Let’s Argue Substance For A Change

In a world where narratives count more than facts and data, we may be evolving to a time people armed with actual knowledge are in a place to shut down those too lazy to ground their positions in something other than personal prejudice. Take the Trump true believers claiming election fraud. They’ve yet to produce anything when challenged to show us the basis for their claims. The other side has placed their goods on the table. Only the like-minded listen to these people. Others cast their votes against “Trump Won” candidates.

We can deal the same fate to those claiming the world is ending because of overpopulation, climate change, or a combination of the two. Adherents of “the science” tell us Covid came from a “wet Market,” locking everyone down, including children, prevents the spread, and mandating vaccination for everyone numerous times is necessary. Our nation’s history is really what “The 1619 project ‘ claims. The gap in the U.S. between rich and poor has grown to an all-time high.

We know from the Russian Collusion and The Biden Laptop fiascos those without facts turn to suppress those that do. Unless you’re the Chinese Communist Party, facts ultimately will come out. We can extend the growing embarrassment of elites in politics and media taking this route to their followers.

Simply asking for the basis of their position on any of these subjects may result in a blank look. How can you question dogma? Everyone knows this is true. I read it in the N.Y. Times or The Washington Post. O.K., but where are the facts? Could you show us the data? Volunteer to read whatever they can provide, but in return, they have to read your sources. 

Of course, you need to have sources to offer. If you don’t readily have them, may I suggest a few easily accessible books and articles that skewer many progressive, most cherished themes?

Progressives said Covid was so dangerous that lockdowns and mandates were the only scientific alternative. No reputable people opposed these actions. One only must read “The Great Barrington Declaration” to know this wasn’t true. Even though the lockdown elites vilified and suppressed it, the near million signatures prove the existence of better alternatives. 

The U.S. must severely cut its carbon immissions to save the world. The truth is nothing they propose we do here without significant changes in the rest of the world will make any substantial difference. Bjorn Lomberg’s “False Alarm” illustrates the point. Physicist Steven E. Konin’s “Unsettled” gives us the scientific grounding in detail. While Lomberg’s book is easy, Konin’s reads as if a physicist wrote it. Both books kindle editions are available on Amazon. Luckily a readable summary of Konin’s book is also available.

It isn’t to say there is no warming; putting things in the proper perspective will allow us to arrive at workable solutions. Both books make it clear the path pushed by the climate cult isn’t feasible.

The sister conviction about “climate change” is humans are putting unsustainable pressure on the earth and its resources. We can’t continue to have more people consuming more, which will lead to collapse. “Super Abundance,” a book by economists Marian L. Tupy & Gale L. Pooly, refutes this contention in a highly readable fashion. Using time values, they show how we have increasing goods and better lives, and unless we interfere with markets, we will continue our fantastic progress. 

Even if humans aren’t destroying the planet dooming all of us, these elites claim all this abundance accrues mainly to the rich. The gap between rich and poor is snowballing. Economist Phil Gram and his co-authors beg to differ in their book, “The Myth of American Inequality.” The authors point out this perception is due to the failure to include transfer payments and taxes in their calculations. When corrected, the gap we find is narrowing.  

While the “Critical Race Theory” controversy is confusing, the one mainstay of this program offered to school children is the “1619 Project.” Published and provided with teaching materials to schools across the U.S. by the New York Times, it’s the most visible building block of the curriculum. It is also the flimsiest. Economist Phil W. Magness points out the numerous errors in the Project in his “1619 Project a Criticism”, exposing it as unserious propaganda. This book is also available on Amazon, but the American Institute of Economic Research (AIER) offers two podcasts by the author to provide the pertinent facts.

With these sources at your command, you can force those pushing agendas to entertain competing ideas or unmasked as frivolous. With this in mind, we can understand their actions to suppress counter-arguments. 

Facts and data are the only way to put elite nonsense to rest. These people claim “science and facts” when they often have neither. For less than $50, make them defend things like “The 1619 Project” or shut up.

One thought on “Let’s Argue Substance For A Change

  1. You ought to read the article by J. B. Shurk, entitled “Elections Have Consequences; Stolen Elections Have Catastrophes”, dated 3/16/23 from American Thinker. It’s a great succinct accounting of the 2020 election. Or, at least the version half the country believes in.

    Mr. Shurk’s blogs and articles can be found at truthbasedmedia.com; NOQreport.com; gatestoneinstitute.org; AmericanConservativeMovement.com; as well as in The Federalist; American Thinker; and Real Clear Politics.

    Otherwise, I agree with what you say here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s