Total posts: 1,893
For anyone who might be interested, here is a good debate on the question “Do free societies need postmodernism?”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Seeing that it is now 6 years old, it has certainly aged well… which unfortunately means that the academic and media zeitgeist has not aged well. It is a short, Orwellian message filmed in the style of the “Black Mirror” sci fi series. The fact that it offends the very people it parodies and warns against only further bolsters its message.
This short film is not saying “This is where we are now,” rather it is saying “This is where we are heading.” For those who think that this vision of math class is ludicrously exaggerated, I present this document from a Seattle school district:
One of the few changes I’d make would be titling it (Post)modern education.
Created:
-->
@Lunar108
I know, right? I recall an interview with a Middle Eastern feminist expressing her disappointment with this.
One of the internal contradictions of PC/postmodernism is the open criticism of Westernism while wearing kid gloves regarding other cultures— or simply remaining reticent about them, at least. Also, there is the possibility that putting focus on the Middle East would show how well women have it in the West, which is not in their interests…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Ah, right. It could conceivably have gone from college academia to students to social media to mainstream media. I think even the article itself alludes to the influence of social media. Also, there’s the college students of yesterday becoming the professionals of today contributing to the phenomenon…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Just took the time to read that insightful and well-researched Tablet article. My question is: what lead to the dramatic acceleration in wokeism in print media in the last 10 years? Off topic, I know…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
At this point I think it’s a safe assumption that a democratic administration = your country doesn’t get to have a border.
Not that long ago, the Democratic Party had generally the same view toward border security that the GOP has. I even recall Bernie Sanders having a different stance. Then, through a combination of PC ideology, political expediency, and the desire to oppose Trump on everything, that changed to what we currently have.
As I stated on page one, the desire of the Biden admin to disincentivize immigration from Cuba, from where immigrants tend to be anti-leftism, shows how cynical and political their immigration policy is.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
I am always happy with justice being applied equally. I am with you if it is applied unequally…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
The semantics games of the movement is tedious. CRT, you say? There’s no denying the concept exists, but “it’s not taught in schools (to kids), damnit!” Inculcated in teachers? Well… yes, but that’s entirely different! Woke, you say? “Why is the right so obsessed with these terms (the left originated)!” Or, as AOC likes to claim, “‘Woke’ sounds so dated now. Ok, boomer…” Anti-racism, you say? Well, if you disagree with “anti-racism,” guess what that implies?
Can we not discuss the issue without the evasiveness? Why the hiding behind semantics? I think we can guess…
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
The general sentiment seems to be that supporting Trump’s policies means being blamed for every personal quirk and flaw of Trump himself. This was true of the “Covington kids” and Nick Sandman, Kyle Rittenhouse (never mind that he never even voiced explicit support for Trump; it was merely inferred by the media), and, most importantly, Ron Desantis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I definitely want Mr. Smollett to pay back what he owes the police for wasting their valuable time. Like you, it also irks me that many are so eager to believe in hate crimes. Even when the hoax was largely exposed, many responded, “Yes, but hate crimes still happen with alarming frequency!” Ok, but staging a hate crime must fill a need— a need to be seen as a victim. This is where identity politics has taken us: putting victimhood on a pedestal…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Cool! I would also add Glenn Loury and Coleman Hughes. They have all discussed these issues with each other, too, I believe…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Linguistics Professor John McWhorter speaks very intelligently about this issue. Here is one of his shorter interviews (< 20 minutes) if you’re interested:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
No, being caught in blackface is an absolute livelihood ender. That is unless you are a lefty such as Canadian PM Trudeau, Joy Behar, and the former governor of Virginia. Trudeau even managed successfully to blame his poor judgment on his white privilege.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Not even realizing how much power and privilege you have is yet another aspect of your privilege.
^^^ Man, it’s easy to argue for a concept which cannot be proven false…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
There is no reasonable case to be made that either of his impeachments for example were not warranted, if he were any other president he would have been removed from office.
You aren’t taking into account the Mueller investigation and hearings. Its findings weren’t even used in the subsequent impeachment. It was predicated on an entirely different accusation. That investigation and obsession with it was partisan political axe grinding. It set the tone, if you will, and it was hardly a tone of accountability without prejudice.
And Biden’s highly controversial phone call to the Afghani president prior to the US withdrawal of forces would be grounds for Trump’s third impeachment if Trump had acted identically. It’s about as clear cut a political double-standard hypothetical I can think of. It appears Obama was correct when he quipped, “I guess orange really is the new black!”
Why is the political right so obsessed with the Steele Dossier? It was just one of many documents the justice department used as a predicate for their investigations, and it was only taken seriously because it corroborated intelligence were already had.
The investigation into how wrong you are is still ongoing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Instead of leading to greater racial sensitivity, the overuse of the racism accusation will lead to greater apathy and division. Humans are tribal by nature, so it is futile to attempt the erasure of tribalism. The key is to alter the frame, the basis of that tribalism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
In “The Crucible,” once you were accused of being a witch, there was only one way out alive: contritely admit to being a witch. Such as it is now with the accusation of racism…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Once you admit to being racist, there is at least hope for you.
The above is the sort of reasoning reminiscent of the classic novel “The Crucible.”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Racial sensitivity training has limited effectiveness on adults:
I’m thinking that is why they want to teach it to ever younger children, when they are much more impressionable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
By “trying to unseat a duly elected president” you mean hold the president accountable for blatant and obvious violations of his oath of office that the founding fathers would have abhorred and literally wrote the constitution to protect against.
That sounds noble and all, but what you call accountability, many would call partisan political axe-grinding. The largely fabricated Steele Dossier and the ensuing actions based upon it are an egregious example of accountability, as the Durham investigation is slowly but surely proving. True accountability is applied equally and without prejudice. That is not what we have been witnessing between the last administration and the current one.
Created:
Posted in:
I was well aware our democracy was sliding when our government with help from its de facto propaganda wing spent 4 solid years trying to unseat a duly elected president. Then he finally was unseated via democratic means. It’s as if our own government doesn’t trust our own democratic process.
Created:
-->
@thett3
Thomas Jefferson wrote "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" and I would say that this is the closest thing to a one sentence summary of American cultures core values as you could get.
Agree 100%
The point of my ramblings is that I think liberals are basically just following the philosophical values that America was founded on and that conservatives claim to hold to their logical conclusion, so the conservative is pretty hapless to resist. Distinctions inherently create inequality, and so the less meaningful we can make the distinctions the less relevant the inequality. A new philosophy is needed, along with a spiritual awakening...it's going to happen eventually but don't count on seeing it in your lifetime imo
I don’t think I agree. The Jeffersonian ideal is equality under the law— equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Quite true, people are not literally born equal in traits, talents, abilities, and health. It’s just that as far as the government is concerned, it seeks to maintain equality under the law. Leftists want more than that— they want the government to provide more equal outcomes to those deemed less fortunate (“fortunate” being a very open-ended word in this context), to provide happiness to those who aren’t happy, not just equal opportunity to pursue it. So, I wouldn’t say they are taking the Jeffersonian ideal to its logical conclusion.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
I'd hardly call abolition, feminism, indoor toilets, refrigeration, flight, automobiles, televisions, epidemiology, robots on Mars, etc., etc., etc... a downhill trajectory.
Neither would I, which is why I didn’t. When I said “recent times,” I mean in the last decade or so. Postmodernists might criticize many of these products of the Enlightenment, though, as they would argue that technological advancement culminated in the destructive power of two world wars and the introduction of weapons of mass destruction.
So, Postmodernism is skeptical about the objectivity of many factual claims but that's not quite the same thing as saying that all truth is subjective.
Meh… splitting hairs over how to define postmodernism is a bit futile as one of the common criticisms against it is that it is poorly defined. Also from wiki:
“It can be described as a reaction against attempts to explain reality in an objective manner by claiming that reality is a mental construct.”
To say that moral or cultural relativism are somehow more Left than Right is deluded. All Americans are moral relativists from birth. Our Founding Fathers understood slavery was a great evil and an essential cheap labor if the South was to compete in the burgeoning Industrial Era. They held two opposite and intercancelling moral viewpoints, cemented the paradox into out Declaration of Independence and Constitution and consciously laid the foundation for the American Civil War. Lincoln's moral relativism was exclusively focused on maximizing American power. In August 1862, Lincoln stated: "If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that." Such a platform is not at all leftist but a perfect example of American comfort with moral relativism even before the term Post-Modernism was coined.
What you describe is more of what I would call moral quandaries and moral conflicts rather than a relativistic worldview. The train problem— do you save the train full of adults, or the train with one infant— is a moral quandary and a moral examination but not indicative of moral relativism.
What evidence can you present that the Left is more relativist than the Right? I say the opposite is more likely to be true.
One example that comes to mind is Gloria Steinem— a pioneering and highly influential feminist, yet she is, from what I have gathered, largely silent on the treatment of women in much of the Islamic world. This example is not exceptional in nature, either.
Let's note that where Cristo71 blames Postmodernism for the rise of Marxism, Dr. Sharpe states that Postmodernism supplanted Marxism in academic articles
You won’t be able to note that because I didn’t say that. Why would I, when Postmodernism came into being well after Marxism? Actually, the claim that postmodernism has supplanted Marxism neither detracts from nor contradicts anything I have said.
The burden of proof is yours to demonstrate this embrace- not just that you can find some postmodernist Leftist but that post-Modernism itself is more popular on the Left than the Right, I just don't see any evidence that this is true.
Cultural and moral relativism are not Classical Liberal principles. Such relativism exists in anthropology and, as I pointed out, western feminism. Middle Eastern feminists don’t care for it…
Thoughtcrime!
It’s not merely a thought when one expects, or even demands that all of society accommodate and validate one’s thoughts.
“Postmodernism abhors criticism of all cultures except for Western, European cultures”
Postmodernism originated as a critique of the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment occurred in Western civilization. So, critiquing the West is kind of the point. In criticizing Enlightenment values (reason, universalism, objective reality, and so forth) it posited relativism instead. With relativism, cultures should not be judged (ie criticized) outside of their own context. As I said earlier, this idea inhabits much of anthropology.
Faith requires an absence of objective truths. If a claim is objectively true, then the claim requires no faith to demonstrate its truth. Faith, by definition, is the acceptance as truth in the absence of any proof.
Not if one sees their god as THE objective truth, which is the case in the Abrahamic religions.
People of faith can only trust science up to the point that science discredits their belief system, therefore people of faith have always and will always distrust science to an important degree. Again, if science did not discredit the belief, then the belief would require no faith. If people of faith trusted science deeply, they would no longer be people of faith.
What I am saying is that if trusted institutions give people more and more reasons not to trust them anymore, that will motivate more people to put their trust in other things— such as fundamentalist religion.
Right, because there was no confusion or chaos or decline to be discovered in the atomic bombs and holocausts at the apex of Modernism, no confusion or chaos or decline in the French and American revolutions at the apex of the Enlightenment.
Here, you are actually making a postmodernist argument.
I think you've taken a few of the most pervasive negatives of the human condition, blamed Post-Modernism for those negatives without demonstrating an understanding of the term, then blamed the Left for inventing the concept without any evidence and in the face of experts who actually credit the Right-wingers.
No, this is actually what the postmodernists have done (except they blame the Enlightenment and Westernism, not Postmodernism, of course).
Created:
-->
@Double_R
And yes, I read the part of the article you quoted. It is worthless because the actual description of what postmodernism is according to the article does not line up with what it’s pointing to.
Imagine my complete and utter shock at your highly unexpected response…
Created:
-->
@Double_R
Examples of recent postmodernist influence:
BLM’s stated desire to do away with the nuclear family
When prosecutors look to “reform” the criminal justice system, and crime increases under their watch.
When a gang shootout occurs, resulting in multiple deaths, and the DA decides not to press charges because the shootout was consensual.
When a group of doctors issues a statement that racism is deadlier than COVID, so BLM protesters who congregate yet neglect to wear masks can do so with the doctors’ professional blessing. (Mentioned this one earlier, but not to you directly).
When a mayor has the police evacuate their station because maintaining law and order has become too dangerous.
When universities drop standardized testing entrance requirements because they do not yield the desired outcome. (This was posited by thett already, but not to you directly)
When arson and property damage are not considered violence depending upon the group identity of who is doing the damage.
Defunding the police while expecting crime as well as vigilantism not to increase. Also, defunding the police while expecting police officers to become more highly trained.
The “Abolish ICE” movement
In Seattle schools, mathematics is studied in the context of group identity and oppression.
Associating things like work ethic and punctuality with “whiteness.”
BLM’s stated desire to do away with the nuclear family
When prosecutors look to “reform” the criminal justice system, and crime increases under their watch.
When a gang shootout occurs, resulting in multiple deaths, and the DA decides not to press charges because the shootout was consensual.
When a group of doctors issues a statement that racism is deadlier than COVID, so BLM protesters who congregate yet neglect to wear masks can do so with the doctors’ professional blessing. (Mentioned this one earlier, but not to you directly).
When a mayor has the police evacuate their station because maintaining law and order has become too dangerous.
When universities drop standardized testing entrance requirements because they do not yield the desired outcome. (This was posited by thett already, but not to you directly)
When arson and property damage are not considered violence depending upon the group identity of who is doing the damage.
Defunding the police while expecting crime as well as vigilantism not to increase. Also, defunding the police while expecting police officers to become more highly trained.
The “Abolish ICE” movement
In Seattle schools, mathematics is studied in the context of group identity and oppression.
Associating things like work ethic and punctuality with “whiteness.”
Created:
-->
@Double_R
See? You’re not even trying to correlate the contents of the article I linked— just for you— with what I have been saying. *sigh* I will help answer for you my question to you, but you’re trying my patience, honestly. From the article (which I didn’t read before I wrote the OP, for what it’s worth):
“Because the established discourses of the Enlightenment are more or less arbitrary and unjustified, they can be changed; and because they more or less reflect the interests and values of the powerful, they should be changed. Thus postmodernists regard their theoretical position as uniquely inclusive and democratic, because it allows them to recognize the unjust hegemony of Enlightenment discourses over the equally valid perspectives of nonelite groups. In the 1980s and ’90s, academic advocates on behalf of various ethnic, cultural, racial, and religious groups embraced postmodern critiques of contemporary Western society, and postmodernism became the unofficial philosophy of the new movement of “identity politics.”
Created:
-->
@thett3
Exactly.
There seems to be a philosophical undercurrent regarding the fickle fortunes of birth. It is definitely true enough— people are born into vastly different levels of fortune— but some leftists actually believe they can “cure” it fairly. This undercurrent even proposes that work ethic is an inborn, immutable trait. Hence, AOC’s reference to being “unwilling to work.” As if to say, “It isn’t truly your fault that you don’t have a great work ethic. You shouldn’t have to live in deprivation because of that.”
There seems to be a philosophical undercurrent regarding the fickle fortunes of birth. It is definitely true enough— people are born into vastly different levels of fortune— but some leftists actually believe they can “cure” it fairly. This undercurrent even proposes that work ethic is an inborn, immutable trait. Hence, AOC’s reference to being “unwilling to work.” As if to say, “It isn’t truly your fault that you don’t have a great work ethic. You shouldn’t have to live in deprivation because of that.”
Created:
-->
@thett3
The right in the West has no effective answer because their political foundation is also based around classical liberalism, and so they're basically sitting ducks when the left extends the principles that the right holds to chip away at traditional society generation after generation. This is because, ultimately, the society that rightists claim that they want (for example one of honor, duty, family, God, patriotism, etc) simply is not supported by the philosophical ideals they claim at the same time to hold.
Can you give a more detailed explanation on this?
As I stated previously, Democrats and Republicans both are rooted in classically liberal principles (liberty, self determination, shared values, etc.) So, it isn’t the right alone, I would say. The problem is that postmodernist influences are growing outside of merely politics itself. Corporate CEO’s for example, give lip service to a socialist movement while being obviously capitalist themselves. Even if done out of pure cynicism (don’t want to lose their business!), it illustrates the traction such an ideology can attain.
Created:
-->
@thett3
You offer up a lot to chew on there! I’ll just start slow and in small bites:
Whether they realize it or not the endgame of leftist politics is an undifferentiated mass of humanity where no one can be forced to do anything, even face others silent judgement, on account of their clan, tribe, nationality, race, religion, etc.--anything they did not choose.
I’m not getting the “silent judgment” reference, but… I would summarize it as the progressive/leftist/far-left ultimately wants a collectivist utopia, where envy doesn’t have an opportunity to really develop. It wasn’t until AOC made a reference to supporting people “who either are unable or *unwilling* to work” that I realized what such a utopia might offer. That blew my mind, that she ultimately wants to accommodate a person’s unwillingness to work.
therefore those things must be destroyed.
I’m not understanding this interpretation— “those things” being clan, tribe, race, nationality, religions…
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
*sigh* You really aren’t understanding the timeline here. I looked up the Pew polling data AFTER you expressed your disappointment over me giving you my personal, spitball estimate (which is what you asked for the way you worded your initial request, by the way).
It has been clear to me since your post #37 that if you were less lazy and more honest, you would have answered your own question through your own research and perhaps even offered up a link to at least one reputable pollster yourself instead of baiting me or whatever it is you are trying to accomplish.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
You asked for MY personal estimate, not for me to do an internet search for you. Perhaps I interpreted your question too literally, but I thought, “Surely, he’s not asking me to do an internet search FOR him, is he? No, he just wants to know what my guesstimate is.” And you ignored almost all of what I said in my first response to you. It seems that I was mistaken to give you the benefit of the doubt. Noted.
There are people (pollsters) who estimate these things for a living. This might be news to you, but I am not one of them. Here’s one of them, even though you could have done the same thing yourself (I hope):
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Oh, various and sundry things, I guess… life experience, political awareness, Bernie Sanders’ popularity, protest crowds last year and their popularity, vocally left college students, various educators, school boards, political pundits and their popularity, “the squad” and their popularity, the over enrollment in social studies versus STEM careers in upper education, to name some things that come to mind…
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
I would guesstimate about 20% of the left is far left. That only tells part of the story though. Think of the “80/20 rule” as an example: “20% of the fishermen catch 80% of the fish” and so forth. Academia has a larger influence on the social zeitgeist than the number of educators would suggest. A company’s HR department might make up 10% of the employees, but they account for 50% of the hiring decisions, and so on…
In summation, postmodernism has a larger influence on the West currently than the number of literal adherents would suggest. Many people probably don’t even realize how influenced they are by it.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
So I’m sorry to disappoint you, I did read your post and I did read your link. Perhaps you need to be more clear in what you are trying to convey.
I’m very glad you read both fully. It’s posting thoughts as if you ignored them that is disappointing. So, having read the Britannica article (I think my link just linked to a portion of the article, but for now this is a good enough start), what did you glean from it? How and where do you believe it contradicts or at least fails to support what I’m saying? Where can you concede it does support some of what I’m saying? Of course, I fully realize that you will *never* come to a point of total agreement with any politically oriented opinions of mine… and that’s… ok…
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't currently see anything particularly disconcerting, that cannot be adapted to.
In a nutshell, postmodernism is ultimately self-defeating/self-refuting. Being a Western invention, I just don’t want it to take the West down with it…
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, it’s entirely possible that postmodernism is partly to blame for the decline of journalism (which I also made a thread on). Even clearer examples would be the group of doctors claiming that racism is more deadly than COVID (ie BLM protestors can congregate while neglecting to wear masks with their professional blessing) and the “defund the police” and “reimagine law enforcement” movement.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
More like… your claim is BS, please provide real evidence or examples that this ideology has anything to do with the left.
Dang, man. I gave you an encyclopedia reference. I can guess that you didn’t read it. Be careful about claiming that my claim is BS— not only are you potentially taking on your own burden of proof in making a claim yourself, but it is also abundantly clear that you don’t know enough about the subject to criticize my OP.
There will always be whack jobs on every end of the political spectrum, so to find one and then claim they’re representative of their political group is a lazy and disingenuous tactic. So if we’re going to have a conversation about any political group it needs to be a group large enough to warrant attention. There is no group on the left waging war with reality worthy of discussion, but there absolutely is on the right, so I find it odd that you would decide to go on a rant against one and not the other when the other is politically significant.
Right… because you and other lefties are so critical of the left around here when it’s warranted. You’re just messing with me now, right?
If you read my OP (much) more carefully, you will see that I’m not saying that postmodernism is representative of the Democratic Party. You’re reading things I haven’t written. Heck, even my title says “far left.” BUT you will also read in my OP that I say postmodernism has grown in various western institutions. You have a penchant for underestimating dangers from the left even after they have been brought to your attention by various posters, as you do here: “There is no group on the left waging war with reality worthy of discussion”
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I want to reiterate that this isn’t so much a Republican vs Democrat thing; it’s classical liberalism (which both parties have strong foundations in) vs Postmodernism, whose adherents find refuge in the Democratic Party out of political expediency. Sadly, it has been working to a great enough extent to be worth educating and warning people about, so here it is…
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Exactly. Thing is, reality ALWAYS gets the last word…
Created:
-->
@Double_R
You are looking at the entirety of a philosophical movement too one dimensionally. Your post basically boils down to a declaration of “I don’t believe you,” which is hardly unexpected, with an ad hominem tu quoque tossed in, which was already foreseen and addressed in the OP (“This shit is chess; it ain’t checkers!”) Maybe you missed it.
As you won’t take my word for it, here is a quick primer on it for your perusal:
Created:
There’s a political pundit who is fond of pointing out, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.” Well, in postmodernism, one’s feelings don’t care about your facts!
The Enlightenment was a high point in Western civilization; it has been on a downhill slide from there in recent times. I believe postmodernist thought, originating in the mid to late 20th century, is to blame. Birthed largely in academia, it has since grown into all of the West’s institutions. What is postmodernism? It posits the subjectivity of truth. From there, one arrives at moral relativism, cultural relativism, and neo Marxism.
Classical liberalism has adhered to the objectivity of truth, whereas leftism seems to embrace postmodernism. It used to be on the fringes of political discourse, but it has become much more mainstream in the 21st century. If you ever hear someone declaring that society needs to “reimagine” something, that is likely postmodernist thinking. Just some of the telltale results are: moral confusion, gender confusion, identity politics, anti-capitalism, collectivism, anti-Westernism, anti-patriotism, and even skepticism over the inherent objectivity of mathematics.
Now, you might ask, “How can an ideology that promotes cultural relativism also be anti-Westernism? Isn’t that a contradiction?” Well, yes, it is a contradiction— merely one of several in the movement. Postmodernism abhors criticism of all cultures except for Western, European cultures. Regarding the West, it is highly judgmental. Postmodernists, ironically enough, only expect Western societies to adhere to Postmodernism in the first place!
You might also want to point out that evangelical Christianity, with its continuing belief in Creationism, is also putting ideology and belief ahead of what is generally accepted as factual and scientific. My response to that is at least Christianity places a high value on objectivity and fundamental truths. However, Postmodernism is actually reducing society’s trust in institutions (such as science in this case) even further because it is detracting from the rigor and trustworthiness that adhering to objectivity provides. People of faith will not be convinced to trust science more anytime soon if they feel it has been tainted by the ideological agenda of Postmodernism. You might also want to ask yourself why you don’t feel that same need to point out the same issue with much of the Islamic world!
In short, left unchecked, Postmodernism leads to confusion, chaos, and the decline of Western societies. Worst of all, that may actually be a feature rather than a bug…
The Enlightenment was a high point in Western civilization; it has been on a downhill slide from there in recent times. I believe postmodernist thought, originating in the mid to late 20th century, is to blame. Birthed largely in academia, it has since grown into all of the West’s institutions. What is postmodernism? It posits the subjectivity of truth. From there, one arrives at moral relativism, cultural relativism, and neo Marxism.
Classical liberalism has adhered to the objectivity of truth, whereas leftism seems to embrace postmodernism. It used to be on the fringes of political discourse, but it has become much more mainstream in the 21st century. If you ever hear someone declaring that society needs to “reimagine” something, that is likely postmodernist thinking. Just some of the telltale results are: moral confusion, gender confusion, identity politics, anti-capitalism, collectivism, anti-Westernism, anti-patriotism, and even skepticism over the inherent objectivity of mathematics.
Now, you might ask, “How can an ideology that promotes cultural relativism also be anti-Westernism? Isn’t that a contradiction?” Well, yes, it is a contradiction— merely one of several in the movement. Postmodernism abhors criticism of all cultures except for Western, European cultures. Regarding the West, it is highly judgmental. Postmodernists, ironically enough, only expect Western societies to adhere to Postmodernism in the first place!
You might also want to point out that evangelical Christianity, with its continuing belief in Creationism, is also putting ideology and belief ahead of what is generally accepted as factual and scientific. My response to that is at least Christianity places a high value on objectivity and fundamental truths. However, Postmodernism is actually reducing society’s trust in institutions (such as science in this case) even further because it is detracting from the rigor and trustworthiness that adhering to objectivity provides. People of faith will not be convinced to trust science more anytime soon if they feel it has been tainted by the ideological agenda of Postmodernism. You might also want to ask yourself why you don’t feel that same need to point out the same issue with much of the Islamic world!
In short, left unchecked, Postmodernism leads to confusion, chaos, and the decline of Western societies. Worst of all, that may actually be a feature rather than a bug…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You just directly equated being a racist parent to being a bad parent, this is actually further than I'd go because I merely said bad influence not overall bad parent.
I wasn’t equating; I was drawing a parallel to exemplify a claim that doesn’t add new information to a discussion.
I reckon some racist parents may, in terms of caring for their own, not actually be that bad. However, the influence their racist and thus inherently spiteful, divisive outlook and temperament will give to those they raise, regarding other races, is certainly a bad/negative influence.
Now, THAT’S more like it, and I agree 100%. The problem for you is that you have said something about the subject which is agreeable to someone you believe “sympathizes with racism,” which is exactly why I said what I said in post 69 (why did it have to be THAT number?)
Do you remember what I said that in reply to?
Nope. It’s the first I’ve heard you say it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Nope, the discourse that took place started with me literally stating that racist parents are not good influences on their children.
Actually, it started with a criticism of the anti-racism agenda being taught in schools. Then you said the above. I pointed out that it was a facile point; it neither adds insight nor provokes further thought; it oversimplifies complex issues (that’s what “facile” means) such as racism, anti racism/CRT, good/bad parenting, etc.
You might as well have made a tautological claim such as “Bad parents are a bad influence on their children.” I think, or at least thought, you could do better than that…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
No deal, I’m afraid. First off, I disagree with your comprehension that I “sympathize with racism”— unless you are one of those people who thinks all white people who disagree with CRT are racist (and that black people who disagree are the “black faces of white supremacy”) which is a nonstarter anyway. And if you are intransigent in that conclusion, perhaps I ought to be the one blocking you… but that’s not really my style…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
If age weren’t the primary factor, you could have left it out of your law complaint entirely, and your point would have been clearer and easier to discuss, I would think.
Instead of this:
“17 year olds shouldn’t be running around with AR-15s.”
“Ok. Only adults, then?“
“No, you ‘gotcha!’ poster! Nobody should have them!!”
“Why so angry, dude?”
This:
“Semiautomatic pistols and rifles should not be as easily accessible as they are.” <— leave out specifics that are besides the point when you want to discuss a bigger issue
Alas, if you insist on projecting bad faith motives onto me, we are done here. Good morning, and good luck…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
You answered simply in the negative (ie “no”). Then you added this:
Age is part of the problem, but it’s not the only issue.
From where I sit, it looks like you’re being intentionally vague and unnecessarily terse. Ok, but I’m not going to drag more comprehensive responses out of you by playing “20 questions” as if you would be doing me some big favor. Just curious how others view things so differently from myself…
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
No, rather it’s because you have me blocked…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
While we’re on simple answers to simple questions… A man decides to head into a downtown area that’s experiencing civil unrest armed with an AR15. By the end of the night two people are killed by that AR15. Do you find this result surprising?
Seems more like evasive answers on your part, but it’s ok with me if you don’t like my questions.
FYI, Rittenhouse was not the only visibly armed person that night. The others stayed in groups I believe. It appears that Rittenhouse simply allowed himself to end up mostly alone, thus making himself a more attractive target to someone violently unstable like Rosenbaum. A deceptively attractive target, as it turned out…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
They will be educated even deeper on reality in 2022…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
17 year olds should not be able to roam the streets with AR15’s
It looks as though Rittenhouse was excused on that aspect because of a poorly written exception to firearm age restrictions. One year older, and you will accept it as legal, then?
Created: