sam tells you to take the injection, you take the injection and things about the injections along those lines from active duty members.
A couple of times I replied if orders conflict with conscience or autonomy or religious belief you must refuse. That is a God given right. An experimental injection can't be ordered. Never got an answer.
There's a lot of psychological priming that is done via entertainment, media. Like all white men are stupid in television and commercials today. Every single commercial is all disproportionately people of color. It's across all mediums, sports, weather, history, action-adventure, comedy, etc. Even the latest Star Wars and other movie series have reimagined characters that check the DEI boxes. Same goes for ideas on culture, academia, obedience. It's very calculating and calculated. Becomes very obvious when you start paying attention...thinking. But if just along for the ride it doesn't stand out, most just drink it in and by repeated exposure are normalized to a reality from tv/social media that's different than the reality outside our own doors.
Courage and moral absolutes are a difficult and rarely followed path. Is why the lyric "home of the brave" accompanies "land of the free" in our national anthem. Without enough brave, righteous, beatific souls no land can be free.
I seriously doubt very many contemplate what the lyrics mean. Same with the pledge of allegiance. It's all mindless rote like the haitian school kids I observed sing song repeating their lessons.
Thank you for this summary/solution. Remember people as a mass we can push back and refuse. UNITED WE STAND, divided we will fall.
The French are avid readers and are almost all jabbed. Must be reading the wrong books!
The idea that we need a teacher to learn, or that we need a doctor to be healthy, is a fairly recent phenomenon. Both ideas are the source of a multitude of mischief.
Same here in Canada , except being what was formerly known as Canadian , I find myself apologizing for finding the time and inclination to read a wide variety of topics . Like you Bill ,I don’t care that I’m not an expert but the reality is ,I read more than most and have opinions about a lot of issues . When it comes to medical stuff , I research like crazy because I get the system ,having been a nurse for20 years in my youth - you do learn a few things after all that time . I found a wonderful engineer who was pivotal in my addressing a health issue that we both had and then ,because of him ,I was able to avoid big pharma capture . I could start a library with all my Covid related books and also those of CJHopkins who no doubt will be facing jail time - by those fair minded German authorities - after the second attempt to vilify him for his book writing and opinions as a satirist. Of note these days , I frequently get the comment that I am interesting to speak with : funny when everyone thinks the same thoughts ,how you can stand out in the crowd as being interesting 😂 even as an older geriatric! Keep writing Bill , you are helping me to stay awake and alert .
I assumed way too much...
https://substack.com/inbox/post/150115129
There is the trend of people being loudly, arrogantly wrong about something, never admitting to any reservations or doubts, and going on social media to wage battle for their position.
That's not the behavior of someone who spends a lot of time sitting quietly and reading.
Or thinking about anything other than their own opinion.
Thank you for a thoughtful and important post. It is difficult to determine whether the growing aversion to reading books is a cause of our country's rapidly decreasing intellectual capacity or a symptom. Consider how many interactions you have daily with others that show a stark resemblance to trying to communicate with someone dealing with substance addiction. They lack interest in important topics, are slow/unable to process and comprehend information, seem to be struggling with some inner dialogue more than the present conversation, and consistently exhibit behavioral choices based on pure emotion, devoid of rational thought. I would offer that these folks are indeed intoxicated (and indoctrinated) by their electronic over-consumption and any human interaction that doesn't mirror their virtual experiences is, at best, an annoyance and, at worst, a "traumatizing" experience. Philo Farnsworth, the farm boy who invented the television, refused to ever have one in his home, much to the chagrin of his children. Another example of his brilliance, I would argue.
One of the dangers of information gathering in the age of propaganda is that even the statistics we read are often skewed. We might do better looking around at our own environment and the people in it. A lot of us still read and a lot of us still converse. But we do tend to stick together. That makes us less obvious to people who aren't reading anymore or aren't talking to each other anymore.
We all came about the conclusion that Covid was a hoax by different routes. In my case the recommendations for masking, distancing and frequent cleaning hands made sense. I wear a mask when sanding, I stay way from people passing wind and it has been known that hand washing has reduced disease for almost a couple of centuries. However my wife was smarter than me and had more free time and she and her BFF dug into the vax when it came out and figured out it was no good. I still remember when she came to me and said we're not taking that sh_t! I said agreed. I wasn't going to be the first guinea pig anyhow as I don't trust government. My mistake is not realizing at that point that the MSM had been bought. I had already switched from CNN to FOX as there definitely seemed to be something weird going on with CNN. I would have eventually taken the vax if I didn't clue into the problems so I will be eternally grateful to my wife and her BFF. I don't read fiction but I do read several thousand pages of technical literature each year so to me it is not the amount of reading that one must do to be aware rather it is reading material that educates the reader in protecting their own life which could be fictional stories including tales of older generations or like this book on Biology that I just bought that talks about how the body works so I have a reference book. It was recommended by someone on substack as to their source of realizing the Covid sham was bogus.
I bet'cha that Biology book tells you what mRNA does in the human body. I also bet'cha it tells you how your own mRNA can make mistakes, too. Therefore, it's always a great idea to add some foreign mRNA into the mix, isn't it? (Not at all.)
I haven't cracked the book open yet. Its about a thousand pages. I am looking forward to skimming a few chapters pertaining to DNA, cell function, etc.
Enjoy. Biology can be pretty interesting. It's one of my majors.
The 60's mantra was "Question Authority". What has happened? Like a hanging, the draft concentrated our minds.
I often recommend Bloom's "Closing of the American Mind" and Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death". Doubtless still relevant after 35+ years.....
That's a great thought - the more we read, the more we realize how much we don't know! Thanks!
Absolutely