General Politics Discussion VII [ARCHIVED] • Page 1430

This. People also forget that Marxism, Socialism, etc were originally modernist schools of thought and therefore have their origins in an era that came well before postmodernism was even conceived. Hearing Peterson and others talk about how this mid to late 20th-century philosophical approach has direct ties to 19th and early 20th century Marxism, Communism, etc is a bit laughable. It's so embarrassing that they don't even know the fucking historical lineage of these "ideas". For them, postmodernism stands as anything that would ultimately put into question their sacred, treasured "western values". Their postmodernism is pretty much without substance in its definition but, unfortunately, has a lot of impact in the way they use the term to vilify their "intellectual opponents".

 

Im very happy with my Prius lol

 

You're discounting and erasing the tireless work of organizations in communities throughout the United States that have been nonstop in their dedication to showing up in the streets every day to demand action. I know in Detroit and Chicago specifically friends and organizations that I've worked with and continue to work with who have effectively used this national moment to speak out not only in the wake of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, but draw attention to local issues of race and police brutality. I would urge you to look at what organizations are doing in your community and see if you still feel that way about Black Lives Matter broadly, because as a movement grows, of course it's going to be co-opted, but it's one of the largest movements in American history and I haven't seen anything within the movement where I feel that their ongoing work is compromised or invalid. Most people who use the talking points you've cited are anti-BLM and looking to demonize protestors.

As to your views on young trans people, how hard are you looking for perspectives that oppose the videos and articles you agree with? Because when it comes to trans issues, I have found it most beneficial to listen to trans people and trans activists, and while you might think that you're protecting young people by not letting them embrace their gender at a young age, you are not, you are harming them. Self harm goes up, it causes trauma that lasts a lifetime. You're forcing kids to go through puberty in a body that isn't theirs. The people you cite and their tactics are transphobic at their core. They are misguided. I hope you can seek out people and studies who explain why this matters, and why the things you're posting are flat out wrong. That there is no justification for it scientifically. You stressed on us to consume the work of people we don't agree with. Trust me, I have. Please do the same.

 

this thread is so cool now

 

What about now?

 

it’s because I’m back

 

yes!

yes : )

 

the main thing I'm worried about with her is that her way of thinking is being implemented into schools from young children to college. If you don't believe me watch the evergreen teacher in class and the "anti-racism" she's teaching.

 

ok the reason I'm not in an echo chamber is I try to read things from all points of view. For the past few years I only read talking points/articles from social justice warriors that mostly focused on identity politics and basically how we are all seperated by race, class, gender and I started to really internalize everything being said eating up every word and ended up not believing at all in any shared humanity or enlightenment. Now Im starting seeing videos of how some people that supposed to have good intentions are acting (I'm really hoping it's just a fridge group)some people seen as racist/problematic are not even the real problem and actually want to have real discussions on everything happening.
I was 100 percent on the side of everything happening before people actually started to become cruel and lacking basic humanity and I started seeing it unfold before my own eyes. One instance I saw in the video with Bret Weinstein is that they assigned certain students to follow him around watching his every move. He couldn't even walk around his own work without people invading his personal space screaming at him and calling him a piece of shit. I don't see how anyone could say that is ok. People have rights to basic freedoms and privacy. I also see people thinking professors of science and math and faculty are the enemy instead of focusing on the actual cause of most of the problems which is the greedy 1%. We need to keep focus and anger on where the root of the problem is. The Democratic party/elite are playing into this so that they can pacify people for a little longer into not coming after them. If people are focusing on professors/courageous journalists/normal citizens they can stave off something similar to the french revolution happening here for a little longer.

 

I guess I would say the extremists are the people purposely trying to agitate protestors into being violent (some do it on their own though) and then on the left anyone invading someone's personal space/ their right to be in that space/being violent toward them in a way that is not simply self defense.

 

Maybe this is already been addressed but I'm catching up.

I didn't say you can't post them, I am reccomending you don't because when you post videos full of harmful conspiracies or transphobic psuedo-science and get challenged by us you can't back it up any further than the video and get defensive and dissmisive.

 

Please drop the phrase “social justice warrior”

 

I am very interested in this subject and it's something I've recently started looking into. I'm looking forward to learning more about it and the discussion im like manically excited typing this lol. I will have to watch talks with Jordan Peterson to see what he says but yeah I've basically read that it doesn't cannot with marxisim in any real way. I did read the basic broad definition on wiki as this: Postmodernism is generally defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection toward what it describes as the grand narratives and ideologies associated with modernism, often criticizing Enlightenment rationality and focusing on the role of ideology in maintaining political or economic power. Postmodern thinkers frequently describe knowledge claims and value systems as contingent or socially-conditioned, describing them as products of political, historical, or cultural discourses and hierarchies. Common targets of postmodern criticism include universalist ideas of objective reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, science, language, and social progress. Accordingly, postmodern thought is broadly characterized by tendencies to self-consciousness, self-referentiality, epistemological and moral relativism, pluralism, and irreverence.

I definitely think that describes the mindset right now.

Ps- I'm sorry I don't know how to format this so that it doesn't include annoying links.

 

this is frustrating on about a dozen different levels

 

I will back up my claims. But also can you back up yours with real scientific proof?

 

Ok fine. Now engage with what I said please

 

There's an awful lot going on here. All im gonna say is that you're telling me youre reading "from all points of view", but you're only referencing people like Rogan, Brent Weinstein and Jordan Peterson. That, along with many of the phrases youre using (social justice warriors, echo chambers, etc.) tells me that you're actually getting a fairly narrow diet of information that presents itself as "open-minded" and "questioning". If youre truly interested in shared humanity, tackling the problems of the 1%, then I suggest you are not looking in the right places.

 

"Real scientific proof" is very redundant and also condescending af

I don't think I've said anything that would even require that lol, if you have some question for me that demands "real scientific proof" I would be happy to try and find it for you. Otherwise I have no idea what you're referring to

 

Ok lean into that feeling and explain why you're uncomfortable?

 

I don't really have the eloquence and/or time to refute all the points but let me just say in all earnest that not all point of views are created equal.

 

Also brb!

 

Between the (Gender) Lines: the Science of Transgender Identity - Science in the News

not a perfect article, but pay close attention here:

"And so, while the list of causes for transgender identity continues to grow, it has become quite clear that it is not a conscious choice"

and


"These individuals are not suffering a mental illness, or capriciously “choosing” a different identity. The transgender identity is multi-dimensional – but it deserves no less recognition or respect than any other facet of humankind."

this is the polar opposite of what the people you're listening to are saying. and this is coming from Harvard. there is plenty of science behind the validity of transgender identities, this article barely even scratches the surface of it. do some more research on your own. literally all i had to do was google "transgender science" and this was the first hit.

 

Almost everything posted in here is posted with proof or with an interpretation of what's presented and possible issues with the source information. Except the random YouTube videos that that are super biased and harmful without any attached evidence or expansion on what is being presented. As a mostly observer of this thread the last few days have been less enlightening than normal.