JournoList - Collusion or just good fun?

[dank69]

...

We simply accept it: Journalism and academia are two bastions of liberalism and unfortunately, of progressivism. ...

True journalism is reporting of the facts. True academia is the search for knowledge. When you say journalism and academia are "bastions of liberalism and unfortunately, of progressivism," why do you think that is? And why do you think that is a bad thing?

 

[werepossum]

True journalism is reporting of the facts. True academia is the search for knowledge. When you say journalism and academia are "bastions of liberalism and unfortunately, of progressivism," why do you think that is? And why do you think that is a bad thing?

I don't think it's a bad thing for journalism and academia to be bastions of liberalism; classical liberalism is a wonderful thing responsible for much of society's advancement. I think it's a very bad thing for journalism and academia to be bastions of progressivism because the progressive movement is in large part dedicated to pulling back those advances. It was liberalism that says man has an innate, G-d-given or natural right to be free; the progressive movement not only denies any innate, G-d-given or natural rights whatsoever, but is dedicated to removing as much freedom and individual liberty as possible. It is progressives, not liberals, who believe it's perfectly all right for government to seize someone's property and give it to a rich person as long as government stands to benefit. It is progressives, not liberals, who believe an individual should not have even the freedom to decide what size Coke to order.

As far as why I think that is, three reasons. First, progressives by preference hire only progressives - perhaps a logical step once you've decided that everyone who disagrees with you is insane. The more progressive is a business or an industry, the more progressive it will grow, for this reason. Second, progressives are self-identified with progressively making societal changes that revolution failed to accomplish, and journalism is an excellent place to wield that kind of power. (Or at least it was back when people trusted the media.) And third, progressives dislike individual responsibility, and academia is an excellent place to avoid individual responsibility.

 

[monovillage]

True journalism is reporting of the facts. True academia is the search for knowledge. When you say journalism and academia are "bastions of liberalism and unfortunately, of progressivism," why do you think that is? And why do you think that is a bad thing?

Because so many journalists and academics have sold out their professional integrity for political, financial and social reasons and would rather spread ideology then the facts. JournoList was positive proof that ideological partisan Democrats got together to plan how to plant, use and abuse the media for their own purposes.

 

[dank69]

Because so many journalists and academics have sold out their professional integrity for political, financial and social reasons and would rather spread ideology then the facts. JournoList was positive proof that ideological partisan Democrats got together to plan how to plant, use and abuse the media for their own purposes.

For argument's sake, let's accept your conclusions about JournoList. Would you say FoxNews is better/worse/same as JournoList?

 

[dank69]

I don't think it's a bad thing for journalism and academia to be bastions of liberalism; classical liberalism is a wonderful thing responsible for much of society's advancement. I think it's a very bad thing for journalism and academia to be bastions of progressivism because the progressive movement is in large part dedicated to pulling back those advances. It was liberalism that says man has an innate, G-d-given or natural right to be free; the progressive movement not only denies any innate, G-d-given or natural rights whatsoever, but is dedicated to removing as much freedom and individual liberty as possible. It is progressives, not liberals, who believe it's perfectly all right for government to seize someone's property and give it to a rich person as long as government stands to benefit. It is progressives, not liberals, who believe an individual should not have even the freedom to decide what size Coke to order.

As far as why I think that is, three reasons. First, progressives by preference hire only progressives - perhaps a logical step once you've decided that everyone who disagrees with you is insane. The more progressive is a business or an industry, the more progressive it will grow, for this reason. Second, progressives are self-identified with progressively making societal changes that revolution failed to accomplish, and journalism is an excellent place to wield that kind of power. (Or at least it was back when people trusted the media.) And third, progressives dislike individual responsibility, and academia is an excellent place to avoid individual responsibility.

It seems to me that you are over-generalizing the term progressive. While I'me sure there are some progressives that fit your characterization, I would venture to say that most actually do not. I would also venture to say that you even mischaracterize the extremists, at least WRT motivation.

 

[werepossum]

It seems to me that you are over-generalizing the term progressive. While I'me sure there are some progressives that fit your characterization, I would venture to say that most actually do not. I would also venture to say that you even mischaracterize the extremists, at least WRT motivation.

Well, in my defense there are millions of progressives just within the USA; it's very difficult to accurately portray such a large group other than with a broad brush. Either way, a rejection of all innate, G-d-given or natural rights must be part and parcel of every progressive's core, because the progressive movement centers on two things: replacing individual liberty and initiative with enlightened government authority; and seizing and redistributing wealth. If one believes that man has an innate right to freedom, one can hardly also believe that government should have the power to tell him what size Coke he may have. If one believes that man has an innate right to the product of his own labor, one can hardly also believe that government should have the power to decide how much is enough and simply take the rest for redistribution. And no one who believes that government should have the right to take your property and give it to a rich person because government will benefit can value property rights or individual liberty or any other natural rights in the slightest.

 

[monovillage]

For argument's sake, let's accept your conclusions about JournoList. Would you say FoxNews is better/worse/same as JournoList?

Fox news and JournoList are not the same thing at all.
I have no problem at pointing out that Fox news is biased to Republicans and I also have no problem pointing out that CNN is biased to Democrats. There's truly no such thing as unbiased reporting, my problem is that many on the left (including JounoList and their defenders.) try to deny their bias or claim that they are "fair and balanced".

 

[dank69]

Well, in my defense there are millions of progressives just within the USA; it's very difficult to accurately portray such a large group other than with a broad brush. Either way, a rejection of all innate, G-d-given or natural rights must be part and parcel of every progressive's core, because the progressive movement centers on two things: replacing individual liberty and initiative with enlightened government authority; and seizing and redistributing wealth. If one believes that man has an innate right to freedom, one can hardly also believe that government should have the power to tell him what size Coke he may have. If one believes that man has an innate right to the product of his own labor, one can hardly also believe that government should have the power to decide how much is enough and simply take the rest for redistribution. And no one who believes that government should have the right to take your property and give it to a rich person because government will benefit can value property rights or individual liberty or any other natural rights in the slightest.

I don't think any of those things, with exception of maybe the soda thing, are exclusive to progressives. Take the bolded part for example, conservatives do this all the time. Nobody but the most extreme libertarians want to eliminate all taxes, so your "seizing and redistributing wealth" isn't exclusively progressive either. All governments get to decide "how much is enough and simply take the rest for redistribution," which is a laughably transparent caricature of our tax system btw. Not sure why or when you have chosen to abandon your attempt to at least put on a façade of being non-partisan and have instead decided to go full shill lately, but more power to you if that's what floats your boat. FWIW I, for one, never bought your act for a second anyway so it's actually nice to see you throw off the shackles and just be yourself, even if it is a bit frightening.

 

[dank69]

Fox news and JournoList are not the same thing at all.
I have no problem at pointing out that Fox news is biased to Republicans and I also have no problem pointing out that CNN is biased to Democrats. There's truly no such thing as unbiased reporting, my problem is that many on the left (including JounoList and their defenders.) try to deny their bias or claim that they are "fair and balanced".

I know I've heard that slogan somewhere before. "Fair and Balanced." Really does sound familiar, but I can't for the life of me remember who used it.