31:30 "What Tolkien set out to do was a kind of concealed delivery mechanism for the Christian mythos." Mary Harrington's gift for expression through language bowls me over. Smart, well-adjusted females with a sense of humor and an infectious laugh are probably my favorite version of human being.
Wow I am homosexual and I struggle all the time with them risk dilemma of having children. Mary is the first person in the feminist movement I heard discussing the idea that every child needs a mom and dad
I really don't think what she said applies to adoption (as opposed to surrogacy) though. Of course the ideal for a child is to grow up with a loving mother and father, but that ideal is far from to be taken for granted for most.
Since UA-cam will not allow me to speak on the subject, I will just have to leave it at this-no. There’s nothing to save or “reclaim.” The ideology was antiwestern from its conception
@@matthewdyer2926 I disagree. Ive read the type of feminism proposed by Mary Wollstonecraft in the mid-1700s and it was reasonable at the time, but it went under the radar of the ruling class. THAT feminism was about Equality and rising women to the same opportunities as men, not Dominance or Supremacy like today’s 3rd wave. Whose subscribers can’t find or point a single law “oppressing” women, but will cry havoc nonetheless.. the blue-haired they/thems
Women weren't non-persons, they were not persons before the law. In my case, there have been only a few instances, or circumstances where I have been before the law. I don't mean criminal issues. I mean there are taxes to be paid. Speed limits to be respected. When you are born there is a birth certificate. It wasn't all that long ago when you didn't face speed limits, or have to have permits. Maters of legal personhood. Many of us would prefer even greater anonymity.
Mary had me at hello 😂 Wonderful interview. I wish we could just drop the labels and be free to believe a combination of ideas and hold various beliefs. Crazy people seem to always hijack important movements and ruin the core good principles.
I recently listened to 2 different videos delving into the occult, anti- Christian origins of the feminist movement. I learned years ago that when the foundation of any movement is evil, I need not go any further.
Wow. Just wow. How does each one of these interviews manage to top the last. Thank you for expanding the reach and sharing your platform with such brilliant cultural warriors! I can’t wait to hear more from Mary!
If men discuss family issues that affect them, our opinions are seen in the culture as second to a woman's opinion; we have become Ginocentric, as a man if you open your mouth, you have a label attached to your head and often with no context to what the man may believe most modern men believe in equality, but feminist have become bullies they have become Holy cows there is no room for men especially in the family, when men express there is no reason for them to participate in family life they are labelled misogynistic yet there is no room for them in family life the labelling and disrespect needs to go, and Men's concerns need to be addressed and not shouted down equilibrium is what is required all we are hearing are the crazies, I am glad to see women like Mary looking and thinking about were we are at this moment of history
Nothing worth “reclaiming” from an ide ology that was ro tten from the very conception. Women being “opp ressed by men” is part of the Antiwhite Narrative
Except, until feminism, they weren't. So, an intellectual perspective is required to achieve those ends. You can call it " good, tradition-based feminism", if you wish.
You want to do something like vote, sure, but do you really need a label for it? No! Would you call equality for advocating for men as Masculinism? No! So this is a ridiculous waste of time.
@@blacksocrates1huh? women having their own bank accounts was an explicit goal of feminism. and the early feminist works made very clear distinctions between men and women - physically and psychologically. log off and open a book.
@@lmr1049 Really? So women couldn't get bank accounts without feminism? Feminism since its inception wanted to rid distinction between men and women. How about you read a book?
@@blacksocrates1 I encourage you to read Feminism Against Progress. Her premise is there were two threads in feminism…we’re talking the Wollstoncraft feminism from the 1800s…the two being “feminism of freedom” and “feminism of care”. The former is the type that wants to flatten the difference between men and women. The latter wants to look out for women’s interests like female only bathrooms in workplaces (that wasn’t a thing once upon a time). She makes a compelling argument that there were solid, helpful ideas that came out of the “femisim of care” but at the advent of the pill, the “feminism of freedom” decisively took over and the other type was forgotten, especially in the US. Even if you don’t want to use the term feminism for anything positive, her book is very insightful and worth a read.
"On your side of the pond, you don't have any federally-mandated maternity leave." Yes. If you want to work, don't get pregnant. There are a number of ways to not get pregnant, at least one of which is free. Your company paying for your sexual decisions is a little bit gross if you think about it, and it's in no way fair to the employer
Agreed and this concept simply doesn't make sense to Brits. You either want the Gov to control your life and take care of you or you don't. There's absolutely nothing stopping companies from offering this as a benefit and they don't. Why? It's not that important to Americans.
Interesting.... Stutter was hard to hear. She spoke about how important intact families were for children but then argued for daycare for young children. Not realizing that there is an all a correlation between an intact family caring for a child and not a stranger while they're young.
Andrew you should have "Rachel Wilson" on so that she can explain why you are right about throwing out Feminism root and branch and your son no relations is wrong.
Liberalism is a fantastic way of organizing a "free society." And yet, as a singular principle, untethered from limiting structures and the cultural traditions that give life it's meaning, it is terrible way for organizing a 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩𝘺 𝘰𝘯𝘦.
I assume Ms. Harrington mean's leftist, and not enlightenment influenced, when she calls modern feminism "aggressively liberal"? The word "liberal" is not well understood in most forums, in my opinion. Or does Ms. Harrington think modern society is too individualist, and that collectivism is conservative? In that case I disagree completely. The modern form of feminism is based in the theory that men, and society have put women in the prison/role/identity, "women" and they have to band together as a group, and take over the power that control's the collective. One lie in feminism, is, that women, and reality, play no part, in the role/identity of women. Another lie, is that "society" is the only influence on future people/society. God/Truth, good and reality, also influence people, as does evil, if we agree that it exists without, in addition to within, currently living people. And while "conservative" is often a useless word itself, I would associate it more with individualism, and enlightenment thinking, than collectivism. As far as I know, there are very few people calling themselves "conservatives" who want to go back to the rule of kings, for example.
Funny how the West still considers everxthing outside of there own Culture as cruelties. Atleast they still have a functioning society and are replacing the old Religions in Europe with theres. This cannot be said about the state of the Western World.
Why do you want to "take back" a word that was never yours? Conservatives are so aimless that they're arguing over whether to be progressives from 20 years ago or progressives from 50 years ago.
I agree. I'm not convinced we need the word feminism. Why not just proclaim to believe in human rights? Are there inalienable rights that women have that don't apply to men? I can't think of any.
@@stephanieshedd5188 Because there are no "Human Rights". Its just made up nonsense and everyone can claim X and Y is a Human Right. There should be only things and laws that work. And you cant hold Men or Women to the same level in everything because they are not the same.
It might be worth taking back because the movement’s name is a language trick, like Black Lives Matter. Feels like you can’t be against it otherwise you’re against black lives. For many girls and very young women it feels like you shouldn’t be against feminism because feminism if FOR women. I am FOR women but abhor modern feminism. But my 14 year old daughter had a harder time understanding what could be wrong with being a “for women” feminist. Mary’s book is very helpful tackling the thing head on, showing she’s FOR women but NOT for nonsense. Don’t misread her…she won’t back down from ANY issue. But it may be that her British pragmatism is showing a bit and does not suit you ;)
I was born in 1950. I marched for the ERA. We passed it. I will always mourn the fact it was never ratified. We only needed 3 states. Texas and 34 other states ratified it, but the states of Carter, the Clintons an Obama didn’t. And they were never asked why not. 1972: Section 1: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3: This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. I think it would have simplified many issues. I consider myself an old school feminist.
Unfortunately, you are in the minority. When polled today, the vast majority of women 18-25 say they do not think they should have to do a whole litany of things including the following for just two examples: 1. Go Dutch on a first date 2. Sign up for selective service It’s pure hypocrisy now, the mainstream feminist position was never about equality. Almost all the prominent feminist leaders were at bare minimum socialists, and at worst full blown communists. Most were also wholly anti-family. Feminism has destroyed the family unit, collapsed birth rates, crushed wages, and ushered in socialism all over the west.
I'm guessing by this you mean you support Candace Owens and her phony conservative ilk in giving a Christian veneer to their stupid, ill informed, click seeking positions. Whoop-de-do.
"Huge economic contributions made by homemakers going into the workforce" By monetizing work they were doing already? Well, that made the little number go up, didn't it. Klavan, I can't believe you are unaware that there's more to life than a GDP number.
@@jimluebke3869 I think you misunderstood. They were talking about the huge economic contribution they made before their style of work was commodified by the Industrial Revolution. That change devalued their contribution. Neither Mary, nor Klavan disagree with that.
Mary is amazing. My only squabble with her is that I could never buy into the "there is no such thing as progress" argument. Yes, the evolution of society is nuanced. Everything has a price, everything is a trade-off. Also, there is such a thing as a overwhelmingly favorable trade off. The trade-off for being free is you have to be responsible for yourself, but considering that the alternative is slavery, I wouldn't say emancipation is not true progress.
She sometimes speaks in hyperbole that can easily be misunderstood. She says she does not believe in progress meaning an axiomatic faith belief from the far left that continuing “forward” (whatever that means) is ALWAYS an inherent good. She takes umbrage with the Obama/MLK/etc phrase “The arc of history is long but it bends toward progress.” She is arguing that ideas of human depravity, human limits and knowledge that everything is a trade off is INCOMPATIBLE with the idea of never ending progress. She’s saying we’ve reached peak progress…and going much further beyond is folly. I encourage you to read her book. It’s in my top 5 from the past couple years. Very helpful.
@@innovationatwork199Picking up on your point, I think she means the essential progress (or not) of humankind. She wouldn’t argue that there haven’t been significant technological advances but would suggest that there is precious little evidence that we have progressed morally or in terms of character. I’m not sure MH believes we have reached ‘peak progress’ - she just doesn’t accept the notion of ‘moral’ progress at all. The ‘arc bending towards progress’ line is the bastard child of the Enlightenment: the likes of Voltaire believed that we could develop a science of society to mirror the progress of the hard sciences. This has led to totalitarianism: the imposition of a pseudo-scientific ideology that claims to be able to change the present and the future on rationalist lines. But humans are not rational to any great degree, have fatal flaws - original sin, if you will - and as Kant famously wrote ‘out of the crooked timber of humanity nothing straight has ever been built’. {Sorry to rant on!}
Klavaness has always been my favourite thing. Mary Harrington giggling is my new favourite thing.
I agree! Her giggle combined with her beautiful accent were just lovely!
@@vivienneb6199 what does that mean?
31:30 "What Tolkien set out to do was a kind of concealed delivery mechanism for the Christian mythos." Mary Harrington's gift for expression through language bowls me over. Smart, well-adjusted females with a sense of humor and an infectious laugh are probably my favorite version of human being.
It's like 30 minutes of revelations, I swear it.
Wow I am homosexual and I struggle all the time with them risk dilemma of having children. Mary is the first person in the feminist movement I heard discussing the idea that every child needs a mom and dad
It might be worth taking a look at Katy Faust’s Them Before Us organization.
I really don't think what she said applies to adoption (as opposed to surrogacy) though. Of course the ideal for a child is to grow up with a loving mother and father, but that ideal is far from to be taken for granted for most.
Well dang, call me a reactionary feminist because this lady is awesome.
Since UA-cam will not allow me to speak on the subject, I will just have to leave it at this-no. There’s nothing to save or “reclaim.” The ideology was antiwestern from its conception
And it's a commie ideology, begin to be pushed by the commies in the early 20th century
I was orphaned in the soviet union at birth and adopted out. She is spot on about that 👌 great interview!
Feminism is alive and well through men like Klavan
classical or 3rd wave?
@@overlex Classical is the root, 3rd wave is the fruit. They cannot be separated.
@@matthewdyer2926 I disagree. Ive read the type of feminism proposed by Mary Wollstonecraft in the mid-1700s and it was reasonable at the time, but it went under the radar of the ruling class.
THAT feminism was about Equality and rising women to the same opportunities as men, not Dominance or Supremacy like today’s 3rd wave. Whose subscribers can’t find or point a single law “oppressing” women, but will cry havoc nonetheless.. the blue-haired they/thems
@@matthewdyer2926BARS 🔥🔥🔥
@@matthewdyer2926😂😂😂😂 man
Women weren't non-persons, they were not persons before the law. In my case, there have been only a few instances, or circumstances where I have been before the law. I don't mean criminal issues. I mean there are taxes to be paid. Speed limits to be respected. When you are born there is a birth certificate. It wasn't all that long ago when you didn't face speed limits, or have to have permits. Maters of legal personhood. Many of us would prefer even greater anonymity.
Mary had me at hello 😂 Wonderful interview. I wish we could just drop the labels and be free to believe a combination of ideas and hold various beliefs. Crazy people seem to always hijack important movements and ruin the core good principles.
You are free
Simp
I agree.
@@natescorner - loser
There was absolutely nothing good about the feminist movement ever. This woman wants to return to the root and soil that produced the rotten fruit.
Fantastic interview. I could listen to this again. Mary is such a philologist. Count me as part of the bookish right.
I am fortunate in that I can choose to never listen to anyone talk about feminism. Thank God.
But what if you could have the best time ever and then propose to her and live happily ever after and she's not a feminist any l😅longer.
I recently listened to 2 different videos delving into the occult, anti- Christian origins of the feminist movement. I learned years ago that when the foundation of any movement is evil, I need not go any further.
Wow. Just wow. How does each one of these interviews manage to top the last. Thank you for expanding the reach and sharing your platform with such brilliant cultural warriors! I can’t wait to hear more from Mary!
Only a religious revival will save us. Pray to Our Mother St. Mary.
Mary is just a delight. I look up to her so much.
If men discuss family issues that affect them, our opinions are seen in the culture as second to a woman's opinion; we have become Ginocentric, as a man if you open your mouth, you have a label attached to your head and often with no context to what the man may believe most modern men believe in equality, but feminist have become bullies they have become Holy cows there is no room for men especially in the family, when men express there is no reason for them to participate in family life they are labelled misogynistic yet there is no room for them in family life the labelling and disrespect needs to go, and Men's concerns need to be addressed and not shouted down equilibrium is what is required all we are hearing are the crazies,
I am glad to see women like Mary looking and thinking about were we are at this moment of history
Mary Harrington isn’t just genuine, she’s a cutie!!
Normaphobia=don't be a square... Heard it all since 1960... Norma-divergence... intrinsically disordered 😢..
Great interview! 🙌
Easily pleased..."great"?
All the good parts of feminism, such that they are, can obtained from traditional values.
Feminism is at best superfluous, at worst harmful.
yes.
Nothing worth “reclaiming” from an ide ology that was ro tten from the very conception. Women being “opp ressed by men” is part of the Antiwhite Narrative
There are no “good parts.” The ide ology was antiwh ite / antiwestern from its conception. Not based in reality but in narrative
It’s like how Hitler made the autobahn. The autobahn may be good but by no means was Hitler good.
Except, until feminism, they weren't. So, an intellectual perspective is required to achieve those ends. You can call it " good, tradition-based feminism", if you wish.
Won't deny I enjoyed Mary Harrington's previous interview more, but I am interested in her book!
You want to do something like vote, sure, but do you really need a label for it? No!
Would you call equality for advocating for men as Masculinism? No!
So this is a ridiculous waste of time.
Love Mary! Thank you Andrew!
Love Mary. Her "reactionary feminism" is a set of ideas a man can subscribe to - therein lies the progress.
Christ is king
Thank you both❤
Reclaiming? Feminism has always been bad
Nonsense. There was a time women couldn't have their own bank account.
@@k.o.hakala2112 how is that an argument for feminism? The goal of feminism was to destroy distinction between men and women. How is that working out?
@@blacksocrates1huh? women having their own bank accounts was an explicit goal of feminism. and the early feminist works made very clear distinctions between men and women - physically and psychologically. log off and open a book.
@@lmr1049 Really? So women couldn't get bank accounts without feminism? Feminism since its inception wanted to rid distinction between men and women. How about you read a book?
@@blacksocrates1
I encourage you to read Feminism Against Progress. Her premise is there were two threads in feminism…we’re talking the Wollstoncraft feminism from the 1800s…the two being “feminism of freedom” and “feminism of care”. The former is the type that wants to flatten the difference between men and women. The latter wants to look out for women’s interests like female only bathrooms in workplaces (that wasn’t a thing once upon a time). She makes a compelling argument that there were solid, helpful ideas that came out of the “femisim of care” but at the advent of the pill, the “feminism of freedom” decisively took over and the other type was forgotten, especially in the US.
Even if you don’t want to use the term feminism for anything positive, her book is very insightful and worth a read.
Thank you!!!
Thank you
Andrew Klavan, you need to go to the doctor and have a check up.
Equality and equity are also two terms whose definitions have become suspect.
"On your side of the pond, you don't have any federally-mandated maternity leave."
Yes.
If you want to work, don't get pregnant. There are a number of ways to not get pregnant, at least one of which is free. Your company paying for your sexual decisions is a little bit gross if you think about it, and it's in no way fair to the employer
Agreed and this concept simply doesn't make sense to Brits. You either want the Gov to control your life and take care of you or you don't. There's absolutely nothing stopping companies from offering this as a benefit and they don't. Why? It's not that important to Americans.
@@nicktopinoplus8393 My company actually gives 1 month to secondary caregivers and 3 months to primary caregivers, but no one is forcing them
@@ProductBasement That's great! I could certainly see that being a trend but I'd never vote for it being mandated.
Interesting.... Stutter was hard to hear. She spoke about how important intact families were for children but then argued for daycare for young children. Not realizing that there is an all a correlation between an intact family caring for a child and not a stranger while they're young.
She was arguing against children going to daycare and argued that children need their mother for at least the first 15 months.
@@veecubed69 but she also said we don't provide a way for mother's to work while their kids are young.
Andrew you should have "Rachel Wilson" on so that she can explain why you are right about throwing out Feminism root and branch and your son no relations is wrong.
Please please please!
Well I'm a bookish trumpy right, wtf!!!!
Brilliant indeed 👏
I would love to be apart of this new happen’n. Beautiful soul💋⚔️🇺🇸🎯🕊
Love your intro music.
I laughed out loud when you said you stabbed Spencer🤣
Liberalism is a fantastic way of organizing a "free society." And yet, as a singular principle, untethered from limiting structures and the cultural traditions that give life it's meaning, it is terrible way for organizing a 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩𝘺 𝘰𝘯𝘦.
Lila Rose has also had a couple of guests in her podcast on the subject, tbh I still haven’t made up my mind lol much to consider 🤔
Good interview, please consider bringing on more cute english women
I assume Ms. Harrington mean's leftist, and not enlightenment influenced, when she calls modern feminism "aggressively liberal"? The word "liberal" is not well understood in most forums, in my opinion. Or does Ms. Harrington think modern society is too individualist, and that collectivism is conservative? In that case I disagree completely.
The modern form of feminism is based in the theory that men, and society have put women in the prison/role/identity, "women" and they have to band together as a group, and take over the power that control's the collective. One lie in feminism, is, that women, and reality, play no part, in the role/identity of women. Another lie, is that "society" is the only influence on future people/society. God/Truth, good and reality, also influence people, as does evil, if we agree that it exists without, in addition to within, currently living people.
And while "conservative" is often a useless word itself, I would associate it more with individualism, and enlightenment thinking, than collectivism. As far as I know, there are very few people calling themselves "conservatives" who want to go back to the rule of kings, for example.
feminism is gay tho.
??? Wtf.
@@adrienne.7685 - you heard me.
@@Sam_T2000 it ain't gay-
@@adrienne.7685 - on the contrary, it is _very_ gay.
@@Sam_T2000 says a man.
Glad to see you guys got the blue shirt memo.😊
#no-too 😮
If Western feminists don't speak against the cruelties women in Muslim culture experience then they are hypocrites.
Funny how the West still considers everxthing outside of there own Culture as cruelties. Atleast they still have a functioning society and are replacing the old Religions in Europe with theres. This cannot be said about the state of the Western World.
If it’s not apparent, they’re only talking about feminism in the US, Canada, and UK
❤❤❤❤❤❤
Why do you want to "take back" a word that was never yours? Conservatives are so aimless that they're arguing over whether to be progressives from 20 years ago or progressives from 50 years ago.
I agree. I'm not convinced we need the word feminism. Why not just proclaim to believe in human rights? Are there inalienable rights that women have that don't apply to men? I can't think of any.
@@stephanieshedd5188 Because there are no "Human Rights". Its just made up nonsense and everyone can claim X and Y is a Human Right. There should be only things and laws that work. And you cant hold Men or Women to the same level in everything because they are not the same.
It might be worth taking back because the movement’s name is a language trick, like Black Lives Matter. Feels like you can’t be against it otherwise you’re against black lives. For many girls and very young women it feels like you shouldn’t be against feminism because feminism if FOR women. I am FOR women but abhor modern feminism. But my 14 year old daughter had a harder time understanding what could be wrong with being a “for women” feminist. Mary’s book is very helpful tackling the thing head on, showing she’s FOR women but NOT for nonsense. Don’t misread her…she won’t back down from ANY issue. But it may be that her British pragmatism is showing a bit and does not suit you ;)
did she have the mic in her nose?
No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
I'll even say it in Hebrew: לא. לא. לא. לא. לא. לא. לא. לא. לא.
😂❤
Tough to interview this woman, she doesn't stop for air. Difficult to ask a question.
"Helm's Deep situation"
Don't be the cave troll carrying the bomb. There wasn't anything it it for him.
75% chance Ben and Jerry are so scared of Candace that they scuttle the debate.
The daily wire is WOKE
I was born in 1950. I marched for the ERA. We passed it. I will always mourn the fact it was never ratified. We only needed 3 states. Texas and 34 other states ratified it, but the states of Carter, the Clintons an Obama didn’t. And they were never asked why not.
1972:
Section 1: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3: This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
I think it would have simplified many issues.
I consider myself an old school feminist.
Unfortunately, you are in the minority. When polled today, the vast majority of women 18-25 say they do not think they should have to do a whole litany of things including the following for just two examples:
1. Go Dutch on a first date
2. Sign up for selective service
It’s pure hypocrisy now, the mainstream feminist position was never about equality. Almost all the prominent feminist leaders were at bare minimum socialists, and at worst full blown communists. Most were also wholly anti-family.
Feminism has destroyed the family unit, collapsed birth rates, crushed wages, and ushered in socialism all over the west.
That would have saved us from Title IX entirely, it would be legally nullified and women's sports simply cease existing when the ERA came into power.
Wasn't necessary, isn't necessary. I'd say we'd be better off putting women back in their 50's role.
Christ is King!
"love thy neighbor"
I'm guessing by this you mean you support Candace Owens and her phony conservative ilk in giving a Christian veneer to their stupid, ill informed, click seeking positions. Whoop-de-do.
@@SuperOldpaint aww offended?
I doubt you believe that, I'm fairly certain you are spitting on Christ for your own demonic reasons.
@@denroy3the Jews killed Jesus
Oooh, I get it! You want to get back to the root and soul that produced the rotten fruit. Genius!
Andrew looks so frustrated most of this interview.
Could it be that she does not have to breath to speak so much?😂
More like they have 30 minutes to go over an entire book.
I love the way Mary explains her points, great interview Andrew.
Christ is King
king of the jews?
This was great… she makes sense, especially about the “normaphobia “ that exists.
"Huge economic contributions made by homemakers going into the workforce"
By monetizing work they were doing already? Well, that made the little number go up, didn't it.
Klavan, I can't believe you are unaware that there's more to life than a GDP number.
I can't believe you're unaware that there's more to Klavan than a concern with the GDP.
@@nnotny It seems extremely out of character for him, is what I'm saying.
@@jimluebke3869
I think you misunderstood. They were talking about the huge economic contribution they made before their style of work was commodified by the Industrial Revolution. That change devalued their contribution. Neither Mary, nor Klavan disagree with that.
Mary is amazing. My only squabble with her is that I could never buy into the "there is no such thing as progress" argument. Yes, the evolution of society is nuanced. Everything has a price, everything is a trade-off. Also, there is such a thing as a overwhelmingly favorable trade off. The trade-off for being free is you have to be responsible for yourself, but considering that the alternative is slavery, I wouldn't say emancipation is not true progress.
Interesting point.
She sometimes speaks in hyperbole that can easily be misunderstood. She says she does not believe in progress meaning an axiomatic faith belief from the far left that continuing “forward” (whatever that means) is ALWAYS an inherent good. She takes umbrage with the Obama/MLK/etc phrase “The arc of history is long but it bends toward progress.” She is arguing that ideas of human depravity, human limits and knowledge that everything is a trade off is INCOMPATIBLE with the idea of never ending progress. She’s saying we’ve reached peak progress…and going much further beyond is folly.
I encourage you to read her book. It’s in my top 5 from the past couple years. Very helpful.
@@innovationatwork199 Your explanations have been very helpful as well!
@@innovationatwork199Picking up on your point, I think she means the essential progress (or not) of humankind. She wouldn’t argue that there haven’t been significant technological advances but would suggest that there is precious little evidence that we have progressed morally or in terms of character. I’m not sure MH believes we have reached ‘peak progress’ - she just doesn’t accept the notion of ‘moral’ progress at all.
The ‘arc bending towards progress’ line is the bastard child of the Enlightenment: the likes of Voltaire believed that we could develop a science of society to mirror the progress of the hard sciences. This has led to totalitarianism: the imposition of a pseudo-scientific ideology that claims to be able to change the present and the future on rationalist lines. But humans are not rational to any great degree, have fatal flaws - original sin, if you will - and as Kant famously wrote ‘out of the crooked timber of humanity nothing straight has ever been built’. {Sorry to rant on!}