From: tnp@invalid.invalid   
      
   On 25/12/2025 22:05, Lars Poulsen wrote:   
   > On 2025-12-25, c186282  wrote:   
   >>     "Intellectuals" generally love subjects with   
   >>     a zillion potential fine points they can argue   
   >>     for eternity. Does not matter if the subject   
   >>     is "important" or even particularly real. Some   
   >>     people like chess, 'intellectuals' love the   
   >>     arguments, it's their favorite game.   
   >>   
   >>     Unfortunately they sometimes SOUND significant   
   >>     and profound - and horrible "-isms" are born.   
   >   
   > It is true that academics like to find trivial little edges   
   > to invent controversy about, because that is a precondition for   
   > writing a paper that can get published in a journal that nobody   
   > reads, which again is a precondition of staying employed in   
   > a tenure track position.   
   >   
   > It is equally true that right-wing think tanks are even more   
   > adept at creating superficial bullshit that SOUNDS sorta   
   > common-sense until you think about it for a few seconds.   
   >   
   All think tanks are like that.   
      
   I mean Labour here haven't got as far as 'feedback' so they think   
   'raising minimum wage' 'tax rich people' will make people richer,   
   instead of driving their jobs and their employers overseas...   
      
   --   
   “People believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,   
   and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.   
   Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, one’s   
   agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of   
   one’s suitability to be taken seriously.”   
      
   Paul Krugman   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)