Some policy debates feature one side uninterested in truth where scholarship is propaganda

Evidence

Basically, Joe is arriving where I’ve been since 2000: what’s going on in the discussion of economic affairs (and other matters, like justifications for war) isn’t just a case where different people look at the same facts but reach different conclusions. Instead, we’re looking at a situation in which one side of the debate just isn’t interested in the truth, in which alleged scholarship is actually just propaganda. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 829

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Crystallizes the epistemic claim that consensus failure can stem from deliberate disinterest in truth rather than competing readings of shared facts — a repositioning of the entire debate frame.
• XREF: connects to: Purportedly objective scholarship can function as propaganda against its subject — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 801; Policy-oriented scholarship serves political exigencies rather than new knowledge. — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam: How the Media and the…, 381; Neutral scholarship rhetoric often conceals worldly power connections — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam: How the Media and the…, 309 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Purportedly objective scholarship can function as propaganda against its subject #exemplifies (0.92) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 801
• Policy-oriented scholarship serves political exigencies rather than new knowledge. #expands (0.85) — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam, 381
• Neutral scholarship rhetoric often conceals worldly power connections #exemplifies (0.78) — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam, 309
• Neoliberalism rests on a double truth separating elite doctrine from mass propaganda #expands (0.72) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 2146