"If they ever "won" and defeated the cisheteropatriarchy, they'd turn on each other immediately to get their MHG (moral high ground) dopamine fix, and because their toolkit is only good for fighting against a common enemy, not for peacefully resolving conflicts even with a former ally."
They haven't won, and they already do that. I'm not …
"If they ever "won" and defeated the cisheteropatriarchy, they'd turn on each other immediately to get their MHG (moral high ground) dopamine fix, and because their toolkit is only good for fighting against a common enemy, not for peacefully resolving conflicts even with a former ally."
They haven't won, and they already do that. I'm not sure how to bring them back to reality but maybe when they get Trump or one of his clones elected, it'll give them the good swift kick in the ladynuts they need.
There's so much similarity between the far left and far right - they merely disagree on whom they hate. What about showing them, "What's in a better, more equitable world for *me*?" Which is pretty much everyone's question about everything. Although we're also dealing with people who exhibit a LOT of psychological problems, largely unaddressed, and their hatreds are how they express their anger at the world.
Mass enforced therapy? I'm joking...
Reading Hate Crime Hoax now by black sociologist Wilfred Reilly who makes a lot of points about how black Americans need to address the problems in their own neighbourhoods, including within themselves. How racism and oppression only count for a small, not insignificant but small, reason for their being left behind. He points out that American whites are suffering from a lot of the same problems and that African, West Indian, and Southeast Asian immigrant kids don't have the same educational and cultural problems American POC do. It's the same situation I face with self-infantilizing feminism, in which women who are good at paying lip service to empowerment quail like frightened bunnies at suggestions of exercising some *real* power and throw tantrums if you suggest that women can do a lot more to help themselves and each other. Lefty antiracism and feminism look largely the same, you could take an article about one or t'other and substitute the word 'black' for 'woman' and vice versa, and post the article on the other social justice blog :)
Steve's thang is to get black people to think about these things. My thang is to get women to think about these things. I'd like to see the alphabet soup set do the same...not all LGBTQetc.'ers are far-left nutbags, plenty of sane, rational people there, including transwomen who get why penises aren't welcome in some women-only venues and support that right to keep them out, at least until we get a few things sorted out (like sex offender 'trans' and 'women' who act rather a lot like alpha male bullies).
> "They haven't won, and they already do that. I'm not sure how to bring them back to reality but maybe when they get Trump or one of his clones elected, it'll give them the good swift kick in the ladynuts they need."
Alas, the last dose of Trump had a lot to do with the woke train jumping the rails, for multiple reasons. Extremists on each side thrive on each other, as a way to bypass rational thinking - "look over there!!".
Also, learning from experience depends on closing the loop - correctly associating a good or bad outcome with the major causes, so one can attempt to have more or less of said factors in the future. One of my largest functional critiques of neo-progressivism is that it's very weak at that very thing - treating a proposed solution as a hypothesis to be reality tested and adjusted or abandoned if it fails to produce the intended result (eg: reducing rather than increasing racial bias). Because their policies are largely dictated by moral arguments rather than on the basis of pragmatic improvements, and promoted through ad hominem attacks rather than reason or persuasion, they become detached from reason and evidence, and from respecting feedback from reality. So they often double down instead, because it's only reality which is not complying; their morality-centered arguments (or rationales) are untouched by such feedback. They made no testable promises of results from following their strategy, only a moral argument for why "it must be done" because the nominal goal is unquestionable.
One of my own dictums is that even a very strong moral argument doesn't make a dysfunctional strategy magically become functional, or a counterproductive one become productive. If a program is failing or backfiring, shouting "but SLAVERY!" might help to keep it funded but won't make it work.
In that context, I think another dose of Trump would likely derail them even more, rather than invite them back to reality. As much as I dislike Trump, I can see that what conservative call TDS has some reality. (That is, he can be a real mess, and people's reactions to him can also be dysfunction too).
"If they ever "won" and defeated the cisheteropatriarchy, they'd turn on each other immediately to get their MHG (moral high ground) dopamine fix, and because their toolkit is only good for fighting against a common enemy, not for peacefully resolving conflicts even with a former ally."
They haven't won, and they already do that. I'm not sure how to bring them back to reality but maybe when they get Trump or one of his clones elected, it'll give them the good swift kick in the ladynuts they need.
There's so much similarity between the far left and far right - they merely disagree on whom they hate. What about showing them, "What's in a better, more equitable world for *me*?" Which is pretty much everyone's question about everything. Although we're also dealing with people who exhibit a LOT of psychological problems, largely unaddressed, and their hatreds are how they express their anger at the world.
Mass enforced therapy? I'm joking...
Reading Hate Crime Hoax now by black sociologist Wilfred Reilly who makes a lot of points about how black Americans need to address the problems in their own neighbourhoods, including within themselves. How racism and oppression only count for a small, not insignificant but small, reason for their being left behind. He points out that American whites are suffering from a lot of the same problems and that African, West Indian, and Southeast Asian immigrant kids don't have the same educational and cultural problems American POC do. It's the same situation I face with self-infantilizing feminism, in which women who are good at paying lip service to empowerment quail like frightened bunnies at suggestions of exercising some *real* power and throw tantrums if you suggest that women can do a lot more to help themselves and each other. Lefty antiracism and feminism look largely the same, you could take an article about one or t'other and substitute the word 'black' for 'woman' and vice versa, and post the article on the other social justice blog :)
Steve's thang is to get black people to think about these things. My thang is to get women to think about these things. I'd like to see the alphabet soup set do the same...not all LGBTQetc.'ers are far-left nutbags, plenty of sane, rational people there, including transwomen who get why penises aren't welcome in some women-only venues and support that right to keep them out, at least until we get a few things sorted out (like sex offender 'trans' and 'women' who act rather a lot like alpha male bullies).
>"They haven't won, and they already do that."
And today I saw this:
https://quillette.com/2022/05/17/confessions-of-a-social-justice-meme-maker/
Pretty much what I was referencing. Except in this case, there was the financial payoff of making a living involved as well - which is not rare.
What a great article! Excellent breakfast reading. Thanks for sharing it.
> "They haven't won, and they already do that. I'm not sure how to bring them back to reality but maybe when they get Trump or one of his clones elected, it'll give them the good swift kick in the ladynuts they need."
Alas, the last dose of Trump had a lot to do with the woke train jumping the rails, for multiple reasons. Extremists on each side thrive on each other, as a way to bypass rational thinking - "look over there!!".
Also, learning from experience depends on closing the loop - correctly associating a good or bad outcome with the major causes, so one can attempt to have more or less of said factors in the future. One of my largest functional critiques of neo-progressivism is that it's very weak at that very thing - treating a proposed solution as a hypothesis to be reality tested and adjusted or abandoned if it fails to produce the intended result (eg: reducing rather than increasing racial bias). Because their policies are largely dictated by moral arguments rather than on the basis of pragmatic improvements, and promoted through ad hominem attacks rather than reason or persuasion, they become detached from reason and evidence, and from respecting feedback from reality. So they often double down instead, because it's only reality which is not complying; their morality-centered arguments (or rationales) are untouched by such feedback. They made no testable promises of results from following their strategy, only a moral argument for why "it must be done" because the nominal goal is unquestionable.
One of my own dictums is that even a very strong moral argument doesn't make a dysfunctional strategy magically become functional, or a counterproductive one become productive. If a program is failing or backfiring, shouting "but SLAVERY!" might help to keep it funded but won't make it work.
In that context, I think another dose of Trump would likely derail them even more, rather than invite them back to reality. As much as I dislike Trump, I can see that what conservative call TDS has some reality. (That is, he can be a real mess, and people's reactions to him can also be dysfunction too).