Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just wanted to comment on something that's bothering me lately, and I'm going to use this particular thread.
I don't think it's wrong to post articles containing ideas like these sometimes. Of course we don't need every single one posted, because there is way too much content and there are other channels (on Reddit, Twitter, Youtube, etc.) that have it covered. It doesn't mean somebody's "outraged." But we have to be able to critique ideas no matter their source.
BUT I think trying to use these as rhetorical salvos to lob at opponents is the wrong approach. And I think trying to use these to justify scorn and acrimony vs all Democrats or progressives or liberals or leftists is counter-productive. It compresses the political spectrum into a one-dimensional line, a one-side vs. one-side struggle, and it needlessly puts people on the defensive.
The fact is that many of these ideas are ILLIBERAL. That is, they aren't coming from a classical liberal position nor from a conservative or libertarian mindset. They are part of post-modernism, which, as Jordan Peterson put it, is an assault on classical liberalism, on everything we’ve learned since the Enlightenment – rationality, empiricism, science, clarity of mind, dialogue, individualism, and the marketplace of ideas.
There are **countless** examples, and new bad ideas every day. One of my [least] favorite ones is the idea that parents should not read to their young children, should not give them a love of learning or any advantages academically or intellectually, should in fact intentionally disadvantage them -- in order to create more equality and social justice because there are other children who aren't read to or given a love of learning or interesting opportunities and it's not "fair" if you give your own kids something some other kids might not have.
So, if I posted an article from HuffPost, Salon, Vox, Vice, Slate, Daily Kos, or whatever where the author was trying to make that argument, it doesn't mean I'm "outraged," but I'd criticize it. I'd think it was just a terrible idea. And I'd put it out there for the consideration of others. But if I tried to use it to say "you _______ have some terrible ideas," I would expect such acerbic language to cause negative reactions not to the article and its ideas, but to ME and MY WORDS. I'd be attacking groups, not the idea. My goal in posting something like that would be to show everyone who reads it, regardless of where on the two- or three-dimensional political and cultural spectrum they lie, an example of something that is being discussed, in hopes of eliciting criticism of it as a bad idea and something we should know about and be aware of and condemn.
I mean, if my goal is to show something as a bad idea and encourage others to consider it as a bad idea as well, if I instead approach it as if it's ammunition, then I'm both preaching to the choir (for some people) and totally undermining my ability to convince other people. My point for the past year or two of discussing these Bad Ideas has been to lay bare how illiberal and regressive they truly are and how true liberals and clear-thinking people of all political stripes should decry them.
At the same time, there HAS been a shift in the past few years and post-modernist illiberality IS spreading. To deny that, when presented with ample evidence of it, is to either be willfully blind to how the culture is shifting away from those classical liberal Enlightenment values, or to feel the tug of needing to defend them (despite misgivings) due to the insidious tit-for-tat, us-vs-them game I was denouncing above.
In my opinion, responses like "more rightie snowflake outrage" are every bit as ineffective and abrasive as assertions like "liberals are crazy" or "Democrats are so dumb" or "snowflake this or that." Let's attack the IDEAS, not the groups, shall we? The best response, the kind I'd like to see, is the idea, if it's truly bad, being put in its place by everyone who feels the same way despite differing backgrounds and political stances (or, if such a thing could exist, a reasoned, factual, rational defense of the idea). I think the best way to do that is to be friendly and shoot at the ideas, not at any group or set of people.
However, what I've noticed on the internet is that each website (even certain forums within this website) have certain karmas, if you will. The Politics and Controversies Forum is a scrappy place...it's controversial....and I just doubt that predisposition will change.
And truly no offense to anyone, but the young crowd on here are quite emotional (did you know that, apparently, the part of the brain responsible for judgment isn't fully developed til around age 27?). It's obvious to me anyway that they are very knee-jerk reactionary and stuck in their thinking but, that won't likely change much til they live more of life. Just sayin'.
There are other websites where much more interesting and really smart stuff gets discussed. PM me if you'd like the links to some.
I choose: gender gifted. But that's only for today. According to those instructions, I can be something different tomorrow and call you out big time for mis-addressing me. You are required to keep up with my feelings.
Meanwhile, De Blasio needs to be in an asylum and if anyone is still wondering what exactly happened last Nov, then take the sheer idiocy of that official publication by NYC and extrapolate it across many issues and you have the answer. Not complicated. (except for low IQ types. Sorry, can't help you with that.)
Oh wait, one more thing. What you describe here had not hit my radar and I am appalled by it.
"One of my [least] favorite ones is the idea that parents should not read to their young children, should not give them a love of learning or any advantages academically or intellectually, should in fact intentionally disadvantage them -- in order to create more equality and social justice because there are other children who aren't read to or given a love of learning or interesting opportunities and it's not "fair" if you give your own kids something some other kids might not have."
Some of us get snide or even nasty because that is one of the most moronic ideas I have ever heard. Sacrificing the development of your child for some idiotic "greater good" idea dreamed-up by the brain-hijacked is tantamount to child neglect. It ranks right up there with De Blasio's 31 gender flavors as referenced above.
Sometimes people need a hard smack in the face to wake them the hell up!!!
I didn't realize that the controversy over gender reveal parties was the association with progressive gender perception issues.
I thought it was because the sudden deluge of cheesy feel-good stories that the media has been releasing about clever ways to reveal one's child's gender were cloying and annoying.
I don't think the article has anything to do with liberals or conservatives. On Politics and other Controversies, it's a controversial issue, not a political issue.
You know, it could be that these people are just looking for an excuse to party.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
