I say this even though "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."
I am doing deterministic predictions all the time. I am guilty as fuck.
Recently, an acquaintance that I ghosted texted me. He is a right-wing extremist. I think he is a Trump fan. His political takes became more and more insane/disgusting. And then I ghosted him. And I insulted him beforehand. I usually ignore him. But this time I replied. I think he celebrated the Venezuela coup. And I told him he is an idiot for denying that Trump is corrupted/in the Epstein files. I think more and more MAGA people distance themselves from Trump. Trump just started a forever war over Israel. And Israel is a dividing line for the right. I think he increasinlgy realizes that MAGA is a scam. But has a hard time to admit that...
He sent me a tweet of a right-wing internet edge lord he follows. And he wanted to impress me with this extremely smart and interesting take. Usually I would have ignored it. I replied something like. I don't like to read internet edge lords that are desperate for attention. You can see that when they use words like retard in politicial texts. Moreover, I emphasized all the spelling/grammar mistakes (such an irony but I wouldn't take my politicial takes that serious either). And I am hesitant to take someone as geooliticial expert who uses retard for his analysis, makes myrid of language mistakes, and cries for attention.
My hardest punchline was though: the text consists of countless statements that cannot be falsified and most of the statements are pretty deterministic about the future and real experts usually think in scenarios. The person is a bullshitter.
The irony is the critique also applies to many of my posts. It is good to emphaszie uncertainty in the content I post and to express doubts when necessary. (real scholars in journals do this all the time. This is more of a media phenomenon.) There are many wanna be experts online and in the media who claim to know everything for certain. And if they are wrong they don't care about it and just move on to the next topic. I told him most of the independent right-wing voices are not interesting at all and many of them are useful idiots for billionairs/and they spread their propaganda.
He also reads people like Curtis Yarvin and he likes him. I once watched a lecture of Yarvin and he repeats always the same narratives. At the end of the lecture there was a discussion between Yarvin and a historian. And the historian could pretty much elaborate on all the details where Yarvin had wrong interpretations or factual errors in his lecture. And Yarvin was exposed for spreading bullshit. And it was like "I don't care people will listen to my shit anyway." Then he made jokes about it. And actually this is how politics works nowadays. Many right-wing intellectuals when they are confronted with experts in their field they can be exposed as propagandists but actually noone care about it and they just continue with their march through the institutions.
I am doing deterministic predictions all the time. I am guilty as fuck.
Recently, an acquaintance that I ghosted texted me. He is a right-wing extremist. I think he is a Trump fan. His political takes became more and more insane/disgusting. And then I ghosted him. And I insulted him beforehand. I usually ignore him. But this time I replied. I think he celebrated the Venezuela coup. And I told him he is an idiot for denying that Trump is corrupted/in the Epstein files. I think more and more MAGA people distance themselves from Trump. Trump just started a forever war over Israel. And Israel is a dividing line for the right. I think he increasinlgy realizes that MAGA is a scam. But has a hard time to admit that...
He sent me a tweet of a right-wing internet edge lord he follows. And he wanted to impress me with this extremely smart and interesting take. Usually I would have ignored it. I replied something like. I don't like to read internet edge lords that are desperate for attention. You can see that when they use words like retard in politicial texts. Moreover, I emphasized all the spelling/grammar mistakes (such an irony but I wouldn't take my politicial takes that serious either). And I am hesitant to take someone as geooliticial expert who uses retard for his analysis, makes myrid of language mistakes, and cries for attention.
My hardest punchline was though: the text consists of countless statements that cannot be falsified and most of the statements are pretty deterministic about the future and real experts usually think in scenarios. The person is a bullshitter.
The irony is the critique also applies to many of my posts. It is good to emphaszie uncertainty in the content I post and to express doubts when necessary. (real scholars in journals do this all the time. This is more of a media phenomenon.) There are many wanna be experts online and in the media who claim to know everything for certain. And if they are wrong they don't care about it and just move on to the next topic. I told him most of the independent right-wing voices are not interesting at all and many of them are useful idiots for billionairs/and they spread their propaganda.
He also reads people like Curtis Yarvin and he likes him. I once watched a lecture of Yarvin and he repeats always the same narratives. At the end of the lecture there was a discussion between Yarvin and a historian. And the historian could pretty much elaborate on all the details where Yarvin had wrong interpretations or factual errors in his lecture. And Yarvin was exposed for spreading bullshit. And it was like "I don't care people will listen to my shit anyway." Then he made jokes about it. And actually this is how politics works nowadays. Many right-wing intellectuals when they are confronted with experts in their field they can be exposed as propagandists but actually noone care about it and they just continue with their march through the institutions.
