Actually, I have just now discovered Daniels/Dalrymple via this book.
I actually forget where it was recommended, but I'm glad I ordered a copy and put it at the top of my endless reading list.
In honestly, I'm still finding my balance in regard to these essays. It makes a pretty powerful case. I am still digesting the implications from it, lots of reflection will be needed. It challenges some of my "traditional liberal" perspectives, not just the absurdities of more recent CSJ infused progressivism.
This is one of those experiences where you can't unsee what has been shown, like when I first encountered "women's lib" (as it was called back then).
By this time in my life, I've encountered a number of "new and compelling lenses" through which to view society, and so I regard each as revealing just a facet of the truth, rather than latching onto one of the as The Truth around which to make everything else fit.
I'm not easily stampeded by emotional arguments, but Dalrymple is invoking a much more nuanced persuasion which deserves serious reflection. But I need time to figure out where I agree and disagree and why.
In my own journey, I used to embrace the "liberatory" facets of progresssive liberalism - liberating people from obsolete and repressive customs, structures and thought patterns. Like, say, homophobia, or the condemnation of non-procreative sex. As progressivism started moving towards a new puritanism of sorts, as it started invoking the guilt borrowed from echos of Christianity, as it began to make Procrustean prescriptions, etc - I began to back away from the extremes (when then proceeded to infiltrate the mainstream left). I have been questioning "how did all this go wrong, what wrong turn did liberalism take, and was it optional or inherent from the start?".
Now Dalrymple makes a case that even among many things I found liberatory, many have percolated down to the underclass as destabilizing the civilizing forces restraining the less savory aspects of the human condition. Yikes! Lots of food for thought.
That's a good thing, even if not always comfortable. It's also kind of exciting.
(This is the kind of excitement my wife and I love sharing and thinking about together; I feel very lucky to be in such a partnership. While I was reading this, she was reading "Woke Fragility" and from her comments I think I'll need to read that too. It's great to have a free thinker to explore ideas with!)
----
I'd be glad to hear of rational critics of Dalrymple's views, as I (gently) search for balance. I don't mean those who are driven to screeching by his blasphemy and think calling him names is a good counter-argument, I mean somebody who can present evidence and reasoning to provide balance. Pointers to any such are welcome.
And meanwhile, I'd appreciate any suggestions for where to go next in sampling Dalrymple's writing. Apparently I've been missing out on a lot of good stuff.
I like your third sentence, by the way. Yes, the man can write! I started marking some good passages early on, but then I felt like I'd use up a hiliter filling the book with yellow lines over "the good parts". It feels like kind of peak British low key humor, mixed with a message that resonates authenticity.
You mention "He has a deep understanding of humanity that is truly rare". I think that's one of the things which bothers me about CSJ ideology - it seems to have a shallow one-dimensional view of humanity, seeing everything in terms of privilege/oppression and trying to make every thing fit into that narrative (or suppress it otherwise). There IS a kernel of real insight beneath a lot of CSJ, but then it gets buried in excesses and oversimplifications and weaponization and a perverse moralization. There's not enough wise acknowledgement of the complexity of humanity.
Your history sounds fascinating, by the way. I'm enjoying this.
So much to talk about and share! Here is a favorite essay among Dalrymple’s more recent work, titled “The Age of Cant.” It sums up so much of what irritates me about the self righteousness of the “progressive” left.
I also love his very early writing about Sub Saharan Africa. He discovered many truths about what poverty really is that I independently discovered living deep in India in the mid 1980s and in rural Southern Mexico in the 1970s. I will locate for you. He really, really knows his shit.
Actually, I have just now discovered Daniels/Dalrymple via this book.
I actually forget where it was recommended, but I'm glad I ordered a copy and put it at the top of my endless reading list.
In honestly, I'm still finding my balance in regard to these essays. It makes a pretty powerful case. I am still digesting the implications from it, lots of reflection will be needed. It challenges some of my "traditional liberal" perspectives, not just the absurdities of more recent CSJ infused progressivism.
This is one of those experiences where you can't unsee what has been shown, like when I first encountered "women's lib" (as it was called back then).
By this time in my life, I've encountered a number of "new and compelling lenses" through which to view society, and so I regard each as revealing just a facet of the truth, rather than latching onto one of the as The Truth around which to make everything else fit.
I'm not easily stampeded by emotional arguments, but Dalrymple is invoking a much more nuanced persuasion which deserves serious reflection. But I need time to figure out where I agree and disagree and why.
In my own journey, I used to embrace the "liberatory" facets of progresssive liberalism - liberating people from obsolete and repressive customs, structures and thought patterns. Like, say, homophobia, or the condemnation of non-procreative sex. As progressivism started moving towards a new puritanism of sorts, as it started invoking the guilt borrowed from echos of Christianity, as it began to make Procrustean prescriptions, etc - I began to back away from the extremes (when then proceeded to infiltrate the mainstream left). I have been questioning "how did all this go wrong, what wrong turn did liberalism take, and was it optional or inherent from the start?".
Now Dalrymple makes a case that even among many things I found liberatory, many have percolated down to the underclass as destabilizing the civilizing forces restraining the less savory aspects of the human condition. Yikes! Lots of food for thought.
That's a good thing, even if not always comfortable. It's also kind of exciting.
(This is the kind of excitement my wife and I love sharing and thinking about together; I feel very lucky to be in such a partnership. While I was reading this, she was reading "Woke Fragility" and from her comments I think I'll need to read that too. It's great to have a free thinker to explore ideas with!)
----
I'd be glad to hear of rational critics of Dalrymple's views, as I (gently) search for balance. I don't mean those who are driven to screeching by his blasphemy and think calling him names is a good counter-argument, I mean somebody who can present evidence and reasoning to provide balance. Pointers to any such are welcome.
And meanwhile, I'd appreciate any suggestions for where to go next in sampling Dalrymple's writing. Apparently I've been missing out on a lot of good stuff.
I like your third sentence, by the way. Yes, the man can write! I started marking some good passages early on, but then I felt like I'd use up a hiliter filling the book with yellow lines over "the good parts". It feels like kind of peak British low key humor, mixed with a message that resonates authenticity.
You mention "He has a deep understanding of humanity that is truly rare". I think that's one of the things which bothers me about CSJ ideology - it seems to have a shallow one-dimensional view of humanity, seeing everything in terms of privilege/oppression and trying to make every thing fit into that narrative (or suppress it otherwise). There IS a kernel of real insight beneath a lot of CSJ, but then it gets buried in excesses and oversimplifications and weaponization and a perverse moralization. There's not enough wise acknowledgement of the complexity of humanity.
Your history sounds fascinating, by the way. I'm enjoying this.
So much to talk about and share! Here is a favorite essay among Dalrymple’s more recent work, titled “The Age of Cant.” It sums up so much of what irritates me about the self righteousness of the “progressive” left.
See https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-age-of-cant
I also love his very early writing about Sub Saharan Africa. He discovered many truths about what poverty really is that I independently discovered living deep in India in the mid 1980s and in rural Southern Mexico in the 1970s. I will locate for you. He really, really knows his shit.
And I say this as a lifelong liberal.
Thanks. Great essay, albeit depressing (like the essays in "Life at the Bottom".
What a gem to have discovered.
I can really resonate with the liberalism you have described (in another comment). I so wish it were ascendant today!
And I look forward to more recommendations!