Folktruther, this is from Reuters, not U.S. media, and Mahkladef does have the bonafides to discuss Iranian coups real or otherwise. What happened to him is surely a part of the truth, just as the bystander shot by the police bleeding to death on youtube was. People can’t develop an accurate consensus without information. I wish there were more about Moussavi’s intent to privatize because that too has some bearing on the issue, perhaps more important than Iranians’ individual experiences.

If pseudo-Progressive truthers means anything, it means Progressive truthers who are too selective in which facts they will and will not consider. nefesh is right: no good argument can be made “mired in meaningless catchphrases.”

By Russian Paul, June 24 at 4:28 pm #

Pseudo-Progressive truthers = Phony liberals who may support certain progressive policies at home, but when it comes to foreign policy, they are just as hawkish as most on the right, and they also tend to be supportive of neoliberal meddling in other countries. Basically, they are defenders of the status-quo, but hide behind the label of “liberal” or “progressive” to confuse and obfuscate those who would otherwise be against such interventionism.

Here’s where it gets squirrely for me. A ‘Pseudo-Progressive truther’ defends the status quo, normally, you say, but is actually interventionist in some areas of foreign affairs. So who defined ‘Progressive’ to mean anti-status quo for domestic policies only? And maybe it’s not un-Progressive to be anti-status quo in some aspects of foreign policy. This is my point - what meaning do these labels have when those who claim the mantle of the Progressive orthodoxy decide which status quo is untouchable and which isn’t? And for what reasons?
It would better advance many positions on these boards if slick jargon was avoided in favor of cogent arguments and clarity of purpose in writing.

By nefesh, June 24 at 4:52 pm #

(fixed the formatting this time)

By Russian Paul, June 24 at 4:28 pm #

Pseudo-Progressive truthers = Phony liberals who may support certain progressive policies at home, but when it comes to foreign policy, they are just as hawkish as most on the right, and they also tend to be supportive of neoliberal meddling in other countries. Basically, they are defenders of the status-quo, but hide behind the label of “liberal” or “progressive” to confuse and obfuscate those who would otherwise be against such interventionism.

Thank you. Still unclear on what you mean by ‘truther’. My understanding is that it means a sceptic of the commonly accepted version of events of the attack on the WTC in 2001. Now it is being used in a different context.
============================

As for truth consensus, it’s self-explanatory, isn’t it? Both terms are, really.

No, it isn’t. Honestly, it’s not. Glossaries and definitions are de rigueur for any serious written work when newly-coined terminology is used, especially those terms invented and used almost exclusively by and within narrow interest groups. A “truth consensus” means what, exactly, to you?

By Russian Paul, June 24 at 4:28 pm #

Pseudo-Progressive truthers = Phony liberals who may support certain progressive policies at home, but when it comes to foreign policy, they are just as hawkish as most on the right, and they also tend to be supportive of neoliberal meddling in other countries. Basically, they are defenders of the status-quo, but hide behind the label of “liberal” or “progressive” to confuse and obfuscate those who would otherwise be against such interventionism.</blockquote>

Thank you. Still unclaear on what you mean by ‘truther’. My understanding is that it means a sceptic of the commonly accepted version of events of the attack on the WTC in 2001. Now it is being used in a different context.
============================

As for truth consensus, it’s self-explanatory, isn’t it? Both terms are, really.

No, it isn’t. Honestly, it’s not. Glossaries and definitions are de rigueur for any serious written work, especially when newly-coined terminology is used, especially those terms invented and used almost exclusively by narrow interest groups. A “truth consensus” means what, exactly, to you?

Pseudo-Progressive truthers = Phony liberals who may support certain progressive policies at home, but when it comes to foreign policy, they are just as hawkish as most on the right, and they also tend to be supportive of neoliberal meddling in other countries. Basically, they are defenders of the status-quo, but hide behind the label of “liberal” or “progressive” to confuse and obfuscate those who would otherwise be against such interventionism.

I am far less eloquent than other posters here, but I feel many others don’t have the patience for such obvious BS questions so I thought I’d give it a try.

As for truth consensus, it’s self-explanatory, isn’t it? Both terms are, really.

By Shingo, June 24 at 5:30 am #

nefesh,

>> Your arguments are mired in meaningless catchphrases.<<

You don’t comprehend them because American people to be misinformed and deluded.  You are one of those Americans he’s talking about.

OK, Know-It-All, why don’t you define those terms yourself so I won’t have to be so misinformed and deluded. If you create your own special language and refuse to share the meaning of your alien lexicon, it’s not fair to slam those not in your club for being misinformed.

So here they are again:

Define ‘pseudo-Progressive truthers’ in a concise and unambiguous sentence.

Define ‘truth consensus’ in a concise and unambiguous sentence.

nefesh,

>> Your arguments are mired in meaningless catchphrases.<<

You don’t comprehend them because American people to be misinformed and deluded.  You are one of those Americans he’s talking about.

Folktruther, June 23 at 8:01 pm #

with the us media printing and airing this kind of stuff constantly, it is natural for the American people to be misinformed and deluded.  And I emphasize that this is done by pseudo-Progressive truthers, again, and again and again.  Until the US population can develop a distrust and resistence to this kind of worthless swill, they cannot develop a truth consensus capable of mobilizing us.
**************************************

ROFLMAO!  FT, you are just TOO much! Thank GOD we have our divine prophet, FolkTruther, to read the signs and omens and examine the entrails of a slaughtered ox.  That way he can GUARANTEE that the avalanche of information to the contrary is all a phony…just before it buries us!

Too bad there isn’t a force-you-to-face-reality pill!

By Folktruther, June 23 at 8:01 pm #

with the us media printing and airing this kind of stuff constantly, it is natural for the American people to be misinformed and deluded.  And I emphasize that this is done by pseudo-Progressive truthers, again, and again and again.  Until the US population can develop a distrust and resistence to this kind of worthless swill, they cannot develop a truth consensus capable of mobilizing us.

Define ‘pseudo-Progressive truthers’

Define ‘truth consensus’

Your arguments are mired in meaningless catchphrases.

with the us media printing and airing this kind of stuff constantly, it is natural for the American people to be misinformed and deluded.  And I emphasize that this is done by pseudo-Progressive truthers, again, and again and again.  Until the US population can develop a distrust and resistence to this kind of worthless swill, they cannot develop a truth consensus capable of mobilizing us.