This is what I refer to as ideological syndromes. We differ in seeing a symmetry; outside the "woke" culture our side actually is diverse; I hold some views congruent with the "left syndrome" such as reining in corporate power and wealth inequality but at the same time I am not on board with the pronouns and bathrooms.
This is what I refer to as ideological syndromes. We differ in seeing a symmetry; outside the "woke" culture our side actually is diverse; I hold some views congruent with the "left syndrome" such as reining in corporate power and wealth inequality but at the same time I am not on board with the pronouns and bathrooms.
But. The symmetry is broken; left-as-woke is a *stereotype* promoted by the right, whereas in reality a lot of us are disgusted with the uh trans activists and their absolutist stridency.
OTOH—and I expect you will disagree—the right-syndrome is much more homogenous and much less tolerant of any deviation. Sure there are conservatives who think we should leave a little room for orangutans but they don't get invited to CPAC. You're all in for "Trump won" or you get primaried.
Haha, yeah, I don't think we're going to agree on this. But I have to say, I see the identity politics aspect of the left as being just as indispensable politically speaking.
What do you think would happen if a liberal politician started saying "all lives matter" during campaign speeches? Or that there are important differences between men and women that can't be erased with a declaration of pronouns and cross-sex hormones?
It's not necessarily about homogeneity, I strongly suspect most politicians, in private, understand that Trump lost. Just as they understand that there are differences between males and females. But in public, yes, they're all in (or at least silent) because that's the stupid game we're playing. To be extremely clear, I don't endorse this. I find the dishonesty repugnant. I guess we just disagree about the size of the asymmetry.
*Of course* they know Trump lost (a recording of the committee was saying the same as I typed). But they say the words anyway because it's a qualification of membership. So intense is the need to belong that the plain truth recedes to the background. That membership is promoted by the necessity of homogenity.
We are not like that.
Just look at us here. You and I disagree. We don't attack each other for it. We don't call each other names. We continue to respect each other.
This is what I refer to as ideological syndromes. We differ in seeing a symmetry; outside the "woke" culture our side actually is diverse; I hold some views congruent with the "left syndrome" such as reining in corporate power and wealth inequality but at the same time I am not on board with the pronouns and bathrooms.
But. The symmetry is broken; left-as-woke is a *stereotype* promoted by the right, whereas in reality a lot of us are disgusted with the uh trans activists and their absolutist stridency.
OTOH—and I expect you will disagree—the right-syndrome is much more homogenous and much less tolerant of any deviation. Sure there are conservatives who think we should leave a little room for orangutans but they don't get invited to CPAC. You're all in for "Trump won" or you get primaried.
Haha, yeah, I don't think we're going to agree on this. But I have to say, I see the identity politics aspect of the left as being just as indispensable politically speaking.
What do you think would happen if a liberal politician started saying "all lives matter" during campaign speeches? Or that there are important differences between men and women that can't be erased with a declaration of pronouns and cross-sex hormones?
It's not necessarily about homogeneity, I strongly suspect most politicians, in private, understand that Trump lost. Just as they understand that there are differences between males and females. But in public, yes, they're all in (or at least silent) because that's the stupid game we're playing. To be extremely clear, I don't endorse this. I find the dishonesty repugnant. I guess we just disagree about the size of the asymmetry.
*Of course* they know Trump lost (a recording of the committee was saying the same as I typed). But they say the words anyway because it's a qualification of membership. So intense is the need to belong that the plain truth recedes to the background. That membership is promoted by the necessity of homogenity.
We are not like that.
Just look at us here. You and I disagree. We don't attack each other for it. We don't call each other names. We continue to respect each other.
(I hope)
"I hope"
Of course! As you said here recently, "if two people agree on everything, one of them is redundant."😁
My contribution to the corpus of memorable quotes.
Far behind Maxwell Smart and HL Mencken