Hello Sandwichman, If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original. Granted, he’s a political journalist, not a scholar and his editor(s) are not first rate. But I see this as a technical error and doesn’t carry enough weight to destroy the coherence of his opinions- which are what terrify the left. Buchanan attempts to convince readers that man is not centrally controlled by economic decisions. He cites the offsetting ties of religion, culture/ethnicity/race, and claims in his latest book, that tribalism is winning hearts & minds despite the energies of academia, governments & corporations. Personally, I think people are influenced by a multiplicity of factors whose weights change depending on personal and external factors. And it’s intellectually dishonest to dismiss an entire viewpoint based on limited documentation. I happen to respect his strong stance against regime-change war & enjoy all sides of an argument-which is why I remain on this mailing list.
"If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original." No. You don't "follow me correctly." If you read what I wrote you would see that I document how Buchanan SYSTEMATICALLY misrepresented his sources, who in turn misrepresented their sources. This is not a "technical error" but a technique of deception. Technically, it is called "plagiarism." Being a celebrity author, Buchanan's false narrative will get circulated by fans and admirers until it acquires the "authority" of repetition. On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Natalie Golovin <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Sandwichman, If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original. Granted, he’s a political journalist, not a scholar and his editor(s) are not first rate. But I see this as a technical error and doesn’t carry enough weight to destroy the coherence of his opinions- which are what terrify the left. Buchanan attempts to convince readers that man is not centrally controlled by economic decisions. He cites the offsetting ties of religion, culture/ethnicity/race, and claims in his latest book, that tribalism is winning hearts & minds despite the energies of academia, governments & corporations. Personally, I think people are influenced by a multiplicity of factors whose weights change depending on personal and external factors. And it’s intellectually dishonest to dismiss an entire viewpoint based on limited documentation. I happen to respect his strong stance against regime-change war & enjoy all sides of an argument-which is why I remain on this mailing list.
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sandwichman
How does misrepresentation of sources re the single particular item you dissected translate into SYSTEMATIC misrepresentation of his thesis-which asks the reader to consider whether “dying populations & immigrant invasions imperil....?” The book was published in 2002, and from all current news accounts, the majority populations in Europe are now voicing these concerns. I don’t remember PB’s many critics dismissing him on account of rampant plagiarism. If one goes to the often voluminous Notes section of any book and puts entries under a microscope, I would presume few authors would come out unscathed. You may have uprooted some of the trees in the forest, but the substance remains. Time will tell whether it will burn down, but your concerns are obviously ideologically driven. From: Sandwichman Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 7:47 AM To: P2P Foundation mailing list Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Buchanan "If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original." No. You don't "follow me correctly." If you read what I wrote you would see that I document how Buchanan SYSTEMATICALLY misrepresented his sources, who in turn misrepresented their sources. This is not a "technical error" but a technique of deception. Technically, it is called "plagiarism." Being a celebrity author, Buchanan's false narrative will get circulated by fans and admirers until it acquires the "authority" of repetition. On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Natalie Golovin <[email protected]> wrote: Hello Sandwichman, If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original. Granted, he’s a political journalist, not a scholar and his editor(s) are not first rate. But I see this as a technical error and doesn’t carry enough weight to destroy the coherence of his opinions- which are what terrify the left. Buchanan attempts to convince readers that man is not centrally controlled by economic decisions. He cites the offsetting ties of religion, culture/ethnicity/race, and claims in his latest book, that tribalism is winning hearts & minds despite the energies of academia, governments & corporations. Personally, I think people are influenced by a multiplicity of factors whose weights change depending on personal and external factors. And it’s intellectually dishonest to dismiss an entire viewpoint based on limited documentation. I happen to respect his strong stance against regime-change war & enjoy all sides of an argument-which is why I remain on this mailing list. _______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation -- Sandwichman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
A single particular item? I described THREE egregious distortions. There were more in the particular book I was looking at but there was no point beating a dead horse. For the broader context of "the forest", you need to read Martin Jay's essay from Salmagundi "*Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: The Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of the Lunatic Fringe*" that presents extensive documentation (including first-hand experience) of William S. Lind's (Buchanan's friend and source) spurious documentary: http://cms.skidmore.edu/salmagundi/backissues/168-169/martin-jay-frankfurt-s... See also "The Frankfurt School, Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories, and American Conservatism": http://us-intellectual-history.blogspot.com/2011/07/frankfurt-school-right-w... "...your concerns are obviously ideologically driven." On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Natalie Golovin <[email protected]> wrote:
How does misrepresentation of sources re the single particular item you dissected translate into SYSTEMATIC misrepresentation of his thesis-which asks the reader to consider whether “dying populations & immigrant invasions imperil....?” The book was published in 2002, and from all current news accounts, the majority populations in Europe are now voicing these concerns. I don’t remember PB’s many critics dismissing him on account of rampant plagiarism. If one goes to the often voluminous Notes section of any book and puts entries under a microscope, I would presume few authors would come out unscathed. You may have uprooted some of the trees in the forest, but the substance remains. Time will tell whether it will burn down, but your concerns are obviously ideologically driven.
*From:* Sandwichman <[email protected]> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 27, 2011 7:47 AM *To:* P2P Foundation mailing list <[email protected]> *Subject:* Re: [P2P-F] Buchanan
"If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original."
No. You don't "follow me correctly." If you read what I wrote you would see that I document how Buchanan SYSTEMATICALLY misrepresented his sources, who in turn misrepresented their sources. This is not a "technical error" but a technique of deception. Technically, it is called "plagiarism." Being a celebrity author, Buchanan's false narrative will get circulated by fans and admirers until it acquires the "authority" of repetition.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Natalie Golovin <[email protected]>wrote:
Hello Sandwichman, If I follow you correctly, Buchanan cited a source that wasn’t original. Granted, he’s a political journalist, not a scholar and his editor(s) are not first rate. But I see this as a technical error and doesn’t carry enough weight to destroy the coherence of his opinions- which are what terrify the left. Buchanan attempts to convince readers that man is not centrally controlled by economic decisions. He cites the offsetting ties of religion, culture/ethnicity/race, and claims in his latest book, that tribalism is winning hearts & minds despite the energies of academia, governments & corporations. Personally, I think people are influenced by a multiplicity of factors whose weights change depending on personal and external factors. And it’s intellectually dishonest to dismiss an entire viewpoint based on limited documentation. I happen to respect his strong stance against regime-change war & enjoy all sides of an argument-which is why I remain on this mailing list.
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sandwichman
------------------------------ _______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sandwichman
participants (2)
-
Natalie Golovin -
Sandwichman