Your very existence is problematic, because you can argue that is objectively bad for the environment, because all the products a baby use/used produce a lot garbage, pollution and emissions.
The mistake is to think rationality & logic is relevant. It is all about raw power, as they say. Unfortunately, men have never been able to resist female collaborations, as tears are our kryptonite, so when women gained power in the public square we were doomed.
We’ve to accept defeat … we’re just transitioning from the chimpansee model to the bonobos model; I prey for our sons that they do not forget the free and copious sex …
I mean… academics are all nuts in some respect (speaking as a PhD researcher myself and being the third generation in my family to get a PhD) so one could argue that academia itself is society’s quota of nutters in one profession…
One more bit to add to the (appropriate) witch hunt analogy: during the events at Salem the best and brightest of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were consumed by the question of the admissibility of “spectral evidence.” Todays best and brightest would probably admit such evidence (and, true to form find the analogy extremely problematic using the lexicological ambiguities of the term “spectral”).
Dec 12, 2022·edited Dec 12, 2022Liked by Lee Jussim
this excellent piece ignores a middle logical step in the process. I'll name it "how standard left wing ideological attitudes have partially enabled those lunacies"
1. systematically ignoring the existence of tradeoffs.
not clapping has a definite minor benefit of giving the occasional student a better feeling. but how about the damage to the regular experience of everyone else?
proper social justice tries to balance public inconvenience with helping disadvantaged individuals.
thus, delaying the bus 2 minutes to help a disabled person come on = some inconvenience in order to help a person get the critical use of the bus. = balanced.
1,000 students losing an experience for maybe preventing a minor psychological pain for one student = ridiculously unbalanced.
this tradeoffs ignoring can be found everywhere in progressive circles. defund the police is the greatest example. how can anyone just live in lala land where no police is something to even consider? simple: tradeoffs don't exist. we see the good of our progressive idea. the negatives aren't to be considered.
whenever welfare policies are discussed, the costs to the average citizens doesn't exist. the side effects of welfare (some side effects always exist) are almost a crime to mention, let alone research thoroughly.
same with unintended consequences
2. no grey areas.
normal humans accept black White and grey.
you can be nice, you can be violent (call the police), and you can engage in endless things in the middle. where we don't do aggressive counter actions, nor do we approve it.
but progressivism sometime simply refuse to accept the grey zone concept. every sexual activity is either rape/harassment or wholesome sexual unity.
this makes life black White, and easy. while life is messy confusing and complicated!
this is why even thinking gets difficult. because without the option for grey, thinking properly is impossible.
"For the critical race theorist, objective truth, like merit, does not exist, at least in social science and politics. In these realms, truth is a social construct created to suit the purposes of the dominant group."
This is 100% cribbed from Marx's "German Ideology", the idea that things like truth and facts (and beauty) etc only exist at the behest of the ruling class, and only exist to support ruling-class narratives.
Critical Theory is just Marxist wine in American bottles, labeled according to Marcuse's "coalition of the fringes." There's Race Marxism, Gender Marxism, Queer Marxism (even Fat Marxism!), they are like Marxist franchises that have morphed in a very American way into brands, job programs, spiritual crusades, and group therapy sessions for the young and alienated.
Marxism is a fundamentalist religion for secular intellectuals, and because they only believe in Power and Who/Whom there's really not much else for them to do but the compete in the favorite pastimes of all fundamentalisms: purity spirals, dogma revisions, party intrigues, bureaucratic backstabbings, and their #1 sport, the destruction of enemies, apostates, and heretics.
Sorry the feeding frenzy has come for you!
But the herd usually moves on quickly once they spot a new victim to gnaw on.
Your very existence is problematic, because you can argue that is objectively bad for the environment, because all the products a baby use/used produce a lot garbage, pollution and emissions.
The mistake is to think rationality & logic is relevant. It is all about raw power, as they say. Unfortunately, men have never been able to resist female collaborations, as tears are our kryptonite, so when women gained power in the public square we were doomed.
We’ve to accept defeat … we’re just transitioning from the chimpansee model to the bonobos model; I prey for our sons that they do not forget the free and copious sex …
I mean… academics are all nuts in some respect (speaking as a PhD researcher myself and being the third generation in my family to get a PhD) so one could argue that academia itself is society’s quota of nutters in one profession…
One more bit to add to the (appropriate) witch hunt analogy: during the events at Salem the best and brightest of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were consumed by the question of the admissibility of “spectral evidence.” Todays best and brightest would probably admit such evidence (and, true to form find the analogy extremely problematic using the lexicological ambiguities of the term “spectral”).
At the risk of sounding like an anti-social grouch, the things you wrote about are a glimpse into why I am losing my desire to interact with others.
When things change in whatever way a new status quo is created
this excellent piece ignores a middle logical step in the process. I'll name it "how standard left wing ideological attitudes have partially enabled those lunacies"
1. systematically ignoring the existence of tradeoffs.
not clapping has a definite minor benefit of giving the occasional student a better feeling. but how about the damage to the regular experience of everyone else?
proper social justice tries to balance public inconvenience with helping disadvantaged individuals.
thus, delaying the bus 2 minutes to help a disabled person come on = some inconvenience in order to help a person get the critical use of the bus. = balanced.
1,000 students losing an experience for maybe preventing a minor psychological pain for one student = ridiculously unbalanced.
this tradeoffs ignoring can be found everywhere in progressive circles. defund the police is the greatest example. how can anyone just live in lala land where no police is something to even consider? simple: tradeoffs don't exist. we see the good of our progressive idea. the negatives aren't to be considered.
whenever welfare policies are discussed, the costs to the average citizens doesn't exist. the side effects of welfare (some side effects always exist) are almost a crime to mention, let alone research thoroughly.
same with unintended consequences
2. no grey areas.
normal humans accept black White and grey.
you can be nice, you can be violent (call the police), and you can engage in endless things in the middle. where we don't do aggressive counter actions, nor do we approve it.
but progressivism sometime simply refuse to accept the grey zone concept. every sexual activity is either rape/harassment or wholesome sexual unity.
this makes life black White, and easy. while life is messy confusing and complicated!
this is why even thinking gets difficult. because without the option for grey, thinking properly is impossible.
*our shores
It’s even more simple. Study communism in
The early USSR. Suppression of and imprisonment of any scientist that presented date contrary to the regime.
It is horrifying it’s reached out shores ....
"For the critical race theorist, objective truth, like merit, does not exist, at least in social science and politics. In these realms, truth is a social construct created to suit the purposes of the dominant group."
This is 100% cribbed from Marx's "German Ideology", the idea that things like truth and facts (and beauty) etc only exist at the behest of the ruling class, and only exist to support ruling-class narratives.
Critical Theory is just Marxist wine in American bottles, labeled according to Marcuse's "coalition of the fringes." There's Race Marxism, Gender Marxism, Queer Marxism (even Fat Marxism!), they are like Marxist franchises that have morphed in a very American way into brands, job programs, spiritual crusades, and group therapy sessions for the young and alienated.
Marxism is a fundamentalist religion for secular intellectuals, and because they only believe in Power and Who/Whom there's really not much else for them to do but the compete in the favorite pastimes of all fundamentalisms: purity spirals, dogma revisions, party intrigues, bureaucratic backstabbings, and their #1 sport, the destruction of enemies, apostates, and heretics.
Sorry the feeding frenzy has come for you!
But the herd usually moves on quickly once they spot a new victim to gnaw on.