It’s been a while since I’ve responded to an item from the “conservative” email stream, mostly because it’s not a lot of fun, partly because my source has been inactive. I put conservative in scare quotes because, to me, I expect a real conservative to have a near-reverence for facts, truth, and plain speaking.
What I ran across in this email has little relationship to those values, and it’s important for what I’ll call non-political conservatives to see why. The person who assembled this mail is preying upon understandable ignorance, using carefully chosen words to trigger confirmation bias and motivated reasoning, to continue an age-old theme of such writers: continue to widen the gap between conservatives and everyone else in this country.
It’s important to keep in mind the context at the present moment. The conservatives in government have suffered many blows to their moral reputation. In the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas has been caught in an enormous scandal with real estate magnate Harlan Crow, Justice Gorsuch has his own real estate scandal, if of lesser magnitude, and even Chief Justice Roberts left undeclared an enormous sum of income brought in by his wife. Of less visibility is the nakedly partisan speeches give by Justice Alito, and the presence of Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh at highly partisan events. And in terms of official business, the Dobbs decision, overturning Roe vs. Wade, has, to judge from polling, raised grave concerns about the judgment of the conservative wing of SCOTUS among Republicans; the Establishment Clause appears to be under attack by the same conservatives; and a few other decisions have also seemed dubious, again to Republicans.
The reputation of GOP House members has been considerably besmirched by a large number of members. Let’s start, though, with former member Rep Madison Cawthorn (FL), who pled guilty to violating laws against attempting to carry a gun on an airplane; less visibly was a general inclination towards inflating, or inventing, his achievements, not to mention threats against fellow Republicans when he lost his reelection primary. In the same category of mendacity, but with more fanfare, come Rep Santos (R-NY) and Ogles (R-TN), who seem to indulge in mendacity with pleasure, and not only to gain seats in the House.
And that’s just personal behavior observations of just a few. In the arena of official business, Speaker McCarthy (R) has not covered himself in glory, but simply explicit greed for position, trading committee chairmanships like poker chips in order to buy votes; Rep Jordan (R-OH) has been eagerly, if reportedly ineffectively, weaponizing the committees he chairs; and, of course, the entire debt ceiling mismanagement by the GOP House caucus is a debacle of monumental proportions.
Comparatively speaking, the Senate comes off relatively well, but the actions of Senator Tuberville (R-AL), weakening our country’s defenses in the name of a strident position on abortion, further besmirches conservative reputation. Nor has Senator Scott’s (R-FL) official activities as chairman of the 2022 election committee gone over well, as it may have cost the Republicans control of the Senate.
But that’s enough of context. The email consists of a series of pictures and cartoons, each self-contained, and so I’ll note each with my commentary. Notice the common theme, though: Liberals being stupid. At this juncture, it’s an exercise in moral equivalency: We’ve been undeniably awful, so surely they must be, too.
As comforting as that may be, it doesn’t make it true. If that sentence isn’t jarring to my reader, read it again.
In fact, let’s make it a game. Every time my reader is tempted to stop reading because they find my assertions irritating and, oh, obviously untrue, instead add it to your confirmation bias tally. If your tally at the end is more than two, then you may need to ask yourself if you’re too eager for news that confirms your biases.
And that’s a problem for you. Bad thinking habits leads to false conclusions.
This picture is the setup: See, electric cars need to be towed as well. The true key word here, though, isn’t towed, but as well. That is, all vehicles can suffer defects and damage. This realization blunts the point, doesn’t it?
Yes, yes. On rare occasion, a battery pack will go bad. Early on, it’ll be covered by warranty.
Just like an engine, eh?
This is all about focusing attention on big numbers without acknowledging that the electric battery and motor replaces the fossil fuel engine and gas tank, and that each has its weaknesses. I’ve known plenty of people who’ve been faced with large bills because their fossil fuel engine has failed. That I’ve not known anyone who needed to replace their EV’s batteries or motor is, to supply context, actually not not significant: EVs haven’t been around in the numbers that fossil fuel cars have been.
My point is that honesty in communication is critical to making effective arguments.
Reduction in the consumption of oil, from which plastics are made, is a widely acknowledged public good, as the problems of microplastics, as little known as it is, is a matter of grave concern to everyone who acknowledges that we are dependent on Nature for our continued survival. The banning of straws is a simple & straightforward step in stopping the generation of plastics.
But when it comes to needle supplies, the situation is far more complex. Taking needles as a reference to the abuse of drugs, I’ve been around sixty years now, and American society has been fighting the problem of drugs for longer than that, going all the way back to Prohibition – yes, alcohol is a drug – and the “Drug War” has been a continual failure. Sixty years ago it was reefers; today, it’s fentanyl and opioids. We’ve tried Just Say No and brutal drug raids, and suffered the side effects of police corruption, all in our failed efforts to stop the abuse of drugs.
Supplying needles to drug addicts can, for those who believe the United States is a redemptive country, be seen as part of the process of redemption. A dead person cannot be salvaged, and a person suffering from diseases transferred by dirty needles is certainly far harder to salvage. But if an abuser’s “only” problem is addiction, then they have a better shot at redemption.
Does it work? Beats me. Maybe it’ll fail. But it’s worth a shot. So long we, as a society, believe every person should be fought for, then every tactic in this centuries long issue need to be tried and evaluated, until we find one that works.
And that makes this horrific simplification of a difficult problem a hypocritical statement that really should be disdained, in my book.
In the midst of a reprehensible message collection comes something I can sort of approve. I’ll just note that this includes such dubious personalities as NFL star and failed Senate candidate Herschel Walker (R-GA), college football coach and successful Senate candidate Tommy Tuberville (R-A), and actors and former Presidents Reagan (R) and Trump (R).
On the left side of politics, the only name that comes to mind is former Senator Al Franken (D-MN), who usually gets good reviews for his work.
That point driven home, the inclination to pay attention to the prominent and well-off is an evolutionary trait: Learn from those who’ve succeeded. Even Imitate them. I get annoyed when someone who is a “business leader” thinks that means they can lead in politics as well, or, more generally, that they can succeed in a sector other than their current (private vs public, or private vs free press). While there are examples of such successes, such as George and Mitt Romney, the general rule is, without proper preparation, they won’t. Governor Ventura (I-MN) did well when he moved from private sector to public sector, but he also put in the prep time of being a mayor of Minneapolis suburb Brooklyn Park. Reagan was Governor of California previous to being President, although evaluations of his Presidential legacy come under heavy debate, and will probably be inaccurate until all the relevant cultural warriors have passed away.
But a fascination with the successful is understandable, and, to some extent, a net positive.
Ag workers, Albert Einstein, a third of our medical staff. I’m not kidding, many of our medical professionals come from overseas. Ask any doctor or nurse.
But note the mendacity: illegal aliens do not get welfare, except for that delivered by churches. “Terrorism” is not delivered over “open borders,” but by discontented citizens, as FBI analyses indicate. Human trafficking has been a trait of humanity since just about as long as humans have been around, I’d wager, and is not relevant to open borders.
And drugs? Drugs are tangible things that are not easily carried over borders by people on their feet. Rather, it’s all about ports of entry, where vehicles can carry them.
This message is all about provoking fear and rage, without regard to truth, while making the reader feel “smart”. And that’s mendacious.
Note the sleight-of-hand trick. If it’s not clear, and it’s designed not to be noticed, then ask yourself, Why is $56K the right number?
Yeah.
I can’t imagine why. The right number? It’s the difference in price of a fossil fuel car, of comparable capability, to the “average” EV’s price. Assuming the EV is pricier, then the question is how fast the differential of the two prices will be consumed by savings on gas, discounting for the price of the electricity. Obviously, there are a few variables here, such as how much driving an individual does, the intangible inconvenience of recharge times, etc.
My general rule of thumb isn’t 84 years, though. It’s on the order of … 5 years.
And note the other omission. As an EV owner (from July 2020, MiniCooper SE), I can testify that nearly every year I have owned a fossil fuel car there was at least an oil change necessary, if not other repairs peculiar to the engine, transmission and/or exhaust. For the MiniCooper so far, nothing.
A big, fat $0 in repairs to the unique features of an EV. (In case you wonder: Damn potholes.)
This message is a nearly explicit use of confirmation bias to engage the reader to the message. It’s badly misleading, and relies on the understandable ignorance of the reader, while appealing to their vanity. Once we realize really quite monstrous flaws in the argument, we can take the remark on Buttigieg to be both accurate, and appropriate: insulating ourselves from bouncing gasoline prices is a fiscally responsible action.
Yes, things can and do go boom. Navel-staring, as this guy does, is, as usual, unproductive. Understanding what happened and fixing it, rather than weeping, is the American thing to do. Too bad this guy doesn’t get it.
But you can correct the mendacious. This pic was fully debunked in this article, but I’ll summarize. This pic is of an experiment in Australia; electric charging stations are not hooked up to generators, but to electric grids. The great thing about an electric grid is that the electricity can be supplied in a variety of ways: Diesel generators, nuclear power plants, hydropower, other fossil fuelds, wind, solar, geothermal, etc. Last time I checked, Xcel Power here in Minnesota was generating 40% of its power from renewables, including nuclear; it may be even higher now.
Meaning? The caption on the above picture is based on an unique experiment, not a typical setup, and in a typical setup the mix of electricity sources may render the MPG up in the thousands of miles / gallon.
But notice the “can’t fix stupid.” That’s the conservative rallying cry, meant to inculcate an arrogant, superior attitude, all through the use of misinformation. Keep the herd together – as any sheep farmer will tell you, it’s easier to shear a herd kept together than it is one that has scattered.
Merely banging their point home, in the mind of the author.
But it inadvertently makes a different point for the discerning reader, doesn’t it? That someone who blunders their electricity management doesn’t have to be towed, with all its inherent dangers. Someone with a couple of cups of gasoline and a generator that consumes it can recharge the car easily enough, at least enough for a few miles of driving.
In the future, tow trucks may come equipped with just such a contraption, particularly if we can improve recharge technology.
It’s actually quite a relief to know.
… while improving the grid and not allowing Texas to run the grid, eh?
That’s the hidden assumption, isn’t it? That we’re not allowed to improve the grid. It’s dumb, but it’s there and it’s hidden because the writer is trying to evoke that sense of superiority that he’s been building.
But it’s a failure on his part. Why? Because now you know the flaw. While we continue to gradually change out fossil fuel cars for EVs, we’ll also improve the grid.
As the thorough reader will recall, an electric grid disconnects vehicles from a dependence on a particular source. Coal is rapidly disappearing as a source of electricity, being replaced by renewables. Ask Xcel Power.
Another entry in the snide faux-superiority list, this is.
See my earlier comment on portable generators, helpfully supplied by the author of the above. Sloppy thinking on his part.
Continuing the balsa wood battering ram of ignorance, while adding in legal liability for stealing a corporate logo. It turns out this guy’s not too bright.
Coal is, of course, so dirty that power companies are dropping it – see above. Now, it is true that, at one time, people would glory in soot, as they saw it as proof of living in civilization, which protected them from wild animals and pathogens, which tended to take away their loved ones.
But we’ve grown beyond that now.
But this guy hasn’t even grown beyond lying.
And … I’m done.
It’s a disappointment that such trash is circulating in the conservative blood stream, but too many folks benefit mightily from fossil fuels to expect that they’d soberly think about the world they’re leaving for their kids.
And what was your confirmation bias score?
