I keep trying to drive home the importance of Desmet’s thinking. Some don’t want to hear it. Why is it important? It’s important because we have a prime example of doublespeak in Desmet’s book yet so many are hailing this as a psychology for a new world. We should be prepared to see this sort of doublespeak when it pops up.
As Jim knows, I've done a YT episode on his essay, "On the Psychology of Totalitarianism" and John Waters' article, recommended by one of my viewers. It's curious that I note several commenters on Substacks posting Jon Rappaport's Gain of Fiction and John Waters. I'm not sure why it's so important that we all agree with Desmet, since it doesn't lead to any discernable plan of action. But I'm looking forward to you, Jim, being able to discuss this with that viewer, so you can answer from a point of having read and analyzed the book. You'll hear my critique of Waters' critique in the video, he does the same character assassination he accuses them of, calling them 'the troika' and casting aspersions on their motives. Here's the YT and I'll post it with text and links on Substack tomorrow: https://youtu.be/KDrgnom5_NM.
As Jim knows, I've done a YT episode on his essay, "On the Psychology of Totalitarianism" and John Waters' article, recommended by one of my viewers. It's curious that I note several commenters on Substacks posting Jon Rappaport's Gain of Fiction and John Waters. I'm not sure why it's so important that we all agree with Desmet, since it doesn't lead to any discernable plan of action. But I'm looking forward to you, Jim, being able to discuss this with that viewer, so you can answer from a point of having read and analyzed the book. You'll hear my critique of Waters' critique in the video, he does the same character assassination he accuses them of, calling them 'the troika' and casting aspersions on their motives. Here's the YT and I'll post it with text and links on Substack tomorrow: https://youtu.be/KDrgnom5_NM.