Whenever you got an establishment claiming authority from authority you are going to get this response the only thing surprising is why supposedly competent and intelligent politicians and propagandists keeps getting caught out by this extremely rational behaviour.

The problem here is as that "The Science" is being claimed as a source of authority with the same blind reverence that the church used to claim God or "The Bible" rather then being presented in all it's messy and inconclusive glory.

I think this hits the nail on the head. That the academic space is not just dominated, but overtly hostile to right wingers probably worsens this. Why would they trust advice given by people who proclaim their hatred of them?

Please provide examples of “academia” proclaiming hatred of “right wingers”.

Gladly, as far as hostility goes. The "hatred" was a rhetorical flourish about the relationship between the left and the right, as drawn from their media presence, as well as the general trend on left-aligned circles across social media. A scan of twitter and reddit should be more than sufficient to see that, especially /r/hermancainaward.

I'm going to place a few cases here, but you're going to have to accept that there is a cherry-picking-esque effect here, there isn't really solid data on this, unfortunately, only surveys and general opinion. A decent chunk of my social circle are academics in the state though anecdotal as that is. I'm also going to try to contrast the clash of opinion on both sides.

>https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/health/jama-bauchner-race...

Dr Livingstone claims that medicine is not structurally racist, gets placed on administrative leave by journal.

While the endemicity of structural racism is generally accepted on the left, it's very much not so on the right, and in a sizable chunk of the center.

>https://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2021/03/16/u...

Professor Kindsvatter made a video about how he felt that the way "whiteness" was applied to him like "some kind of disease" was dehumanizing. This gets him an immediate attempt to get him to step down.

The concept of "whiteness" as a clear negative is pretty common in left and progressive aligned media. See [1], and imagine the fireball would be if "white" was replaced with "black". This definition of "whiteness" is certainly not the mainstay outside of said circles.

>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/education/georgetown-law-profes...

“I hate to say this. I end up having this angst every semester that a lot of my lower ones are Blacks, happens almost every semester." This results in David Batson's resignation and the firing of his colleague.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/magazine/classics-greece-...

>I do think that poor critical thinking skills, as exemplified in your rationalization here, do play a major role in how we got here though.

I love the way you prove my point by immediately going with a barely more civil version of "You're retarded". For the record, I'm both Vaccinated and, in a previous life, was a biomedical researcher, critically evaluating scientific literature was literally my job. I'm mostly on your side as far as policy goes, but Jesus Christ, with friends like you, who needs enemies.

I ask anyone here, if someone were to go to you, talk down to you and continuously declare their contempt for you and your kind. Then suddenly flip around and say that they mean the best for you and X policy is for your own good. What would your initial reaction be, assuming you have no idea about the ground truth.

So go on, insult them, demonize them and continue your tribal war. Then complain to your own tribe why the enemy tribe doesn't take your perfectly good advice at face value.

You made a bad argument and got called on it. That's as far as it goes. No need to be a victim. No need to double-down with more bad arguments. But, my apologies if I seemed unnecessarily harsh. I don't know you. I was referring to your argument; an argument that rationalizes malignant behavior and happens to be the crux of the problem.

You're more a victim of tribal thinking than you think. You talk almost purely in terms of "sides" and profess to be on my "side" because you agree with me on policy. So, you are surprised when I call out your poorly constructed argument, as if I should have just gone along. That's tribal thinking.

OTOH, you can agree with me on 99 out of 100 issues, but if your position on that one issue makes no sense to me then I'll tell you exactly that. That's not tribal thinking.

>You made a bad argument and got called on it. That's as far as it goes. No need to be a victim. No need to double-down with more bad arguments.

You don't even have a damn argument here. You've lobbed personal attack after personal attack without any backing. I'm going to quote paraphrase the zen of python here on this. Be explict. Tell me exactly which part of my argument you're dismantling, rather than yelling "YOUR ARGUMENT SUCKS" and declaring victory.

>You talk almost purely in terms of "sides"

Of course I do. That's how American political lines on this are drawn. Deny the existence of this all you want, but your covid debate is almost perfectly modeled by tribal politics.

So, give your counterargument to this point, not some spiel about how I'm a bad person, or some unsupported claim about how my argument is bad. Give a proper, good faith rebuttal

- Most people function with heuristic trust evaluation. That is to say, they gauge trustworthiness by some measure of the source.

- Generally, people who detest you are not going to give you advice that is in your best interest.

- Left aligned spaces are often, if not generally, against, if not outright hostile to any right-aligned individuals. You don't really need to look very hard for this, reddit front page popular posts will give you a fantastic slice

- Given that lefty spaces are so open with their disdain of the right, it is expected that right-aligned individuals do not trust left-aligned authorities.

Despite what a good chunk of the internet seems to believe, screaming at them about how they're horrible people and deserve to die is really really unlikely to change their mind. It is however a fantastic way of signaling to your the ingroup though.

Well, so much for any pretense that you're an objective, non-tribal commentator, amirite?

Obviously, there's a lot of hostility just beneath the surface. Unfortunately, you seem to have bought into exactly the right-wing persecution narrative I mentioned, which is designed to produce the emotional effect you're exhibiting here.

>reddit front page popular posts will give you a fantastic slice

To start detoxing, maybe stop taking Reddit comments as organic and consider the well-known manipulation of online spaces, meant to reinforce bad narratives.

I mean, you offering Reddit comments as proof of anything reveals just how susceptible you are to manipulation. It's bad. Really bad. Your reality is skewed.

>Tell me exactly which part of my argument you're dismantling

Thing is, I told you exactly what's wrong with your argument. Go back and read if you're really interested. I won't enter the infinite loop of re-explaining because every additional comment you make just piles on more bad logic--this, while your anger visibly increases. No coincidence there.

In general, you are regurgitating virtually every talking point you've been programmed to repeat, and even using the language of your programmers ("lefty", "signalling").

It's becoming a case study on exactly how the right has been manipulated, and especially how emotional and tribal vectors are used to circumvent intelligence and critical thinking; which is, of course, my assertion that started this subthread.

So, while I appreciate you offering yourself as a working demonstration of my point, I'm afraid I have no interest in continuing to participate in your demonstration. Fixing the damage here is well-above my pay grade, and I have no delusion otherwise.

Good luck.

I think enough people here thought otherwise, seeing that the previous comment is flagged.

> mean, you offering Reddit comments as proof of anything reveals just how susceptible you are to manipulation. It's bad. Really bad. Your reality is skewed.

For all the ills of social media, they're very much a reflection of their readers. It's easy to say bots bots bots, but I'd bet that the vast majority of those are very much real people. If you think reddit and twitter aren't major players in the public zeitgeist, I don't know what to say. The same applies to facebook.

It's also easy to say "I rebutted your argument" without actually doing so. That you didn't do so, despite all attempts to make it convenient (point by point logical chain), instead resorting to the standard non-answers and personal attacks.

If your best response to this is effectively "no u brainwashed", that says more about you than it does about me.