(II) Liberalism vs. SJW's (Is this now clear enough?


 Yesterday I posted some verbatim remarks from a commenter on the defunct Camels with Hammers Patheos channel.  Snowflake and Freeze Peach🍑 complained that the wording was "over their heads;" I promised yesterday that I would come back and edit this thing for clarity.  So, here is my attempt at clarity:

👨on SJM: "From my outsider point view (I live in Europe, and American-style "SJW" movements are far less common here), I can see three basic problems with the "SJW" approach (practical if not on paper):

"1. Careless, one-size-fits-all attitude towards challengers: "calling out" a leading politician is way different from targeting a confused, maybe unschooled, and surely angry supporter of his - the former has power, the latter has none; the former has an agenda, the latter probably has none. But treating both the top and the base of the other side in the same way is dishonest, dehumanizing, and it is the best way to make sure the latter keeps clinging to the former.

"2. Factionalism: discussing and calling attention to one's identity (ethnic, sexual or whatever) can be a powerful source of political thought and action, but when labels become more important than shared goals, no progress can be made - I mean, are you really ready to waste time and energy on arguing with me just because I'm not totally embracing (not embracing, mind you, not opposing) your view on some obscure gender or sexual type?

"3. Manichaeism (they’re either with us or against us): the most extreme but logical consequence of point #2 - whenever dogma prevails, whoever isn't 99% on board is conflated with the enemy, no matter how trivial that missing 1% might be -- but this is a great way to make tons of potential, good-willing allies feel rejected, or worse.

"My 2 cents."

Posted by Jennifer A. Nolan

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more