Richard Feynman famously said that marketing was an inherently immoral job, because it consisted of selling something as being better than the marketer knows it to be. I tried that argument on our VP of Marketing, back in the day, and she said that “MarCom” – Marketing Communications – was OK. Well, that still leaves the rest of marketing on the hook.
As we discussed in my piece on butter packaging, marketing claims often do amount to lies – excuse me – “deliberate excursions from the truth.”
You tell us, O theologians! that “what is folly in the eyes of men, is wisdom before God, who is pleased to
Jean Meslier
confound the wisdom of the wise.” But do you not pretend that human wisdom is a gift from Heaven?
Verbal abuse and written abuse are important social tools. If you’re going to use them (or defend against them) you may as well do a good job and be properly equipped. In this series, I am going to offer some of my opinions about strategy regarding verbal abuse. To be clear: this is not a canonical treatment; I welcome your feedback – especially if it’s well-aimed and cruel.
Is this the right room for an argument?
I hope to expand this into a full series including a variety of techniques as subtle as eye-gouging and groin-kicking are in a street-fight. This section is groundwork and throat-clearing, so it’s going to be delivered more in the tone of a short lecture than as strategic or tactical maxims. As Anne Elk said, “This is a theory, which is mine. And this is it.”
We start with the 5 minute argument.
I obtained a copy of the classic text by Paul Popenoe, published in 1918 by McMillan. Unfortunately, original editions don’t appear often on Ebay and I thought that it’d be better to spend my money on nerd toys instead of obtaining a beautiful old printing of an ugly old book.
It is pretended, that in forming the universe, God had no object but to render
Jean Meslier
man happy. But, in a world created expressly for him and governed by an all-mighty God, is man after all very happy? Are his enjoyments durable? Are not his pleasures mingled with sufferings?
What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it
Saul Alinsky
should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.
I didn’t want to turn my first posting on this topic into a book report on the Blumrosen’s “Slave Nation” because I find that when one does a book report, it’s easy to turn off the critical engine in one’s brain and just accept material without a close reading. “Look, I’m not going to read all of Jefferson’s correspondance…!” it’s too much.
I’m too proud to go after the tax breaks. But… I can haz Ark Park!
“We should outlaw teleprompters … for anybody running for president” – Donald Trump
“LOL Whut?” – Demosthenes [Read more…]
“The worst political state is the popular state.” So Cinna explains to Augustus. But just as good a maxim is “The worst political state is the monarchy.”