During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
These people went on too be consultants. As the skill of writing essays and making graphs to suit the objective while appearing neutral is a very profitable skill.
During the election cycle of 2016, the rabid sexism of the Bernie bro movement could transform any aspect of Hillary Clinton's perfect qualifications into negative traits. If she encouraged voters to Pokemon-go-to-the-polls, she was being too naggy; if she strategically backed off from campaigning in Michigan she was being too quiet. If she liberated Libya from the tyranny of Ghadaffi she was being too aggressive; if she allowed Americans to continue having the freedom of medical choices then she was being too passive.
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
These people went on too be consultants. As the skill of writing essays and making graphs to suit the objective while appearing neutral is a very profitable skill.
deleted by creator
During the election cycle of 2016, the rabid sexism of the Bernie bro movement could transform any aspect of Hillary Clinton's perfect qualifications into negative traits. If she encouraged voters to Pokemon-go-to-the-polls, she was being too naggy; if she strategically backed off from campaigning in Michigan she was being too quiet. If she liberated Libya from the tyranny of Ghadaffi she was being too aggressive; if she allowed Americans to continue having the freedom of medical choices then she was being too passive.
@neera_tanden
What is this an excerpt from?
Blackshirts and Reds
Thanks. Been meaning to read that.