I agree, and when you promote an ideology of extreme oppression, there has to be an oppressor or it makes no sense. The liberal worldview uses a Marxist framework for sure.
Here's a ChatGPT summary: - The event was organized by the Unheard Club and featured Helen Pluckrose and Eric Kaufmann. - Helen Pluckrose is a cultural critic and co-author of "Cynical Theories" and "The Counterweight Handbook." - Eric Kaufmann is an expert on populism and author of "White Shift" and "Taboo." - The discussion focused on whether liberals started the culture wars and the current state of the Western liberal project. - Eric Kaufmann argued that left liberals are to blame for the culture wars due to their emphasis on diversity, inclusion, and equity without bounds. - Kaufmann believes that left liberalism has evolved through well-meaning but excessive empathy, leading to cultural extremism. - Helen Pluckrose agreed that liberalism has been misapplied but emphasized that the problem lies in the progressive aim to fix things even when they are not broken. - Pluckrose argued that the critical social justice movement has conflated liberalism with identity politics, leading to a backlash. - Both speakers discussed the role of government intervention in education, with Kaufmann supporting bans on indoctrination in schools and Pluckrose advocating for a balanced presentation of ideas. - The conversation also touched on the limits of free speech, with both speakers generally supporting free speech but acknowledging exceptions in cases of direct harm. - The event concluded with a discussion on the future of liberalism and the potential for a post-liberal world. - Main message: The culture wars are a result of the misapplication of liberal principles, particularly by left liberals, and the solution lies in returning to a more balanced and less coercive form of liberalism.
The constitution says simply that the Central government cannot establish an official religion. That says nothing about states having prayer at state government events of schools having prayers.These ARE different things
They did in the US. For example, they keep claiming Roe v Wade is anti-abortion, when in fact it puts the decision in the hands of each state, much closer to the people than Federal - more representative, not less.
It is quite easy to separate the two strains of Liberalism that Eric speaks of - the negative and the positive liberalisms. The negative liberalism is based on individual rights as freedom of action, and it's political expression is Capitalism. The positive liberalism is anti-individual and anti-Capitalist, and is actually anti-liberal. So, really his point should be that "positive liberalism" is not a form of Liberalism. I wonder why he fails to see this. Perhaps he has other reasons for smearing the concept "Liberalism".
How can we have a monarch who swears to "defend the faith" and a church that is established and holds a special place within the state if we don't teach Christianity in school in preference to other religions?
I agree completely. As late as the 1980s Australian government schools were still saying the Lord's Prayer and reading Bible stories. There is absolutely no reason to do anything to accommodate other religions, let them be uncomfortable.
How can we tolerate CofE pushing the woke agenda? It's responsible for 1million kids in the UK and is trying to sneak trans activist guidance out. Flourishing for All, consultation closes end of the month.
It's because we have a monarch who is a figurehead rather than a Tudor monarch. The Tudor monarchs used inter Christian conflct to defned the faith. The current monarch defends the faith through example rather than coercion or compulsion.
It's useful to have Eric testing Helen's thesis. It's made me realise how much closer to James' perspective I have become. I am convinced this discussion is dealing with the Hydra's heads, James is studying the life cycle of the Hydra. Because there is a swarm of Hydras, and we need to understand how they breed and what they feed on.
Labour is highly likely going to make a bad situation much worse and that will, if the Conservatives don't right their ship, will force everyone to vote Reform - or simply things will start to spiral societally-wise as the government has to get more and more authoritarian to keep peoples' deep frustrations and sense of betrayal in check.
There! In the 13th minute, when Helen describes the classic liberal tenets that should have guided the Liberal spirit, but somehow kept timid and was tamped down by other [nefarious] forces.
It's not a matter of celebrating diversity. The issue is mandating diversity. Stick to your libertarian principles. All legal activity should be voluntary. None should be mandatory.
Equity is the demanded outcome of the CRT activist, the femunists, the disability crowd, the Alphabet people, the environmentalists etc. Economic equity is called communism. They all frequently expose anti-capitalism in the same breath as their main demands. They all have different wrappers but they are all red underneath!
My workplace 'allyship' training involved taking lessons from Angela Davis and propaganda full of communist symbols. We also found DEI staff promoting ethno-communist literature. Perhaps some of them aren't communists, however it's not like these people will have a conversation. The Cordial Curiosity video with the CRT 'educators' is is revealing.
As usual Helen Pluckrose is the most well reasoned and clearly articulate person in discussion. Even when I disagree with her I see how she came to a conclusion.
The UK and various other countries already have generally lower bars for speech protection in the US. Does she think those laws or policies are such an imposition? Also, teachers dont have "free speech" at tax funded public schools in the US, at least not in quite the same way as a regular citizen does in the public square. School curriculum in the US has always been under influence by parents and taxpayers via school boards, etc. for better and worse.
Post-WW2 TV Shows + TV Music + TV Advertising. Boomer kid stuff. Roughly 1950 to 1975. Most Americans today cannot fathom what a damaging chainsaw post-WW2 TV was for American life.
I don't think libertarians miss the institutions. I guess it depends on the kind of institutions. There's nothing wrong with prohibiting DEI in government and government initiatives, it goes well with separation of church and state. But once you get to specifics of "intervention", the dispute will become "does the government have a role in shaping society?", and that's a Pandora box of the sort pointed out by the presenter.
It is not libertarian to allow public schools to teach everything and anything. There is no libertarianism involved when an institution has as its backer an entity with the power of taxation. Freedom of speech is for the citizens, not for state employees as such.
DEI is open racism, open sexism, open discrimination in all its forms. The under representation of group x in field y is the fault of group x not society.
Social Justice is good, but Social Justice isn't just, "make everyone equal". That's the simplistic answer of the communists, and we've seen where that got us.
What is she chuntering on about in regards to slavery? Most Whites were not slaveowners, and Blacks, Native Americans and Jews were engaged in slwvery to the same, sometimes even a greater, extent.
To me this "left liberalism", more to the left than a traditional central social democracy, is just the new type of comunism, a comunism that relies on a liberal market. Reminds me of my country before 89, when I was suppose to wisper if I was telling something to my mother so that the "security" police is not hearing through the walls, and when my rigts as an individual, though recognised by UN Charter, went to the 2nd line of importance if they were hurting the "party".
@@JH-ji6cj I went to college the fall after Kent State. The Marxists from NYU were already all over my small Baptist college like a cheap suit. If you want context I can give you plenty. After they lost the issue that was going to radicalize suburban American youth they were absorbed into academia, into tenured teaching positions, first in the humanities, where they taught Harvey Wasserman's revisionist history as American history, then colonized the journalism schools and finally, the law schools. you can have as many citations from source documents as you rish but I lived in, absorbed it through the skin contemporaneously, and know whereove I speak. "Too Old To Be a Troll"...Lol
@davidjennings4589 hey, I do actually appreciate the explanation. You got the ire of me reading many similar comments where I had absolutely no clue what the comment was referencing. I can imagine it must be frustrating to see just how effective subversive militant tactics can be esp when performed by those who cut their teeth on understanding WW2 propaganda techniques with advert marketing tools.
@@JH-ji6cj the hard left has always been behind the well meaning new deal Democrat liberals, pushing for another step left. Now real liberalism is passe' . The hard left is brutal. Angela Davis pretty much blew her cover when she held a shotgun to a judges neck and promised to kill us all, but most Marxists have never declared themselves, disingenuously passing themselves off as libertarians or progressives. My Baptist college was quite liberal, pass/fail, speakers on campus like Bernadette Devlin and Jane fonda, all of it. It precipitated a rift in the Baptist convention, but the Marxists who wormed their way into tenure in the seventies stayed their whole Career's, retiring now after forty or fify years influencing three generations or more of American students without ever declaring themselves. NPR describes Angela Davis as a 'civil rights pioneer' and a 'blues music historian'; an effort to re-invent herself or an effort at revisionist history in itself. As you may style it.
@@JH-ji6cjmy reply to your reply got lost in space but I wrote a reply to my own comment that struck, I think. I did not try to rewrite the original. Culture is going to change whether you wish it or not, you just may not be alive to see it, but you probably will, the rip van Winkle syndrome effects everyone eventually, if you live long enough to realize the tri cornered hats and buckle shoes have gone out of style. I still have long hair, it's thin now, but long.
I was admiring how attractive the host was when she suddenly revealed she votes Green party! How can you be aware and yet vote for their oppressive futile policy setting!?
It was generational also. My generation, I was born in 1952 and grew up with white and colored restrooms were over it as soon as we were exposed to it.
If you assume, that human beings are born with a moral sense, and that inequality and injustice are offensive to it, a view not necessarily based in religion but in the secular documents of our, not the Marxist, revolution, our social compact then it follows that that revulsion was a constant and that society's ability to overcome it diminished over time, by the 1960's it had virtually disappeared prior to or in tandem with the civil rights movement itself. When I asked my father where he lost his racial animus, if he ever had any, as I had ever heard him speak down to or about anyone, he, a white southerner replied, "Inchon". Where the US Army d3 facto desegregated during the Korean war. But his racial prejudice, or preference had been grained in, in childhood, he played all in a group with the neighborhood children, an inter racial group of children in the days before small town life became segregated by the automobile by actual physical removal. By the time he was seven or eight years old he had been schooled in the requirements of adult society, to the social exclusion of blacks, or coloreds. I remember quite clearly that my cousins in the South, even though they had attended segregated schools told their parents in no uncertain terms that if their friends, all their friends were not welcome at their wedding reception at the country club, that they would not be having their wedding reception at the country club. The power of the parents, enforced when they were children had already shifted by the late sixties to the moral sensibilities of the children. A generational shift and a cultural shift across the board, helped by the breakdown of regionalism, the interstate highway system and national television. All were ongoing. John Lewis had no interest in seeing his civil rights movement governed by white liberals from the north and co-opted for their revolutionary or ideological purposes as the Scottsboro Boys case had been. The civil rights movement happened not because it was forced by activism, but because it's time had come.
@@BruceWing I have a hard time responding to or processing that. Religion was evident in the society like racism but both seemed to be on the wane. I had no personal attraction to racism or religion. But my experience as an army brat may have made a material difference. I spent time in occupied Germany where the adult military housing was segregated but the schools were not and blacks were moving rapidly up through the ranks to command positions. Colin Powell and Elvis were both stationed there when I was living on Post under the protection of the MP's. The same building on Post was the Catholic Church, the synagogue, the Methodist Presbyterian and Baptist services were all conducted in the same building. My parents never darkened the door of a Church during my lifetime except on tours. We did go to Christmas night service in Worms where Martin Luther nailed his notice to the door and escaped the resulting trial by hopping out the window. 🥴
@@BruceWing certainly that has been true since revolutionary times but I was always uncomfortable with public prayers at public events like baseball games. But neither in military dependent schools or civilian schools di I ever remember being subjected to sanctioned prayers.
@@davidjennings4589 - The abolitionist movement in America was led by the Quakers. The defense of the Africans by John Adams in the Amistad trial was funded by the Quakers… as was the funding of their return to Africa. The entire American Civil Rights movement was grounded in a fusion of Christian thoughts and American ideals. John Wilberforce of England was the key driver of the abolition of slavery in England and the use of that country’s military to stop the Atlantic slave trade and to stop slavery in Africa. He did that BECAUSE he converted to evangelical Christianity in 1785. Buddhism has been very influential on human behavior as well. One of its key tenets, karma, has encouraged literally billions of people to do good acts. One can, of course, point to the history and see examples of religion being used for ill (eg American southerners using Bible to support slavery, Catholic Church’s cover-up of sexual abuse behavior of priests under the guise of Christian forgiveness) My point is that the issue is not nearly as cut and dried as you suggest.
Silly question! If two political ideologies grow and are mutually exclusive in their worldviews then conflict results. Its not a finger wagging conpetition here guys
I think the culture war in the US as we know it today is rooted in the Reagan Revolution. Maybe a person has to be as old as myself to understand this, but the religious right was not part of the GOP prior to Reagan. Right-wing Christians or social conservatives, were more likely to be Democrat than Republican in the 70s. Reagan's Revolution eventually transformed the south from a Democratic Party stronghold to a Republican one by shifting focus from economic and foreign policy issues to social issues. The culture war as we know it today. In the 80s, we summed up Republican identity politics as 'gays, guns and abortion.' Homosexuality wasn't decriminalized in the 1980s as Pluckrose asserts, it wasn't until 2003 in the US. This is due to the new Republican Party formed by the Reagan Revolution imo. They defined the gay rights movement by their obsessive opposition to gays gaining the most basic rights. Gays in the military decided elections in the 1990s. Not much has changed really. They finally gave up on their gay obsessions because of public opinion turning against them, but they replaced it with 'trans' because Woke extremism made that necessary. However, nobody on the left trusts them after a half century of using LGBT people as political pawns in the most despicable ways imaginable. This doesn't excuse the left of today, but there is a cause and effect imo. Political division prior to 1980 was largely labor vs 'country club Republicans.' The economic power base. Division around civil rights laws also fueled the divide but a solid majority supported these changes eventually. Keep in mind that the so called Moral Majority of the 80s were very much like the Woke of today and 'social justice' liberals were much more representative of a live and let live worldview. The Christian right did not have much of a voice prior to Reagan. I don't know if understanding this serves any purpose but as long as the religious right dictates Republican identity politics, we're unlikely to see much unity. Of course much of the fault lies with the left taking an extremist turn over the last decade but I think some of the fault lies with Republicans. We stopped trusting them decades ago because of their illiberal obsessions and hate mongering. Many voters won't hear conservatives out because of this history. Trust is earned. Maybe it's important to remember that the GOP was not always dependent on religion to maintain power. Today, many conservative seem to be suggesting that a return to Christianity is the solution to our cold civil war. That's no more of a political solution than promoting the Woke cult, which is more like a religion than anything else. We need a return to Enlightenment values, freedom of religion and freedom from religion. Nothing at all wrong with people embracing Christianity as a personal solution to life's struggles, but why is this equated with partisan politics? It has nothing to do with what we should expect from Congress or a president. Barry Goldwater, 'the father of US conservatism', warned against this marriage of the religious right and the GOP over 40 years ago. It's anti-Libertarian. Biden will likely lose in November but another Democrat could easily win in 2028. On and on we go with this 'us vs them' tribalism. Seems to me that a third way should be embraced. A classical liberal/Libertarian identity. This is forming in the media and more voters are registered independent than Republican or Democrat so there's hope. I think the left vs right civil war is a religious war. It's a 'good vs evil' worldview, a belief in deities may be irrelevant. Both sides believe in their moral superiority over 'the other.' Once that's understood, it's easier to be independent imo.
You lost me at the moral majority being like the woke of today. How you can conflate Anita Bryant's 'rather my child dead than gay' and Jerry Falwell with anything other than rabid anti-human rights is beyond me. You seem to have entirely missed the Neoliberal ideology that Reagan (and Thatcher) embraced, and which is at the heart of every social and economic ill we are living with today.
@@lucydayLucida Sounds like you've been captured. Believing you're on the side of the angels because of your political tribe is very much like the Christian right. The hysterical left of 2024 is as vile and hateful as anything that came out of the religious right in the 1980s. With their recent alliance with Hamas, they may be worse. The far left is descending into Nazi-like antisemitism covered in rainbows and unicorns. Insane. The culture war is a distraction from the neoliberal, uniparty economic agenda. Keeping us hating one another. Both Trump and Biden increased our debt to shocking levels for example. Only RFK Jr wants to talk about it and of course, Dems kicked him to the curb just like Bernie Sanders. Voters would rather demonize one another, prepare for civil war. Bill Clinton continued what Reagan started and Obama was basically a carbon copy of Clinton.
@lucydayLucida people often seem to forget or leave out how Clinton, for example, largely furthered all of it via things like NAFTA and deregulation of the financial sector etc. People can blame Reagan and Thatcher for the start but at least Democrats in the US largely bought into or at least participated in the neoliberalism project by the early 90s
@@chickenfishhybrid44 Yes, world-wide the left embraced it too. The Overton window shifting everything rightwards and nothing really changes no matter which side gets in any more.
@@chickenfishhybrid44Free trade and regulation are entirely separate issues. There's nothing inherently right wing about free trade, unlike deregulation.
The notion that indoctrination can be separated from education seems both naive and absurd. Indoctrination is a prerequisite for education. How will children learn if they aren't indoctrinated into behaving in an orderly fashion and into believing that learning is valuable and good for them? How will they learn science if they aren't indoctrinated into believing scientific values and narratives? How will they learn history if they aren't indoctrinated with a particular historical narrative? Maybe you're only concerned about political indoctrination but are you really going to teach political science and economics without indoctrinating students into rejecting Nazism and slavery? Besides, if they aren't indoctrinated by the schools, then they will be indoctrinated by social media influencers, among others.
When you create a protected class, you create an unprotected class.
I agree, and when you promote an ideology of extreme oppression, there has to be an oppressor or it makes no sense. The liberal worldview uses a Marxist framework for sure.
Here's a ChatGPT summary:
- The event was organized by the Unheard Club and featured Helen Pluckrose and Eric Kaufmann.
- Helen Pluckrose is a cultural critic and co-author of "Cynical Theories" and "The Counterweight Handbook."
- Eric Kaufmann is an expert on populism and author of "White Shift" and "Taboo."
- The discussion focused on whether liberals started the culture wars and the current state of the Western liberal project.
- Eric Kaufmann argued that left liberals are to blame for the culture wars due to their emphasis on diversity, inclusion, and equity without bounds.
- Kaufmann believes that left liberalism has evolved through well-meaning but excessive empathy, leading to cultural extremism.
- Helen Pluckrose agreed that liberalism has been misapplied but emphasized that the problem lies in the progressive aim to fix things even when they are not broken.
- Pluckrose argued that the critical social justice movement has conflated liberalism with identity politics, leading to a backlash.
- Both speakers discussed the role of government intervention in education, with Kaufmann supporting bans on indoctrination in schools and Pluckrose advocating for a balanced presentation of ideas.
- The conversation also touched on the limits of free speech, with both speakers generally supporting free speech but acknowledging exceptions in cases of direct harm.
- The event concluded with a discussion on the future of liberalism and the potential for a post-liberal world.
- Main message: The culture wars are a result of the misapplication of liberal principles, particularly by left liberals, and the solution lies in returning to a more balanced and less coercive form of liberalism.
The constitution says simply that the Central government cannot establish an official religion. That says nothing about states having prayer at state government events of schools having prayers.These ARE different things
They did in the US. For example, they keep claiming Roe v Wade is anti-abortion, when in fact it puts the decision in the hands of each state, much closer to the people than Federal - more representative, not less.
And now they have Kennedy running for president saying he will allow abortion up until birth.
Always good to hear from Helen!
It is quite easy to separate the two strains of Liberalism that Eric speaks of - the negative and the positive liberalisms. The negative liberalism is based on individual rights as freedom of action, and it's political expression is Capitalism. The positive liberalism is anti-individual and anti-Capitalist, and is actually anti-liberal. So, really his point should be that "positive liberalism" is not a form of Liberalism. I wonder why he fails to see this. Perhaps he has other reasons for smearing the concept "Liberalism".
How can we have a monarch who swears to "defend the faith" and a church that is established and holds a special place within the state if we don't teach Christianity in school in preference to other religions?
I agree completely. As late as the 1980s Australian government schools were still saying the Lord's Prayer and reading Bible stories. There is absolutely no reason to do anything to accommodate other religions, let them be uncomfortable.
@AndyJarman We can't, or at least if Christianity isn't taught these institutions are likely to disappear
@@courtilz1012 I agree
How can we tolerate CofE pushing the woke agenda? It's responsible for 1million kids in the UK and is trying to sneak trans activist guidance out. Flourishing for All, consultation closes end of the month.
It's because we have a monarch who is a figurehead rather than a Tudor monarch. The Tudor monarchs used inter Christian conflct to defned the faith. The current monarch defends the faith through example rather than coercion or compulsion.
Why are we being taught what to think rather than how to think?
Marx may have had substantial critiques of 'wokeism', but he would've no doubt seen its destructive potential.
It's useful to have Eric testing Helen's thesis. It's made me realise how much closer to James' perspective I have become.
I am convinced this discussion is dealing with the Hydra's heads, James is studying the life cycle of the Hydra.
Because there is a swarm of Hydras, and we need to understand how they breed and what they feed on.
I love the setting for this.... echoes the french salons of days past
Thank you Flo, Helen and Eric for offering us intelligent and healthy ideas regarding the complexity of our social environment.
Labour is highly likely going to make a bad situation much worse and that will, if the Conservatives don't right their ship, will force everyone to vote Reform - or simply things will start to spiral societally-wise as the government has to get more and more authoritarian to keep peoples' deep frustrations and sense of betrayal in check.
The Conservatives have had years to right their ship and haven't.
@@Khayyam-vg9fw That's certainly true
Why are children at school being enabled rather than taught while adults in the workplace are continuously being trained?
There! In the 13th minute, when Helen describes the classic liberal tenets that should have guided the Liberal spirit, but somehow kept timid and was tamped down by other [nefarious] forces.
Activists are paid by interested party to sustain this cultural war..
It's not a matter of celebrating diversity. The issue is mandating diversity. Stick to your libertarian principles. All legal activity should be voluntary. None should be mandatory.
Unfortunately schoolchildren are forced to "celebrate" LGBTXYZ, BLM, etc. in order to ensure passing grades.
Secularism in schools and institutions has led to "science as ideology."
Can someone please explain this to James Lindsay because he seems to think its all communism
its a very american liberal radicalism thing
James Lindsay rejects this hypothesis, Carl Benjamin tried to explain it to him, but James is very protective over Liberalism, he's hardcore.
Equity is the demanded outcome of the CRT activist, the femunists, the disability crowd, the Alphabet people, the environmentalists etc.
Economic equity is called communism.
They all frequently expose anti-capitalism in the same breath as their main demands.
They all have different wrappers but they are all red underneath!
My workplace 'allyship' training involved taking lessons from Angela Davis and propaganda full of communist symbols. We also found DEI staff promoting ethno-communist literature. Perhaps some of them aren't communists, however it's not like these people will have a conversation. The Cordial Curiosity video with the CRT 'educators' is is revealing.
"American liberal radicalism" is merely euphemism for communism.
I saw the thumbnail, and just came here to comment YES!
As usual Helen Pluckrose is the most well reasoned and clearly articulate person in discussion. Even when I disagree with her I see how she came to a conclusion.
I remember seeing a bit too much of Justin Trudeau 's mother at Studio 54 in New York
Audio feedback. Helen's voice comes across as being a bit muffled. Perhaps the microphone is not optimally placed.
Volume too low
Censorship works really well, so well that most successful censorship efforts are often forgotten. Have you heard of the Cathars? Exactly!
Yes.
The UK and various other countries already have generally lower bars for speech protection in the US. Does she think those laws or policies are such an imposition?
Also, teachers dont have "free speech" at tax funded public schools in the US, at least not in quite the same way as a regular citizen does in the public square. School curriculum in the US has always been under influence by parents and taxpayers via school boards, etc. for better and worse.
Post-WW2 TV Shows + TV Music + TV Advertising. Boomer kid stuff. Roughly 1950 to 1975. Most Americans today cannot fathom what a damaging chainsaw post-WW2 TV was for American life.
Eric is the greatest at this.
Love Helen too!!
I don't think libertarians miss the institutions. I guess it depends on the kind of institutions. There's nothing wrong with prohibiting DEI in government and government initiatives, it goes well with separation of church and state. But once you get to specifics of "intervention", the dispute will become "does the government have a role in shaping society?", and that's a Pandora box of the sort pointed out by the presenter.
It is not libertarian to allow public schools to teach everything and anything. There is no libertarianism involved when an institution has as its backer an entity with the power of taxation. Freedom of speech is for the citizens, not for state employees as such.
DEI is open racism, open sexism, open discrimination in all its forms.
The under representation of group x in field y is the fault of group x not society.
Exactly. Parents and tax payers have always had some influence over schools and curriculum via school boards etc.
Don’t force your shit onto others!! 🤦🏽♀️🤦🏽♀️
“That’s not real [insert ism]”
Social Justice is good, but Social Justice isn't just, "make everyone equal". That's the simplistic answer of the communists, and we've seen where that got us.
What is she chuntering on about in regards to slavery? Most Whites were not slaveowners, and Blacks, Native Americans and Jews were engaged in slwvery to the same, sometimes even a greater, extent.
“ 1:00:00 “total pizzagate hoaxes”…. ? Jeffrey Epstein, Franklin Scandal, Craig Spence, operation climax, Barney Frank, Michael Aquino?
😢White Fear 💔
To me this "left liberalism", more to the left than a traditional central social democracy, is just the new type of comunism, a comunism that relies on a liberal market. Reminds me of my country before 89, when I was suppose to wisper if I was telling something to my mother so that the "security" police is not hearing through the walls, and when my rigts as an individual, though recognised by UN Charter, went to the 2nd line of importance if they were hurting the "party".
Yes! I was one and we/they are classist snobs.
One what?
@@jackiedelvalle Liberal
Of course they did.
Thanks for the context clues. We all definitely know what you're referencing, lol.
@@JH-ji6cj I went to college the fall after Kent State. The Marxists from NYU were already all over my small Baptist college like a cheap suit. If you want context I can give you plenty. After they lost the issue that was going to radicalize suburban American youth they were absorbed into academia, into tenured teaching positions, first in the humanities, where they taught Harvey Wasserman's revisionist history as American history, then colonized the journalism schools and finally, the law schools. you can have as many citations from source documents as you rish but I lived in, absorbed it through the skin contemporaneously, and know whereove I speak. "Too Old To Be a Troll"...Lol
@davidjennings4589 hey, I do actually appreciate the explanation. You got the ire of me reading many similar comments where I had absolutely no clue what the comment was referencing. I can imagine it must be frustrating to see just how effective subversive militant tactics can be esp when performed by those who cut their teeth on understanding WW2 propaganda techniques with advert marketing tools.
@@JH-ji6cj the hard left has always been behind the well meaning new deal Democrat liberals, pushing for another step left. Now real liberalism is passe' .
The hard left is brutal. Angela Davis pretty much blew her cover when she held a shotgun to a judges neck and promised to kill us all, but most Marxists have never declared themselves, disingenuously passing themselves off as libertarians or progressives. My Baptist college was quite liberal, pass/fail, speakers on campus like Bernadette Devlin and Jane fonda, all of it. It precipitated a rift in the Baptist convention, but the Marxists who wormed their way into tenure in the seventies stayed their whole Career's, retiring now after forty or fify years influencing three generations or more of American students without ever declaring themselves. NPR describes Angela Davis as a 'civil rights pioneer' and a 'blues music historian'; an effort to re-invent herself or an effort at revisionist history in itself. As you may style it.
@@JH-ji6cjmy reply to your reply got lost in space but I wrote a reply to my own comment that struck, I think. I did not try to rewrite the original. Culture is going to change whether you wish it or not, you just may not be alive to see it, but you probably will, the rip van Winkle syndrome effects everyone eventually, if you live long enough to realize the tri cornered hats and buckle shoes have gone out of style.
I still have long hair, it's thin now, but long.
Self-justifying, self-perpetuating talking shop.
I was admiring how attractive the host was when she suddenly revealed she votes Green party! How can you be aware and yet vote for their oppressive futile policy setting!?
It was generational also. My generation, I was born in 1952 and grew up with white and colored restrooms were over it as soon as we were exposed to it.
If you assume, that human beings are born with a moral sense, and that inequality and injustice are offensive to it, a view not necessarily based in religion but in the secular documents of our, not the Marxist, revolution, our social compact then it follows that that revulsion was a constant and that society's ability to overcome it diminished over time, by the 1960's it had virtually disappeared prior to or in tandem with the civil rights movement itself. When I asked my father where he lost his racial animus, if he ever had any, as I had ever heard him speak down to or about anyone, he, a white southerner replied, "Inchon". Where the US Army d3 facto desegregated during the Korean war. But his racial prejudice, or preference had been grained in, in childhood, he played all in a group with the neighborhood children, an inter racial group of children in the days before small town life became segregated by the automobile by actual physical removal. By the time he was seven or eight years old he had been schooled in the requirements of adult society, to the social exclusion of blacks, or coloreds. I remember quite clearly that my cousins in the South, even though they had attended segregated schools told their parents in no uncertain terms that if their friends, all their friends were not welcome at their wedding reception at the country club, that they would not be having their wedding reception at the country club. The power of the parents, enforced when they were children had already shifted by the late sixties to the moral sensibilities of the children. A generational shift and a cultural shift across the board, helped by the breakdown of regionalism, the interstate highway system and national television. All were ongoing. John Lewis had no interest in seeing his civil rights movement governed by white liberals from the north and co-opted for their revolutionary or ideological purposes as the Scottsboro Boys case had been. The civil rights movement happened not because it was forced by activism, but because it's time had come.
@@davidjennings4589- Nice post. I do think that our secular culture was marinated in our religious culture… and vice versa.
@@BruceWing I have a hard time responding to or processing that. Religion was evident in the society like racism but both seemed to be on the wane. I had no personal attraction to racism or religion. But my experience as an army brat may have made a material difference. I spent time in occupied Germany where the adult military housing was segregated but the schools were not and blacks were moving rapidly up through the ranks to command positions. Colin Powell and Elvis were both stationed there when I was living on Post under the protection of the MP's. The same building on Post was the Catholic Church, the synagogue, the Methodist Presbyterian and Baptist services were all conducted in the same building. My parents never darkened the door of a Church during my lifetime except on tours. We did go to Christmas night service in Worms where Martin Luther nailed his notice to the door and escaped the resulting trial by hopping out the window. 🥴
@@BruceWing certainly that has been true since revolutionary times but I was always uncomfortable with public prayers at public events like baseball games. But neither in military dependent schools or civilian schools di I ever remember being subjected to sanctioned prayers.
@@davidjennings4589 - The abolitionist movement in America was led by the Quakers. The defense of the Africans by John Adams in the Amistad trial was funded by the Quakers… as was the funding of their return to Africa. The entire American Civil Rights movement was grounded in a fusion of Christian thoughts and American ideals.
John Wilberforce of England was the key driver of the abolition of slavery in England and the use of that country’s military to stop the Atlantic slave trade and to stop slavery in Africa. He did that BECAUSE he converted to evangelical Christianity in 1785.
Buddhism has been very influential on human behavior as well. One of its key tenets, karma, has encouraged literally billions of people to do good acts.
One can, of course, point to the history and see examples of religion being used for ill (eg American southerners using Bible to support slavery, Catholic Church’s cover-up of sexual abuse behavior of priests under the guise of Christian forgiveness)
My point is that the issue is not nearly as cut and dried as you suggest.
Silly question! If two political ideologies grow and are mutually exclusive in their worldviews then conflict results. Its not a finger wagging conpetition here guys
I think the culture war in the US as we know it today is rooted in the Reagan Revolution. Maybe a person has to be as old as myself to understand this, but the religious right was not part of the GOP prior to Reagan. Right-wing Christians or social conservatives, were more likely to be Democrat than Republican in the 70s. Reagan's Revolution eventually transformed the south from a Democratic Party stronghold to a Republican one by shifting focus from economic and foreign policy issues to social issues. The culture war as we know it today. In the 80s, we summed up Republican identity politics as 'gays, guns and abortion.'
Homosexuality wasn't decriminalized in the 1980s as Pluckrose asserts, it wasn't until 2003 in the US. This is due to the new Republican Party formed by the Reagan Revolution imo. They defined the gay rights movement by their obsessive opposition to gays gaining the most basic rights. Gays in the military decided elections in the 1990s. Not much has changed really. They finally gave up on their gay obsessions because of public opinion turning against them, but they replaced it with 'trans' because Woke extremism made that necessary. However, nobody on the left trusts them after a half century of using LGBT people as political pawns in the most despicable ways imaginable. This doesn't excuse the left of today, but there is a cause and effect imo.
Political division prior to 1980 was largely labor vs 'country club Republicans.' The economic power base. Division around civil rights laws also fueled the divide but a solid majority supported these changes eventually. Keep in mind that the so called Moral Majority of the 80s were very much like the Woke of today and 'social justice' liberals were much more representative of a live and let live worldview. The Christian right did not have much of a voice prior to Reagan.
I don't know if understanding this serves any purpose but as long as the religious right dictates Republican identity politics, we're unlikely to see much unity. Of course much of the fault lies with the left taking an extremist turn over the last decade but I think some of the fault lies with Republicans. We stopped trusting them decades ago because of their illiberal obsessions and hate mongering. Many voters won't hear conservatives out because of this history. Trust is earned.
Maybe it's important to remember that the GOP was not always dependent on religion to maintain power. Today, many conservative seem to be suggesting that a return to Christianity is the solution to our cold civil war. That's no more of a political solution than promoting the Woke cult, which is more like a religion than anything else. We need a return to Enlightenment values, freedom of religion and freedom from religion. Nothing at all wrong with people embracing Christianity as a personal solution to life's struggles, but why is this equated with partisan politics? It has nothing to do with what we should expect from Congress or a president.
Barry Goldwater, 'the father of US conservatism', warned against this marriage of the religious right and the GOP over 40 years ago. It's anti-Libertarian. Biden will likely lose in November but another Democrat could easily win in 2028. On and on we go with this 'us vs them' tribalism. Seems to me that a third way should be embraced. A classical liberal/Libertarian identity. This is forming in the media and more voters are registered independent than Republican or Democrat so there's hope. I think the left vs right civil war is a religious war. It's a 'good vs evil' worldview, a belief in deities may be irrelevant. Both sides believe in their moral superiority over 'the other.' Once that's understood, it's easier to be independent imo.
You lost me at the moral majority being like the woke of today. How you can conflate Anita Bryant's 'rather my child dead than gay' and Jerry Falwell with anything other than rabid anti-human rights is beyond me. You seem to have entirely missed the Neoliberal ideology that Reagan (and Thatcher) embraced, and which is at the heart of every social and economic ill we are living with today.
@@lucydayLucida Sounds like you've been captured. Believing you're on the side of the angels because of your political tribe is very much like the Christian right. The hysterical left of 2024 is as vile and hateful as anything that came out of the religious right in the 1980s. With their recent alliance with Hamas, they may be worse. The far left is descending into Nazi-like antisemitism covered in rainbows and unicorns. Insane.
The culture war is a distraction from the neoliberal, uniparty economic agenda. Keeping us hating one another. Both Trump and Biden increased our debt to shocking levels for example. Only RFK Jr wants to talk about it and of course, Dems kicked him to the curb just like Bernie Sanders. Voters would rather demonize one another, prepare for civil war. Bill Clinton continued what Reagan started and Obama was basically a carbon copy of Clinton.
@lucydayLucida people often seem to forget or leave out how Clinton, for example, largely furthered all of it via things like NAFTA and deregulation of the financial sector etc. People can blame Reagan and Thatcher for the start but at least Democrats in the US largely bought into or at least participated in the neoliberalism project by the early 90s
@@chickenfishhybrid44 Yes, world-wide the left embraced it too. The Overton window shifting everything rightwards and nothing really changes no matter which side gets in any more.
@@chickenfishhybrid44Free trade and regulation are entirely separate issues. There's nothing inherently right wing about free trade, unlike deregulation.
The notion that indoctrination can be separated from education seems both naive and absurd. Indoctrination is a prerequisite for education. How will children learn if they aren't indoctrinated into behaving in an orderly fashion and into believing that learning is valuable and good for them? How will they learn science if they aren't indoctrinated into believing scientific values and narratives? How will they learn history if they aren't indoctrinated with a particular historical narrative? Maybe you're only concerned about political indoctrination but are you really going to teach political science and economics without indoctrinating students into rejecting Nazism and slavery? Besides, if they aren't indoctrinated by the schools, then they will be indoctrinated by social media influencers, among others.
How is this in dabate? There are tens of millions of Americans alive who watched them start this shit.