something that's always stuck with me is Adorno's critique of liberal research on fascism - that liberal scientists believe you can approach fascism in good faith by simply asking Nazis what they think about the world and then writing it down. He argued that fascism is itself a bad faith ideology, and that Nazis will not usually answer the question "do you want to exterminate all minorities?" truthfully, especially not when asked by academics (who are all Marxists/Jews/etc plotting to destroy civilization). So in order to accurately capture fascist sentiment, you have to conceal your intentions and basically lie to them. And there are real moral imperatives for social scientists to do this, in the same way that journalists go undercover in white supremacist groups to report on their activities and beliefs. There's even that famous East German documentary where the directors lied to a Nazi military leader about being West German filmmakers, got him drunk, and then just filmed him saying Nazi shit lol. So like the conventions of science itself, the idea that good research is necessarily always transparent, is a political assumption that shapes how you conduct research and acquire knowledge
vaporwave
pixelskylines
stormborns
jacobvanloon
amandla
andulkaphoto
gummygunk
tangentwithtanner
