in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.
Typically speaking... getting the most of people means giving them value and purpose. Studies have shown these two qualities trump (no pun intended) money.
Benjs, I'm really not too sure where you are at with this Trump debacle. Is it possible to succinctly state your stance on the matter so I'm not scratching my head wondering? It seems as if you are on board. I'm hoping you are simply impressed with his manipulation of a population versus feeling a good thing has happened.
my take on it is looking at it objectively and intelligently, not emotionally.. as I'm trying to do now without the fear and world ending stuff that is being thrown around.
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.
You're speaking broadly about what makes a good leader. He was supporting Hitler's "methodologies of persuasion".
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.
You're speaking broadly about what makes a good leader. He was supporting Hitler's "methodologies of persuasion".
In relation to his speeches. Oration is what was being discussed.
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.
You're speaking broadly about what makes a good leader. He was supporting Hitler's "methodologies of persuasion".
In relation to his speeches. Oration is what was being discussed.
Even if that's the more narrow topic, Hitler's emotionally manipulative techniques in speeches is nothing to admire.
Typically speaking... getting the most of people means giving them value and purpose. Studies have shown these two qualities trump (no pun intended) money.
Benjs, I'm really not too sure where you are at with this Trump debacle. Is it possible to succinctly state your stance on the matter so I'm not scratching my head wondering? It seems as if you are on board. I'm hoping you are simply impressed with his manipulation of a population versus feeling a good thing has happened.
Absolutely, Thirty! I think to state my stance on Trump, I have to divide that a little bit further.
Trump the social commentator hides behind vague statements so as to have plausible deniability on any statement made which is seen by the public as racist, sexist, xenophobic, derogatory, etc. I feel that this has the potential to leave people exhibiting these sentiments feeling that their viewpoints are justifiable, and those people could feel empowered by that. In turn, I feel that this could be a significant social setback if not addressed properly (which I think will not come from the government, but must come from the mouths of the populace).
Trump the environmentalist has not only claimed that the causality between carbon emissions and global warming is unverified and unverifiable, but he has not even spoken up about the importance of pursuing why global warming is occurring at such unprecedented rates. Because of this, I can only assume that subsidies on research and development on climate change will shrink down to zero, and the extraction of oil will only speed up, which will exacerbate the issues at hand. I was listening to Noam Chomsky who stated his belief that environmental issues will start to bleed into military and political issues, as drinkable water becomes a rarer commodity, and global warming makes life unrealistic in nuclear-ready countries like India and Pakistan who already have a volatile relationship.
Trump the politician I find to be untested, and his appeal to the emotions of the populace (often contradicting yesterday's position) has ensured that everyone is completely unaware of his true positions. I am hopeful that his narcissism proves to be a positive factor in his tenure: in Trump's business', the gauge of success is his own personal wealth. The gauge of success in Trump's administration will not be his own wealth - it will be the nation's ability to convert potential into actual results, and to leave office with positive potential remaining (as opposed to negative potential). The way he's surrounded himself by a crew of deep pockets doesn't bode well to the direction he will take - but the truth is that no one can really say what he will do when in office.
I guess the ten-second answer would be that I find Trump's words to be socially destructive, but his actions to be uncertain. If Trump's narcissism sways him away from valuing personal wealth and towards valuing his political legacy in this new empire he's attempting to build, the potential exists for him to make great change, and the stars are aligned to make that happen with the aid of the Republicans in all levels of government who want success in the interest of the perpetuation of the power of their party. I feel that there is more upside potential than I think there would have been if Clinton was in office given the Republican penetration and party politics, but I also feel that there is a substantial downside potential, which I hope (but fear) is never realized.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
After a quick browse, I found an article about Hitler's persuasive methods (https://owlcation.com/humanities/Adolf-Hitlers-Tremendous-Persuasive-Ability). These include treating the German people as if they were one entity (promoting groupthink/camaraderie and drawing attention to agreement on values), commanding respect through conveying power or strength through intonation/volume/gestures, reaffirming statuses with effective power-oriented descriptors (the immortal Volk or the dirty Jew), the fallacy (the only technique I deplore since it's primarily used to disseminate false information), the appeal to desire for self-actualization. I truly don't see these as anything different from typically-acceptable persuasion methods, and noble humans have used these same techniques throughout history to achieve positive ends. And I resent your comment about my thinking adopting the style of a fascist dictator is how to attain optimal employee performance: I believe in collaboration amongst all stakeholders, a mandate for respect, and positive reinforcement when it's owed (and I'm lucky enough to work somewhere that it's owed a great deal) - and I don't believe that using any of the persuasive methods listed above would force me to contradict my own beliefs.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.
i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.
i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.
it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?
Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration: "Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."
I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.
I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.
I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.
Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?
Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.
They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.
After a quick browse, I found an article about Hitler's persuasive methods (https://owlcation.com/humanities/Adolf-Hitlers-Tremendous-Persuasive-Ability). These include treating the German people as if they were one entity (promoting groupthink/camaraderie and drawing attention to agreement on values), commanding respect through conveying power or strength through intonation/volume/gestures, reaffirming statuses with effective power-oriented descriptors (the immortal Volk or the dirty Jew), the fallacy (the only technique I deplore since it's primarily used to disseminate false information), the appeal to desire for self-actualization. I truly don't see these as anything different from typically-acceptable persuasion methods, and noble humans have used these same techniques throughout history to achieve positive ends. And I resent your comment about my thinking adopting the style of a fascist dictator is how to attain optimal employee performance: I believe in collaboration amongst all stakeholders, a mandate for respect, and positive reinforcement when it's owed (and I'm lucky enough to work somewhere that it's owed a great deal) - and I don't believe that using any of the persuasive methods listed above would force me to contradict my own beliefs.
It looks like your link put Hitler through the sanitizer, so let's translate those points back to the reality of his persuasion: "one entity" = conformist nationalism. "Commanding respect" =intimidation, aggressive communication, false self-confidence, self-aggrandizing. "Effective power oriented descriptors" = creating prejudice and villainizing other groups. "Fallacy" = creating a struggle that doesn't exist, propaganda. "Self-actualization" = becoming a functioning member of the group and following the group norms, not becoming a better individual.
And I brought up the point about having a management style like a dictator because that's how you worded it, but I appreciate you clarifying.
There's truth in both Benjs and your arguments regarding Hitler.
He managed to influence a significant portion of the German people and he managed the rest through strong armed tactics. He couldn't have achieved what he did had he not surround himself with key personnel who bought into his vision and many others begrudgingly fell in line.
This meeting I'm sure entailed discussing how Mexico will pay for the wall. Billionaires talking get things done. Yes, it is true - Carlos Slim, the great businessman from Mexico, called me about getting together for a meeting. We met, HE IS A GREAT GUY!
You must have a karma tsunami coming your way. This all reminds me of the ten commandments and when Moses went up the mountain and the people all fucked up things. I'm waiting for the earth to open and swallow all the Trump supporters. Maybe it will be more like The Stand...
I never in a million years thought religion would be introduced into a President Trump thread. So you are saying that the book of genesis, it takes precedence (not presidence) over science written about 800bc written by whom? By some scribe during the Babylonian captivity? Most bible scholars attributed the book of genesis to moses. Can you name a bible scholar who attributes it to moses? Religion and politics, gotta love it.
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
Samantha Bee summed it up nicely recently; he can't really read. This will be the equivalent of the birther movement conspiracy.
in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets
Samantha Bee summed it up nicely recently; he can't really read. This will be the equivalent of the birther movement conspiracy.
He's not wrong here but the election is over. He won. It's one thing for his surrogates or her critics to point this out. For him to do it is so petty and small beneath the office of President. We've elected a petulant and narcissistic child. He's obsessed with the fact that so many more people voted against him than for him.
do any of your trump trolls have anything other than "safe place" and "trigger" to try to bait people? Jesus, grow up.
dude go back and read some of the anti Trump posts, watch the news and just count all the reasons Hillary supporters say they lost the election, or look at all the collage kids who needed to take some time for school because they were so distraught over the election results, or the ding bat who was screaming "this is my America" after the final elect.vote, you want to talk about growing up ? holy smokes man the lib's on social media and T.V. have made flaming ass's out of themselves. Embarrassing each other seems to be a way of life for these yahoo's.
Comments
www.headstonesband.com
Benjs, I'm really not too sure where you are at with this Trump debacle. Is it possible to succinctly state your stance on the matter so I'm not scratching my head wondering? It seems as if you are on board. I'm hoping you are simply impressed with his manipulation of a population versus feeling a good thing has happened.
www.headstonesband.com
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Trump the social commentator hides behind vague statements so as to have plausible deniability on any statement made which is seen by the public as racist, sexist, xenophobic, derogatory, etc. I feel that this has the potential to leave people exhibiting these sentiments feeling that their viewpoints are justifiable, and those people could feel empowered by that. In turn, I feel that this could be a significant social setback if not addressed properly (which I think will not come from the government, but must come from the mouths of the populace).
Trump the environmentalist has not only claimed that the causality between carbon emissions and global warming is unverified and unverifiable, but he has not even spoken up about the importance of pursuing why global warming is occurring at such unprecedented rates. Because of this, I can only assume that subsidies on research and development on climate change will shrink down to zero, and the extraction of oil will only speed up, which will exacerbate the issues at hand. I was listening to Noam Chomsky who stated his belief that environmental issues will start to bleed into military and political issues, as drinkable water becomes a rarer commodity, and global warming makes life unrealistic in nuclear-ready countries like India and Pakistan who already have a volatile relationship.
Trump the politician I find to be untested, and his appeal to the emotions of the populace (often contradicting yesterday's position) has ensured that everyone is completely unaware of his true positions. I am hopeful that his narcissism proves to be a positive factor in his tenure: in Trump's business', the gauge of success is his own personal wealth. The gauge of success in Trump's administration will not be his own wealth - it will be the nation's ability to convert potential into actual results, and to leave office with positive potential remaining (as opposed to negative potential). The way he's surrounded himself by a crew of deep pockets doesn't bode well to the direction he will take - but the truth is that no one can really say what he will do when in office.
I guess the ten-second answer would be that I find Trump's words to be socially destructive, but his actions to be uncertain. If Trump's narcissism sways him away from valuing personal wealth and towards valuing his political legacy in this new empire he's attempting to build, the potential exists for him to make great change, and the stars are aligned to make that happen with the aid of the Republicans in all levels of government who want success in the interest of the perpetuation of the power of their party. I feel that there is more upside potential than I think there would have been if Clinton was in office given the Republican penetration and party politics, but I also feel that there is a substantial downside potential, which I hope (but fear) is never realized.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I said 'succinctly'.
The glass half full portion of your response will be worth noting: does he pursue greatness given his narcissm?
I understand where you are at now- thanks for taking the time to clarify.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And I brought up the point about having a management style like a dictator because that's how you worded it, but I appreciate you clarifying.
There's truth in both Benjs and your arguments regarding Hitler.
He managed to influence a significant portion of the German people and he managed the rest through strong armed tactics. He couldn't have achieved what he did had he not surround himself with key personnel who bought into his vision and many others begrudgingly fell in line.
Billionaires talking get things done.
Yes, it is true - Carlos Slim, the great businessman from Mexico, called me about getting together for a meeting. We met, HE IS A GREAT GUY!
So you are saying that the book of genesis, it takes precedence (not presidence) over science written about 800bc written by whom? By some scribe during the Babylonian captivity?
Most bible scholars attributed the book of genesis to moses. Can you name a bible scholar who attributes it to moses?
Religion and politics, gotta love it.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58594304e4b08debb78b0542
http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-play-doh-lousiana/
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/811560662853939200
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3u9vV5Og1DNS09scWs5dHV2eGc
www.headstonesband.com
Rinse and repeat.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
or the ding bat who was screaming "this is my America" after the final elect.vote, you want to talk about growing up ? holy smokes man the lib's on social media and T.V. have made flaming ass's out of themselves. Embarrassing each other seems to be a way of life for these yahoo's.