Who:
Prager University? Beck / Blaze TV? PJM? Freedom Works? Someone with a video camera and the ability to put together an informative, important discussion / lectures series with relatively high production values and maybe a few titties, if that’ll help? — and who then has the organizational muscle to disseminate it? To post it as a series of webinars, then maybe combine it all together into a DVD or dowloadable / streaming presentation?
Call me.
I’m cheap. No, seriously, I am.
It wasn’t always that way, of course — I used to have a decent reputation as something other than a pseudo-intellectual, psyscho-sexually sociopathic marauder of high-charactered fighters for Good and Right — but then, I didn’t always have anarchist / nihilist groups, leftwing academics, and right-side “pragmatists” committed to forming their own insular link exchanges aligned against me. I’m the Devil, you see. My horns hidden largely by my menacing hairline.
Still, if you’re interested, and it helps for liability purposes, I’d be willing to be spritzed with holy water or some such, just so you can be sure the evil is not strong in me before you go and invest. If I burn up, start speaking in tongues, turn my head completely around and begin masturbating with a crucifix, feel free to thank me for my time and send me home. If not, then I’d be willing to put together a series on language / meaning / interpretation, et al. — beginning with a very simple and basic introduction to the simplest useful form of semiotic — that in a very engaging (I hope) way attempts to familiarize people with the various terminology (eg., sometimes SCOTUS Justices like Scalia use “intentionalism” in a way that is actually antithetical to what it is, particular as it exists in a legal hermeneutic setting), and the contemporary school of thought regarding interpretation, which, for all the various subspecialties, all boil down to the same thing: the usurpation of the individual and his agency by a motivated collective who presumes the authority to claim and shape that individual’s meaning.
What you might need to know:
Before my first son was born, I taught several popular honor’s level literature courses at a private university that will host one of this year’s Presidential debates. My courses touched upon these semantic, rhetorical, and hermeneutic themes. When I did so, before 9/11/01, I had no real political affiliation, though if asked I likely would have identified as Democrat, that being the fallback designation of any academic who is largely unconcerned with politics. Yet still, I supported Steve Forbes and his flat tax, before he dropped from the 1996 Presidential race — and my subsequent work on racial theory and interpretation theory naturally moved me to the right, politically, because that’s where logic and rigor and intellectual consistency took me.
— And to “the right,” I mean only that it moved me away from the stultifying and dangerous assumptions at the heart of linguistic theory preferred by the left, and suggested to me that where liberty, individual autonomy, natural rights, a stable rule of law, and equality of opportunity (as opposed to technocratic-enforced / police state egalitarianism) was, to my surprise, on the “right” side of the current political spectrum.
I tested my ideas out in the crucible of the School of Literary Criticism and Theory at Cornell (I was the first student, though a creative writer and grad student, and not a theorist or an assistant professor, or adjunct, to be accepted twice). I was largely alone then in my thinking, but over the course of those summers I won over a number of grudging converts, many of whom I sure reverted thanks to the pressures of ideological conformity so evident in many Humanities departments, and certainly evident during hiring interviews, a few of which I sat in on.
I’ve long described myself as a classical liberal. Others, over the years, have moved me to fringe extremist racist homophobe teabagger who hates and is tolerant of intolerance — a crime of hate, this hateful toleration of hate, though as defined, naturally, by those who have redefined “hateful” and “tolerance” themselves — and yet, as far back as 2005, I was excommunicated from proper academic culture by a former professor of mine for the crime of defending free speech, resisting the willful authoritarian tendencies that provide PC platitudes their real-world shaming power, and positing, well in advance of the TEA Party, a logistical grass roots uprising that would force those who believe in and value the ideals of our founding and the mechanisms for securing such, to eventually break from those who do not.
I called it a soft civil war, and I envisioned it happening through group migration to states whose governance matched the desires of an increasingly molested citizenry. I have since posited that it will have to be strong governors and self-assertive states willing to reclaim the 9th and 10th Amendments that lead the way toward a reclamation of the country as founded. Refusal to comply with federal dictates and bureaucratic mandates could (and perhaps should) be the ignition point for a national clash of ideas and visions.
Still, all that is secondary. Because we don’t need guns to fight a soft civil war. We need the language.
It has been taken from us, and it is to my everlasting consternation that even prominent “conservatives” oftentimes will fall into the trap of further institutionalizing and entrenching the mechanism of their own road to serfdom.
Arguments
On my sidebar, under “language/ intentionalism,” “identity politics,” and “academics” are a series of archived posts I’ve written over the years explaining my position. In the early days of protein wisdom, this was a very wide-open site, inviting of debate (in fact, people who have since cast me as evil incarnate were once welcome here as guest posters, because I was under the illusion at that time that we were engaging in public intellectualism, not marking our territories with squirts of concentrated sophistic piss). And so much of the real back and forth of the debate takes place in the comments, where people raise questions or objections to my arguments, and I do my best to reply in turn.
Back then, many of early blogosphere’s prominent leftist “thinkers” and academics chimed in, mostly trying to pawn off jargon and (at the time) current academic cant to dismiss me without engaging my ideas with any rigor. Such, incidentally, is one of the most frequently learned tools one picks up in graduate studies: how to name drop, sniff, and pretend to have dismissed what you have not dismissed. That is, mockery, followed by a declaration of victory and then a hope that you’ve shamed your interlocutor into silence.
I wasn’t the guy to try that with and still am not.
The bottom line is this: my arguments haven’t changed to meet any new literary theory fad. Language function, within a communication chain where the object is to be understood, is so very simple that those who’ve used it to subvert truth and change its function have worked to make it seem hopelessly complicated. Their prose is often impenetrable. Their jargon is itself but a rhetorical cue suggestive of who their audience is and who they are hoping to freeze out.
Conclusion
The destruction of the Enlightenment paradigm upon which American exceptionalism was built and has thrived, is in full force. We see everyday the symptoms of the disease, but we refuse to dig deeper to identify, isolate, and illuminate what the disease is and how precisely it works on us. And that’s because even many of those on the side of liberty have been contaminated and refuse to recognize it.
There is a way back. And while part of that might have to do with canvassing for GOP candidates, for the most part such a gesture is less even than a Band-aid. Winning elections, then having your policies hamstrung for fear they’ll be cast in a way that will prevent your re-election, is merely a circle-jerk of ineptitude.
It is time to fix the problem by addressing it at its root level.
I want to help.
So. Give me a ring.
Not that I’m counting on any such thing. If I want to spread the word and get a message out through Twitter, I’m better off talking about how Todd Akin and Mitt Romney’s presumptuousness have already cost us the election.
That — and the newest daily poll — is what sells.
I would pay money for this content.
If I understand the theses presented in The Long Tail and An Army of Davids, perhaps it would be better to blaze your own trail rather than hope for the existing media mavens to change their minds. The tools are there to get the message out. Funding is an issue, but then again funding will always be an issue until you get your MacArthur Fellowship or someone like the Koch brothers drops a few dimes for you.
IIRC, it was Dr. Johnson who said no man but a blockhead ever writes except for money. You may have loftier ambitions in mind, but I would still focus on the money to a certain extent if for no other reason than what someone is willing to pay for it is de facto evidence of its value. There is a market for this material, though it will never be a bestseller.
FWIW, my wife has been self publishing for a few years now. It’s work, but what isn’t?
charles —
THe market value, so far as I can see, is less than that of a Volt, and without the subsidies.
I do believe, on the other hand, that there are forces at play who are working actively to depress value.
It’s not paranoia when it turns out Anonymous — and who knows how many others, through one-sided, unseen special pleadings — have actually been told to get you.
That being said, if people here can figure out a way to get this done, I’m in.
Others, over the years, have moved me to fringe extremist racist homophobe teabagger who hates and is tolerant of intolerance
READ: You publicly bested them in several arguments—or worse, showed them that they were more beholden to the Left’s speech and interpretation rules—and We Can’t Have That.
Who does those whiteboard drawings that sometimes accompany Whittle narratives? You know, the ones where they draw really fast?
I don’t know if they’re hitched to any particular wagon. Maybe they can help you.
Consider pulling the ads out of the left sidebar, Jeff. In that space, re-highlight your best work by tag. I’d remodel the site to highlight the dickens out of your lengthy, scholarly posts. They are unique.
Had that same thought, di. It’d be a big branding opportunity.
Also, fucking PJM knows not what it lacks, I think…
Can I take a look at the script prior to its production?
Just from the PoV of someone whose job it is to make hard things easy to understand, that is.
I’d suggest just going ahead and recording one on your own. A “Demo Tape” if you will. At this point, people are pretty used to smartphone/webcam recordings that primo quality isn’t what grabs people anymore. And half the time they’re being viewed at tiny resolutions, so you can really skimp on video quality and get a good product.
Odds are you’ve got the gear already somewhere in your house to whip up a basic recording. Look at the Pat Condell video you have posted, it’s just a guy with a camera standing in front of white wall, nothing fancy in the slightest.
Practice makes perfect. Whip up a couple short ones to get a hang of the tech/format and figure out what works for you. Working on clear diction and camera presence takes some work. Or do it all offscreen and record an audio track over some simple powerpoint slides or something and be less worried about “JeffG Video personality/talking head”, and be focused on the content. People don’t give a rats ass about what Thomas Sowell looks like or how he appears on camera, it’s his ideas that blow people out of the water.
Just have clear audio and a cogent argument and people will buy it.
If you don’t get any takers for your proposed educational series on language and meaning, would you be opposed to doing a show for Adult Swim? I can totally see you as Captain Kangaroo, with the panzer rat and the dolphin as sidekicks. Heck, you could even get Leif and Zombie Annicole to make special appearances! You wouldn’t even have to change your central premise — I mean, your discussions of intent and the perversion of language would blow the stoners’ minds!
But that’s just a fallback plan. I’d friggin love to see you rockin’ the virtual studio like a Hermeneutical Whittle.
Whatever form it may take, please remember — do it with a smile. Our Moral Superiors absolutely hate that.
Shouts into the wilderness met by Stephen Crane’s universe:
A man said to the universe:
“Sir, I exist!”
“However,” replied the universe,
“The fact has not created in me
“A sense of obligation.”
I’d do it dressed as Billy Jack, with my hook being that I KUNG FU KICK some baseless piece of puffery pinned to a wooden human cutout.
Don’t forget to sign up for the new Prager University course: Adam Corolla on Luck.
Incidentally, 11 years and never a single invite to do blogging heads video. Why is that, do you think?
Podcast? I’ve been thinking about it. A voice cries into the wildertubes and all that. Could be fun.
Suggested title for an episode: From “Call me Ishmael” to “Call Me Maybe” in 15 minutes. Or maybe not.
Honestly, Charles, I think a good bit would be an video of me teaching Curious George to grades chool kids and college kids, with the the sessions interspersed.
Done with a straight face and with the right bullshit leftist assertions about language, I can make an eager college student believe Curious George is a pre-conceived fable about global domination of the first black president by, say, the Rothchilds.
Jeff already did a podcast once.
IIRC, it lasted about 30 seconds and consisted of muffled shouts plus assorted expletives.
I don’t know how you improve on that.
It isn’t?
Just don’t go and insult anyone, Jeff. Could get you the stink eye.
What’s Kickstarter?
Kickstarter is a funding platform for creative projects. Everything from films, games, and music to art, design, and technology. Kickstarter is full of ambitious, innovative, and imaginative projects that are brought to life through the direct support of others.
Since our launch on April 28, 2009, over $350 million has been pledged by more than 2.5 million people, funding nearly 30,000 creative projects. If you like stats, there’s lots more here.
http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter%20basics#WhatKick
I think that right there is your main stumbling block. The core of your assertions regarding language are so blindingly simple it only requires the common sense of a six year old to get it. You need a bunch of education to make an argument against them.
The problem is, in too much of our society, language doesn’t have the object of being understood, it’s primary function is gathering consensus. It ain’t about the search for truth and understanding, but for a useful construct of reality and power. Truth in of itself is not important, perception is the thing.
I have a hard time getting past the idea that language is but a tool, a sword if you will…a two edged sword. It’s misuse is a symptom of the problem, not the cause. The cause is we are a spoiled people, that having taken liberty for granted traded it for comfort to self serving tyrants. We have been conned out of our birthright, and yes it was/is done with the con, which you are talking about. My point is, most people no longer care they’re being conned, or engaging in a con, they like living in the Matrix. They’re content to play the game because it offers comfort and security.
The old saying is, a conservative is a liberal that’s been mugged, and I think it’s going to take a nasty national mugging before people wake up.
I know, I’m pessimistic as hell.
Someone needs to tell the UN secretary general that the way to avoid being insulted is to avoid saying stupid things.
Jeff, it sounds like you need to write a grant proposal. To whom, I’m not sure.
Getting a grant from the NEA would be sweet. I’m sure you could write it in such a way as to make it sound innocuous yet edgy and profane.
They eat that shit up with a spoon all while paying you to undermine their message.
Let me know if you need any help on the pre or post production end of it, including hosting.
What i don’t do is marketing, but i’m sure there are enough folks in here who know how to send things viral on the intertubes.
Jeff, the beauty of the web is that you’re not beholden to the old gatekeepers of the MSM. It also means that you’re not beholden to the gatekeepers of the new media either.
I know you feel that you’re a pariah to the right-o-sphere, but you’re not going to get anywhere begging them for links/video deals. They’re only likely to sign on once you’ve got a proven track record/followers.
So you’ve been shunned by the powers that be, and actively shut down by anon, etc. That’s a really tough break, I get that. BUT, you’re the one who has to dig yourself out of that hole again. Sorry, but that’s the case.
You’ve got a great idea, so make it happen yourself. Don’t wait for PJTV or whoever to “discover” you like some boy-band member.
You say you’re got the bits to make a curious george series of lectures? Script it. Record it. Put it out there. Right now it’s sitting in your head, benefitting exactly n0-one.
I know I haven’t really earned the right to say this but the last while’s worth of posts from you have been a bit too “boo hoo, poor widdle me” for the Jeff G I’ve observed over the years. And today’s grovelling has put me over the top.
By all accounts you’ve got: awesome kids, an amazing and understanding wife, an insanely crushing grip, some badass firearm action, and a grasp on the political landscape that needs to be heard. Sounds pretty good to me. So, suck it up buttercup, and get this thing going.
Perhaps Ban Ki-moon would like to address the fate of apostates under sharia law.
Regular people kinda sorta get the idea, in the sense that they know that something is wrong with people reading racism into the stupidest places and such. They know that the Left is being a total bully with their collective, democratized mode of interpretation.
But they don’t know why, nor do they know how to fight back. Rush gets it in the sense that he will often start a response to a reporter with “I reject the premise of the question.”
Glenn Beck’s gang has been known to respond to charges of “it sounded like racism to me” with “IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW IT SOUNDS TO YOU.”
(And I totally hate how close the Enter key is to the Shift key, such that I accidentally submit things before I’m done with them.)
People know that something is wrong but they don’t know what it is.
And what it is is that the locus of meaning must necessarily be in the intent of the speaker, not the interpretation of the listener, even though decades of schooling has insisted otherwise.
The example of finding an inscribed tablet in the jungle is a good one: you can’t say what it means without appealing to the intent of the inscriber.
Or of the recent arrival from Mexico who asks a young black man at the bus stop what time it is by translating her Spanish exactly into English, “Boy, what time is it?” and even though it SOUNDS racist, it really isn’t, because there was zero racist intent.
Or the guy who was sitting in the employee lounge reading an anti-Klan book that had the sheets on the cover, and a black woman, having an understandable visceral reaction to it, still persists in charging him with “creating a hostile work environment.”
I would make Curious George into one of the more advanced lessons, because most people haven’t run into the PoMo mumbo-jumbo, but they definitely have run into absurd, gratuitous charges of racism.
Accept it: You’re just a premature anti-hopenchanger.
I know it might sound that way, but it really is desperation, not self-pity. We’re running out of time and I’m running out of ways to make the case. And the case needs to be made.
Hell, get another front man. I’ll help with the writing. Doesn’t matter to me. But I grow weary of screaming into a dull wind.
So do you have a webcam and a decent microphone?
Glad to hear it.
Desperate men do desperate things. Like make videos and post them to youtube.
Blow our minds please.
The message is the most important thing.
You and a large white board [I denounce myself for being a raaaaacist] are all that’s needed.
The key is the message and you’ve got to start simply and get more sophisticated in your arguments as you go along.
Low cost in terms of the technology. The high cost would come in the time you would have to put into crafting your arguments.
A plus is your sense of humor.
I would promote the hell out the lectures on my site and on Twitter and encourage from Friends In The Ether to do the same. You’ve has technical assistance offered and I’m sure there are more Outlaws willing to give of their time in various ways [I have an annoying talent for pointing out what’s wrong in what people say and the plans they devise].
Hmmm, desperate times call for desperate measures, and sticking with the Outlaw these, perhaps you can be the Desperado from Colorado.
Imagine you are producing a Ken Burns-like documentary, with a bunch of stills a voice over with some images, animation or graphs. You can be David McCullogh. I bet voice talent wouldn’t be all that hard to come by for guest spots by de Toqueville, Smith, Mills, Hayek, Friedman, Jefferson, Madison, and many others.
please do establish a pw channel on you tube. it don’t cost nothin’ i’m told.
I had one. Someone reported it and got me banned. My crime? Dunno. The attorney who helped me out was never able to get an answer.
i’ll establish a “proteinwidomtv” channel if you want but i need to get a bogus gmail account so i can avoid the proggtards’ wrath.
Don’t know what all the fuss is about, I’m sure being intellectual is still super valued in today’s climate. Super sized, even (New York pending).
Why, just one look at the SMU Tate Lecture Series this year tells me that the system isn’t broken: It’s artfully destroyed.
newroutertv at gmail dot com
Hire JD as your publicist.
Jeff. “Ya dance with the one what brung ya.” You are the master of whimsy; it’s what drew me here a dozen years ago. Go with your strength. Billy Jack reaches more people than polemics. While I enjoy parsing all of your posts, they’re beyond most of the potential audience.
Do your whimsy. Do short clips. Be like Whittle. Get out there!
i think you should dissect the language of psas. they’re short so it can be kept simple. the station here runs one for amber alerts during levin’s show. (black female 911 lady){yes many black folks have a dialect} black kid abducted by white male(yea right)
tells all units to be on the look out (white female voice) tells about how “useful “amber alerts are (black female voice) says suspect apprehended. total bs premise if the actual matter of child hood abduction is examined.
or better yet intentionalism as explained by
ZoNation
It seems SEK just can’t quit you, Jeff.