This was also shared on www.HamchuckWC.com
====
Greetings, Howie is letting me post directly here, so it's me, Peter Huston. (Thank goodness. Is it just me or has he been getting a bit snooty, yet whiny, and ultimately judgemental lately?) Therefore I am going to interrupt my viewing of old episodes of a television show called "Son of Zorn" (what a treasure!) to share my latest accomplishments and fan mail.
First, my latest publication, a book review of something called "A Lot of People are Saying --The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy," by Russell Muirhead and Nancy L Rosenblum. It appeared in Vol. 5, No. 4 (latest issue) of The Skeptical Inquirer. The book is heavy reading but quite interesting and covers important stuff. You can find my review here although it is hidden behind a paywall : https://skepticalinquirer.org/2021/06/government-without-facts/
Full details on the book: [A Lot of People are Saying -The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy. By Russell Muirhead and Nancy L Rosenblum. Princeton and Oxford, Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press. 2019. ISBN -9780691188836. 211 pp. Hardcover. $14.95]
Well despite the pay wall, apparently at least one person read it (or at least skimmed it) because I soon got this in my e-mail. And, no, seriously, this is not a joke, and I am not making it up. This is real fan mail!!
Mr. Huston,
I have not gotten to your book, A Lot of People Are Saying, but I did read its review in the Skeptical Inquirer. I cannot disagree with any of your assertions as expressed in the review. Falsifications and misrepresentations are damaging our democracy. However, it seems to me that there is a blaring argument omission to the “Assault on Democracy,” and you are not alone in the non-inclusion of an important argument. As you point out, there are major distortions of the truth coming at us from many directions. But what about the predispositions and biases that are left unspoken by many (if not most) of our politicians/leaders. Where is the truth and how is one to determine it when no logical arguments or reason are given to explain policy decisions and administrative actions. For example, where is President Biden’s explanation for the southern border policy? Do Americans really believe the poppycock we are being served? Defunding the police, really? Releasing arrested criminals in droves – is there some logic to this? I for one have not heard it and I would like an explanation. One cannot help see that their responses are mere deflections at best, lies at worst. Some of these decisions are simply bizarre and incomprehensible. My question, and I would love to see you and others address this is: Does not the withholding, veiling, and concealing of truthful, impartial answers to citizen inquiries constitute an “Assault on Democracy,” in equal measure to fabrications? Is this practice not equally deceptive? Would not many of these self-serving politicians/leaders be removed from office if they spoke the truth and answered unequivocally?
Just another concerned citizen,
XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
Naples, Florida
Again, I am not making this up. This came from a real person, who took enough time to take offense at my article and look my name up, find my contact information, and reach out to argue with me about the book's content, despite misreading my book review and mistaking me for the author of the book and not the reviewer, and despite never having read the book at all. I removed his name from this post, because I don't really think it's healthy to make fun of people from a writer's forum unless they have access to their own forum to make fun of me back. It's sort of the line between a crusading journalist and a nasty cyber-bully. ( Good rule of thumb. Something I decided to try to follow after interviewing Bob Black, an obscure anarchist writer known for vindictive attacks on people who offended him, something frighteningly easy to do sadly. I could easily have wound up like Bob Black, but there for the grace of God go I, etc.)
I did leave in his city and state, because, you know, "Florida Man." etc., and the wonder of people who live out stereotypes.
I did respond. Here it is:
First, that was not ""my" book --that was a book review I wrote about someone else's book, a book I found quite good. A shame you haven't read it as you seem anxious to discuss the ideas in it. It discusses, as stated, the problem of people not just ignoring facts, but thinking they are unnecessary for a discussion to take place. For instance, people arguing about books they have not read.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/
Comments
Post a Comment