THE DEMOGRAPHIFICATION RULES: Without question, the history's brutal!

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2022

But did the essay make sense? In a more perfect world, we Americans would know the full, or at least the fuller, history of the so-called Americas—of North America and South America, before Columbus and after.

For those in search of such wider knowledge we'll recommend the widely praised 2005 book by Charles Mann:

1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus

For the record, Mann's book isn't limited to the world that existed before Columbus. Early on, he relates the history the English people who arrived on Cape Cod in 1620, and of the Native Americans with whom they interacted.

(First sentence, Chapter 2: "On March 22, 1621, an official Native American delegation walked through what is now southern New England to negotiate with a group of foreigners who had taken over a recently deserted Indian settlement.")

Regarding the history of that particular interaction, we'd also recommend the highly erudite 2019 book by Professor David Silverman: 

This Land Is Their Land: The Wampanoag Indians, Plymouth Colony, and the Troubled History of Thanksgiving

Having said that, we'd also say this. It seems to us that Silverman's book carries a bit of a point of view—a point of view which may help explain why our floundering blue political tribe can't even manage to hold onto the House in this, the age of Donald J. Trump.

(According to the Cook Report: With 107.2 million votes counted, Republican candidates outpolled their Democratic opponents this year, by three percentage points.)

Given our acknowledged moral and intellectual brilliance, why can't we blues do better than that? It seems to us that a tiny hint emerges from Professor Silverman's highly erudite book—more generally, from the ways our tribe is inclined to present such basic parts of our own nation's human history.

As we've repeatedly noted, Silverman's book is full of erudition. It's also built around a slightly sour point of view, a point of view our tribe routinely adopts as we struggle to convince the Others of our moral greatness.

On Thanksgiving Day 2019, the New York Times published an essay by Silverman—an essay built out of his vastly informative book. Yesterday, we edited the start of that essay, revealing the well-known, upbeat story which lies at the heart of this tale. 

We didn't add a single world to what Silverman wrote in his essay. Below, you see the actual way the essay began, hard-copy headline included:

The Vicious Myth of Thanksgiving

Generations of Americans have told themselves a patriotic story of the supposed first Thanksgiving that misrepresents colonization as consensual and bloodless.

The story goes like this: English Pilgrims cram aboard the Mayflower and brave the stormy Atlantic to seek religious freedom in America. They disembark at Plymouth Rock and enter the howling wilderness equipped with their proto-Constitution, the Mayflower Compact, and the confidence that they are God’s chosen people. Yet sickness and starvation halve their population during the first winter and challenges their faith.

Meanwhile, the neighboring Indians (rarely identified by tribe), with whom the English desperately wish to trade for food, keep a wary distance. Just when Plymouth seems destined to become another lost colony, miraculously, the Natives make contact through the interpreters Samoset and Squanto (the story sidesteps how these figures learned English, nor does it explain why the Indians suddenly became so friendly). The sachem (or chief), Ousamequin (whom the English know, from his title, as “Massasoit”), even agrees to a treaty of alliance with Plymouth.

Over the spring and summer, the Indians feed the Pilgrims and teach them how to plant corn; the colony begins to thrive. In the fall, the two parties seal their friendship with the first Thanksgiving. The subsequent 50-year peace allows colonial New England and, by extension, the United States to become a citadel of freedom, democracy, Christianity and plenty.

As for what happens to the Indians next, this story has nothing to say. The Indians’ legacy is to present America as a gift to white people—or in other words, to concede to colonialism...

Did Silverman compose that headline? We'll assume he didn't. 

Nor does he say, in the text of his essay, that this country's long-standing Thanksgiving myth is "vicious." Whoever composed that very blue headline was working from the following passage in Silverman's essay:

"The Wampanoags, who are the Indians in this tale, have long contended that the Thanksgiving myth sugarcoats the viciousness of colonial history for Native people. It does."

In his own words, Silverman doesn't say that the Thanksgiving myth itself is vicious. And of course, it plainly isn't, until it falls into the hands of an egghead journalist from our flailing blue tribe.

Silverman doesn't say that the Thanksgiving myth is vicious. Instead, he says that this nation's subsequent "colonial history" turned out to be "vicious for Native people."  

We'd prefer the word "brutal" ourselves. But it's hard to argue that Silverman's assessment isn't tragically accurate. 

(He also seems to say that those Thanksgiving pageants taught the kids that the Indians were "conceding to colonialism." That strikes us as a peculiar, perhaps ridiculous claim—a claim which comes from a highly pointed point of view.)

In the centuries after that famous feast, the history of Native America became unmistakably brutal. For those of us alive today, the question is what we should do about that. We'll make a few suggestions:

One thing we probably shouldn't do is compose exciting headlines which 1) misstate what an author has said, and 2) will surely tend to offend many readers on the morning of a national holiday which many people love. 

The inclination to adopt such thrilling behaviors lies deep in our soul at newspapers like the New York Times. That said, it's a good way to drive the kind of tribal division which leaves the GOP in control of the House in spite of our own tribe's manifest goodness and brilliance.

In fairness to the headline writer, a sardonic tone may perhaps be found in the opening paragraphs of Silverman's actual essay. 

He starts by possibly seeming to refer to "Americans" as "them." He continues along in sardonic fashion, complaining that the children at our grade school pageants haven't even been told the name of the tribe which helped the Pilgrims survive.

Indeed, in the "grade school pageants" to which Silverman later refers, children aren't even told how the interpreters Samoset and Squanto learned to speak English! Nor have second graders ever been told "why the Indians suddenly became so friendly."

Also, the second graders were never told "what happen[ed] to the Indians next." More specifically, they were never told about what happened after "the 50-year peace" which followed that famous 1621 feast.

Later in his essay, Silverman fills us in about that history, exactly as an historian should. Inevitably, though, he seems to complain about the myth as he does:

SILVERMAN: The Thanksgiving myth also sanitizes the power politics of the Pilgrim-Wampanoag alliance. For years afterward, Ousmequin threatened rivals in and outside the Wampanoag tribe with violence from his English allies. Such intimidation played a far more important role in the Wampanoags’ alliance with Plymouth than the first Thanksgiving.

And the myth distorts history by highlighting the alliance while ignoring its deterioration. After Ousamequin’s death in 1660, the English and the Wampanoags constantly teetered on the edge of war because of the colonists’ aggressive, underhanded expansion. These tensions culminated in King Philip’s War of 1675-76, in which the English killed thousands of Native people—including Ousamequin’s son, Pumetacom—and enslaved thousands more. Plymouth and Massachusetts celebrated their bloody victory with a day of thanksgiving.

Imagine! When Americans staged those public school pageants, they didn't include the history of King Philip's War, which started fifty years later. The killing of Pumetacom wasn't even part of the deal!

What are schoolkids taught today about the history of such wars, which extended across the continent as this nation expanded? What are kids taught about the brutal history which followed that "First Thanksgiving?" About the effects of that brutal history in the present day?

What are second graders taught about that? How about kids in high school? We don't know the answer to those questions, and there's no sign that Silverman has researched those questions either. 

What he almost seems to be doing is complaining that children attending public school pageants weren't exposed to a graduate-level history curriculum when they were in third grade. In all candor, this complaint doesn't make a whole lot of sense—except to the extent that the complaining party is approaching this matter from a certain point of view.

We'll compliment Silverman, as at least one commenter did, for something he chose to include in his short capsule history. We refer to the capsule history in which the Wampanoags of that era weren't exclusively "kinder and gentler," as they may have seemed to be in grade school pageants of yore.

In Silverman's essay, Ousamequin is said to have engaged in intimidations and threats of violence against all manner of rivals, Native as well as British, in the years which followed that first Thanksgiving. That said, are we supposed to think that second graders should have been told that too?

Our view? Silverman wrote an angry essay which didn't exactly make sense.

For the record, let's be fair! If you think that anger provides the best route to future progress, there's plenty to be angry about in the brutal American history which lies at the heart of his brief

That said, it doesn't exactly make sense to aim your anger about Native American history at a story that's been told at grade school pageants—a story in which the Native Americans tend to function as the heroes of the piece.

Nor does it necessarily make a lot of sense to drop your bomb on Thanksgiving morning, under a tough-talking headline which misrepresents what your essay actually said. (We'll assume that headline came from some incompetent editor at the Times, not from the essay's author.)

Silverman's essay generated twenty-four comments. It seems to us that they're often very instructive. The shape of his larger point of view is on fuller display in his highly erudite book, concerning which our own general view would be this:

Silverman seems to be a highly erudite historian. Also, we think he's inclined toward an uninsightful political point of view, one which tends to damage progressive (and American) interests.

Did he start by suggesting that "Americans" are secretly "them?" In the actual text of the essay, it's pretty much as you like it. In Silverman's book, he seems to put more flesh on the bones of that sadly familiar point of view. 

Our blue tribe often broadcasts this view—and despite our self-acknowledged brilliance, we rarely seem to notice the fact that we're doing some such thing, or that we may be harming our interests in the process.

In Silverman's book, he seems to give voice to this framework. For example, why should a kid named "Silverman" have had to listen to "My Country Tis of Thee" during those grade school pageants?

In his book, Silverman directly asks that question. He quickly shows that he knows the theoretical answer, but it's an answer he seems to reject.

Are we the people one big people, or are we instead a collection of different demographic groups? Our deeply self-impressed blue tribe has become increasingly committed to difference rather than sameness.

You might call it the demographication of everything. When we're gripped by this growing impulse, we tend to follow the demographication rules, and when we engage in this unhelpful conduct, we may help keep Others in office.

Silverman is highly learned. We aren't high on the basic framework he brings to his work, on his thoroughly well-intentioned but unhelpful point of view.

Possibly coming: A look at some of the comments to Silverman's sardonic piece


77 comments:

  1. One cannot emphasize sameness while people are not treated similarly due to perceived differences.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because people are treated unjustly.

      Delete
    2. Emphasizing and demanding that people are treated the same (because of sameness) should be the first response to unjust treatment.

      Delete
    3. Spoken like a virtue signaling Democrat.

      Delete
    4. Hello!

      I would like to wax poetic the many qualities of my love, Fanny Hebert.

      A buxom blonde, long flaxen hair,
      With rosy cheeks, on skin so fair,
      With such a full and rotund torso,
      I now love her even more so

      So please beware, my sweet Fanny Fair,
      The Whispering Bottom,
      For it just may, on any given day,
      Release a hot one




      With rosy cheeks, on skin so fair,

      Delete
    5. Non right wingers understand that it is immoral and unnatural to treat people/groups in a way that results in all other people/groups having less than the "dominant" group. Humans as a group have understood this for 95% of the time they have existed. It is only in the last 10k years that the obsession with dominance has emerged in certain unfortunate folk - the result of transitioning to an agrarian society, where surplus and commodification supplanted egalitarian communities.

      Right wingers on the other hand obsess about how to get The Others to have less rights, less needs met, less material goods, less wealth, less housing, less food, less income, less privilege, etc....

      Somerby and his tiny cohort of fanboys are right wingers. All of their blog posts and comments seethe with hatred and bitterness.

      They are lost souls.

      A moment of silence please, for their suffering, most likely the result of unresolved childhood trauma. No doubt their parents were shit, and lawdy I hope they do not reproduce and continue the cycle of abuse. Bless their enlarged amygdala and shrunken frontal cortex.

      Delete
    6. Mista Dobalina Mista Bob Dobalina
      Mista Dobalina Mista Bob Dobalina

      First he was my money grip
      Then he stole my honey dip

      You need to take heed and quit being such a groupie
      Ever since I did a little show in Guadeloupe

      Delete
    7. Toolz Fullz Tutorials Leads/Pros

      CC Fullz with CVV (8$ per each, minimum 5)
      Business EIN Fullz (25$ for each)
      SSN DOB DL Fullz/Leads/Pros (1$, 2$ & 5$ each)
      High Credi Scores Fullz (7$ for each)
      Dumps with Pins (101/202) (75$ each)
      Logins
      Combos
      SMTP's 15$
      C-Panels 25$
      Shells 20$
      RDP's 15$
      Complete Spamming Package 300$
      Hacking tools & Tutorials 250$
      Carding tools & Tuorials 300$

      You can asked for any tools/tutorials for carding, hacking, spamming

      Contact Here:
      TG/icq : @killhacks - Skype/Wickr : peeterhacks

      Valid & Guaranteed stuff will be provided with proper guidance
      Invalid stuff will be replaced/No Refund

      Delete
  2. Somerby is entirely too touchy about the words vicious vs brutal. Both are bad.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Somerby blames Silverman for a headline he didn’t write.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Today, Somerby is doing his Kanye impression.

      Same as yesterday....

      Delete

  4. Yeah, dear Bob. Your liberal cult's relentless effort to divide the working people into 'victims' and 'oppressors' based on their ancestry is ... well ... relentless.

    And yes, it does damage American society.

    But dividing the working people into warring factions is exactly what pwogwessive interests are. You may not realize it, dear Bob, but your liberal cult serves the oligarchy.

    ...yes, you may not fully realize it, dear Bob, but certainly you must suspect it, nicht wahr?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Best argument in support of open borders you'll read on the internet today.
      Great job, Mao.

      Delete
    2. Nicht wahr — spoken like a good nazi lover.

      Delete
  5. Silverman has dissociated from our history.

    That’s why he says “them”.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our history includes the Indians, who are American citizens.

      Delete
    2. @4:58 Perfect bon mot from the resident dullard

      Delete
    3. On the contrary, perfect response to a non sequitur.

      Delete
    4. “Non sequitur” means “doesn’t follow.”

      Delete
  6. Hating American and dissing America are in vogue, unfortunately. IMO that's an unhealthy way to raise and educate children. Also, deifying Native Americans is another popular practice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kanye West is antisemitic.

      Delete
    2. Telling the truth about history doesn’t mean you hate America.

      Delete
    3. Cecelia, don't tell me "duh," tell David.

      Delete
    4. West is indeed a Jew baiter, but
      what he has brought to the
      surface on the American right
      Is a crude and sickening afront
      human beings with any sense
      of decency.
      The sad echos of Americans
      Sympatric to Hitler in the late
      1930s are now pretty naked
      in the discourse now.
      To take this in and gage what
      might be done about it this
      would require some kind of
      adult intellect. It might actually
      be best that Bob looks away,
      because he is a child.

      Delete
    5. “Duh” is ambiguous.

      Delete
  7. You know what keeps “Others” in office? Congressional and state legislative districts that have been drawn to advantage the Republicans who drew them. See Michigan for what happens when a nonpartisan commission draws the districts.
    I’ll give you the answer so you don’t have to Google it: Democrats win!
    That’s it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "In Silverman's book, he seems to give voice to this framework. For example, why should a kid named "Silverman" have had to listen to "My Country Tis of Thee" during those grade school pageants?"

    Somerby implies here that Silverman is unpatriotic, because he wrote a more accurate history of colonial interactions with Indians back before our country was born. Somerby won't quote anything Silverman said that was actually unpatriotic. He vaguely moans about a suspected framework, without describing it at all, much less quoting it.

    But Somerby needs to be careful about calling people with Jewish surnames "unpatriotic" even by implication, as when he suggests Dr. Silverman never sang a patriotic song as child in a classroom. It is anti-semitic bigotry to call Jews unpatriotic in such a way, even with a wink wink nod nod and some blatantly unsupported name-calling. And notice how Cecelia piles on.

    This is ugly and Somerby has no excuse for this kind of shit. Somerby may be a bit more educated than Kanye, but he is walking up that same street, and it isn't cute or funny or appropriate -- it is what bigotry looks like. And this, only a day after Somerby pretended to misunderstand why it matters that a football coach who is against increasing the number of black quarterbacks needs to account for his past participation in protests against integration of schools.

    No one is going to vote for Trump again except Republicans, and many of them have defected. Threatening liberals by saying that we will lose votes if we keep decrying bigotry in its various forms, isn't going to keep people from noticing the bad stuff that Somerby excuses her daily, under the guise of concern trolling the left and trying to weaken support for civil rights among Democrats and people who care about other people (among whom Trump and his followers are not counted).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your ignorantly literal reading of Somerby is either a misguided move or willful excessiveness.

      Delete
    2. @1:07 Monkey see, monkey do.

      Delete
  9. Somerby didn’t call Silverman unpatriotic.

    He mentioned those particular remarks in the context of his point about “demographification”.

    I assume that Silverman loves his country as much or more as the most patriotic of people. I assume that about everyone, till proved wrong.

    Still, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with calling a Jew unpatriotic if they are.

    Somerby never suggested such a thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 12:42 does not understand simple concepts like historical context because they are too busy trying to “own” other people.

      Delete
    2. You don’t call someone unpatriotic based on their name.

      Delete
  10. He asked why a kid named Silverman should listen to a patriotic song in school. That is a slur against Jews, plain and simple. Otherwise why mention the name?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Somerby, “In Silverman's book, he seems to give voice to this framework. For example, why should a kid named "Silverman" have had to listen to "My Country Tis of Thee" during those grade school pageants?

    In his book, Silverman directly asks that question. He quickly shows that he knows the theoretical answer, but it's an answer he seems to reject.”

    ReplyDelete
  12. 1:51: And Somerby is saying that that offends the “others” and makes them vote against Democrats. In other words, Silverman’s “point of view” is unhelpful to Democrats, says Somerby. I don’t know what the takeaway from that is, but it seems that Somerby wishes liberal historians with presumably unpatriotic “points of view” would shut up and restrict their views to graduate courses. Maybe they shouldn’t even publish books directed at an adult audience at all. Cancel culture.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. When one group massacred the other, it is specious to insist on commonality dictated by the victor. Ask Armenians about their genocide, if you dare.

    ReplyDelete
  15. mh, Somerby never suggested Silverman is unpatriotic. That he did is the foregone conclusion of Anonymouse 12:00am.

    Bob mentioned that Silverman questioned the possibility of there being a national shared experience via the Thanksgiving holiday and Somerby also mentioned Silverman’s use of the term “them” (rather than “we” or “Americans”) when Silverman spoke about Thanksgiving pageants.

    Bob: “Are we the people one big people, or are we instead a collection of different demographic groups? Our deeply self-impressed blue tribe has become increasingly committed to difference rather than sameness.”

    Yeah, he seems to think you can be more appealing to voters if you emphasize commonality.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymouse 3:36pm, you don’t and logically cannot “insist” on commonality.

    ReplyDelete
  17. No one identifies only with humanity. People identify with their families first, then their communities, then some larger entity such as city or state or region of the country, then their nation, then perhaps people of a similar ethnicity or language group or heritage, and some people identify with race, religion, politics, disability/ability, age group or gender as well. Some do this implicitly and others explicitly. "Bros before hos," or us before them or "you youngsters stop messing around."

    Even Somerby does this, although he chides liberals for not being an exception to all of social psychology, when he isn't one either. Somerby assumes his identifications are the norm and the bestest way to be, while denying other people the right to identify as they choose.

    There is no reason on God's earth why Native Americans should be forced to celebrate their brutal conquest in the same manner as the descendents of the colonials do. And it should be recognized that the manner of celebration of Thanksgiving is blind and deaf to the experiences of Indians. That is a crappy way to treat other people -- and that is Silverman's point. Not something woke or PC or historically liberal in its framework, as Somerby puts it, whatever that means. In duplicate bridge, we have a zero tolerance rule against gloating. Apparently the people who are grateful on Thanksgiving for beating the crap out of the nice Indians who helped them not starve don't understand that concept, and neither does Somerby.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Cecelia, try celebrating Thanksgiving in your own manner in elementary school. You will get sent to special ed.

    ReplyDelete
  19. When someone wants to break down and brainwash people into a cult, they first destroy their existing identity and cut off their affiliations, especially with family and friends. They people are ready to be absorbed into the commonality, conveniently led by some narcissistic megalomaniac. What Somerby is proposing isn't noble or humanistic, it is mind control 101. Healthy people have a strong sense of themselves, know who they are and who they are connected to.

    If Somerby really thought his approach were a good way to live, he would be preaching it on the right, where all those mentally ill people are. Instead, he is here trying to undermine those of us who are not mentally fragile. Why? I cannot think of any explanation for Somerby's actions that isn't evil.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Somerby is wasting time on Silverman while stuff like this is going on:

    "The niece of former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was reportedly kicked off of an airplane after she accused a Latino family of being "drug mules."

    ReplyDelete
  21. Can a woman named Cecelia be patriotic?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymices…

    In your usual manner, you’ve quickly morphed my addressing a misreading (and subsequent unfounded accusation) by one of your own, into the charge that I want everyone to celebrate Thanksgiving and to celebrate it in the exact way.

    You’re such disingenuous trolls.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymouse 8:47pm: “There is no reason on God's earth why Native Americans should be forced to celebrate their brutal conquest in the same manner as the descendents of the colonials do. And it should be recognized that the manner of celebration of Thanksgiving is blind and deaf to the experiences of Indians. That is a crappy way to treat other people -- and that is Silverman's point. Not something woke or PC or historically liberal in its framework, as Somerby puts it, whatever that means.”

    No one said that anyone should be forced into celebrating T-Day. Neither Indians or cowboys…

    Somerby’s quarrel is with Silverman and others and THEIR intrusion upon simple customs with a disdain that demands the correction of “them”. That demands that we set “them” straight. Not America or Americans, but “them”.

    Them being grade schoolers, their teachers, and parents. Your neighbors.

    Somerby thinks it’s wiser to call that cohort “us” rather than dissociating yourself to the point where every November becomes a high-handed lecture-fest for “them” and not “us”.

    That’s his point. Don’t try to morph it into an accusation that he’s calling people unpatriotic as the bonehead anonymouse did.

    In fact, that sort of slam is of the stuff that anonymices engage in with your unceasing character assaults upon anyone who doesn’t precisely do and think as you command.

    Somerby:”Our view? Silverman wrote an angry essay which didn't exactly make sense.

    For the record, let's be fair! If you think that anger provides the best route to future progress, there's plenty to be angry about in the brutal American history which lies at the heart of his brief

    That said, it doesn't exactly make sense to aim your anger about Native American history at a story that's been told at grade school pageants—a story in which the Native Americans tend to function as the heroes of the piece.

    Nor does it necessarily make a lot of sense to drop your bomb on Thanksgiving morning, under a tough-talking headline which misrepresents what your essay actually said. (We'll assume that headline came from some incompetent editor at the Times, not from the essay's author.)”

    End quote.

    You may not agree with Somerby and you don’t have to agree with him. However, you do have to get what he said right.

    He’s not coercive. You are. He’s not demanding. You are. He’s not daily doing ten- ten paragraph posts of “You Suck” on someone else’s blog. You are.

    It’s anonymices who suck. I tell you that with deep and heartfelt sincerity.

    Boy oh boy, do you suck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, you are the Somerby whisperer, reinterpreting what he didn't say in order to address criticisms of what he did say.

      Somerby is not bothering to write coherent essays any more. Your "fixing" them by adding in parts from Silverman's book that Somerby didn't quote, and explaining what Somerby really really means, doesn't change what Somerby wrote, which was every bit as bad as his critics charge. Somerby doesn't get two bites from the same apple, his own first try and then your second try.

      And then you pile on vitriol, as if your mama never taught you how to be polite. If anyone sucks here, it is you.

      Delete
    2. 6:02, Cecilia: so, if only the New York Times had published the 2019 essay the day before Thanksgiving, instead of on Thanksgiving, that would have kept Somerby from writing his criticism of Silverman…(ie liberals should refrain from attacking Thanksgiving on Thanksgiving).

      Also, if only Silverman hadn’t discussed the Thanksgiving feast, but merely the brutal history of the Wampanoag, that would have prevented Somerby’s criticism…

      Don’t think so.

      All of this is just your way of avoiding what Somerby means: essays like Silverman’s, which Somerby describes as “angry” and seeming to attack cherished American propaganda are unhelpful to Democrats. Somerby himself seems angry at Silverman, a supposed liberal giving liberals a bad name. Somerby doesn’t call for Silverman to shut up, but it’s clear from Somerby’s vitriol that he wishes he would.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 9:42 am, what unquoted parts of Silverman’s book have I added in to an argument?

      Delete
    4. mh, I don’t know…, perhaps they could wait to dredge the viciousness up the following Monday after the holiday.

      You know… as rebuttal to A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving.

      How am I “avoiding” the fact that Somerby thinks Silverman’s essays are unhelpful to Democrats when I expressly stated that on this thread on Dec. 3, 2022 at 3:37pm?

      Delete
    5. You were the one talking about what was in Silverman's book -- I assume you read it. If you trusted Somerby's account, you are a fool. He often leaves things out that are germane to a discussion when citing sources. He only quotes the parts that make it seem like he is right about something, ignoring all context.

      Delete

  24. Yeah. But dear Bob objections are always myopic, in our humble opinion.

    Mr. Silverman is just doing his job. He's paid for writing this shit. He is paid help. Just like all the rest of media dembots.

    ...liberal tribe's politburo is the entity that organizes, promotes, and pays for it...

    ReplyDelete
  25. If Somerby has no problem with different approaches to Thanksgiving, why is he griping about Silverman’s hidden framework?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Maria Ressa:

    “If you don’t have facts, you can’t have truth. Without truth, you can’t have trust. Without these three, we have no shared reality. We can’t solve any problems. We have no democracy. That’s what social media has done. It’s come in and used free speech to stifle free speech.”

    This is why Somerby and others on the right must be confronted when they tell historians to sit down and shut up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. "That’s what social media has done. It’s come in and used free speech to stifle free speech."

      Whoa. Poor liberal establishment. It can't brainwash the rubes unopposed anymore...

      Delete
    2. Somerby has frequently lamented the loss of “gatekeepers” in the (legacy) media. (Liberal, of course).

      He has never discussed the controversy surrounding gatekeeping or content moderation of social media.

      Delete
    3. Hmm. What 'controversy', dear mh?

      The state apparatus dictating 'social media' monopolies what to amplify and what to drop into the memory hole? That controversy?

      Delete
    4. ...judging by the fact that he doesn't censor his own comment threats, it appears that it wouldn't be much of a controversy for dear Bob.

      ...although, who knows. He is, after all, a liberal tribesman...
      ...who would gladly vote for a stroke victim with letter D attached to his name...

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 10:45am, did anyone advocate that Silverman be kicked off any social media platforms, boycotted by book publishers, shunned by the news media, and inveighed upon by protesters outside of his home?

      No. All that was said is that his attitude is angry and that publishing such things around a much-loved holiday is unhelpful to Democrats.

      As usual, you show how bat-shite militant you are in your wild denouncement of such a middle-of-the-road opinion.

      Delete
    6. Unlike Conservatives, Liberals actually care about the things they complain about. It's part of the deep political divide in this country.

      Delete
    7. Somerby didn’t say Silverman’s attitude was angry. He said he seemed to detect a blue framework (without explaining what that even means). That sounds political, like blues aren’t supposed to have frameworks, or being a historian is somehow blue. Somerby never directly says anything any more, but the critical tone was obvious.

      Delete
    8. Here is Somerby calling Silverman “angry:”
      “ Silverman wrote an angry essay which didn't exactly make sense.”

      Delete

    9. Anonymouse 7:55pm,
      Somerby: “ Our view? Silverman wrote an angry essay which didn't exactly make sense.”

      Delete
    10. Good job, mh!

      After all these years, you actually managed to read the blog!

      Delete
    11. Good decent people are angry about atrocities. Why should that put Somerby off?

      Delete
  27. According to typical right wingers like Cecelia, it’s ok for Somerby to attack Silverman. That’s just sensible.

    But when commenters here criticize Somerby, they are trying to shut him up according to our resident Somerby whisperer.

    It’s the typical hypocrisy about “cancel culture.” If someone criticizes a liberal, that’s free speech. When a liberal criticizes a conservative, that’s cancel culture.

    What Cecelia is doing here is attempting to cancel the Somerby critics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. mh, is Somerby assailing Silverman with personal insults and accusing him of being a political operative and a stealth wrecker for Russia? Is he launching a campaign against him?

      Somerby says very personal things about Tucker Carlson and other people that I admire. So do Jonah Goldberg and Bill Krystol. I manage to take that in stride (take it as critique) without being part of a daily tag- team wrestling crew intent on turning every comment board and Twitter feed into an accusation fest based upon nothing but distortion.

      You can too! You could actually be a
      real live boy! (or girl)


      Delete
    2. “Russia… if you’re listening…” he
      was an operative for Russia. That he brought in some of the old guard
      to save his bacon, who have
      now jumped ship, does not change
      that. Barr needs to testify before
      the Senate on his actions in
      sinking the report that found
      Trump guilty as hell.

      Delete
    3. Tucker Carlson is evil.

      Delete

    4. Oh, dear. Resident soros-bots are so ignorant and lazy. They're weeks behind.

      Hello? Elon Musk is your new Emmanuel Goldstein, dears.

      Delete
  28. Toolz Fullz Tutorials Leads/Pros

    CC Fullz with CVV (8$ per each, minimum 5)
    Business EIN Fullz (25$ for each)
    SSN DOB DL Fullz/Leads/Pros (1$, 2$ & 5$ each)
    High Credi Scores Fullz (7$ for each)
    Dumps with Pins (101/202) (75$ each)
    Logins
    Combos
    SMTP's 15$
    C-Panels 25$
    Shells 20$
    RDP's 15$
    Complete Spamming Package 300$
    Hacking tools & Tutorials 250$
    Carding tools & Tuorials 300$

    You can asked for any tools/tutorials for carding, hacking, spamming

    Contact Here:
    TG/icq : @killhacks - Skype/Wickr : peeterhacks

    Valid & Guaranteed stuff will be provided with proper guidance
    Invalid stuff will be replaced/No Refund

    ReplyDelete
  29. Somerby recommends Mann because he finds his narrative more pleasing. I will stick with Silverman because a man with a blue framework cannot be all bad.

    ReplyDelete