Well, but here's what he says about the supposed influence of 'extremely radical postmodernist thinkers who are hell-bent on demolishing the fundamental substructure of Western civilisation':
Reads like textbook political paranoia to me.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
The supermajority of people who use labels to describe groups, that these groups don't actually use for themselves, are talking bullshit. It hardly ever adds anything to the debate. It's a mix of straw-manning, exaggerations and smear along in/out-group cleavages.
Is there any group who identifies as "cultural-marxists"? I haven't heard of them...
Sadly that behaviour is by no means restricted to one side of the political spectrum. The majority of people who participate in the public discourse do this.
Is there any group who identifies as "cultural-marxists"? I haven't heard of them...
Sadly that behaviour is by no means restricted to one side of the political spectrum. The majority of people who participate in the public discourse do this.
Yep. You, hobbers, are the default.
No, it's the rest of us that are irrational.
Just googled Cultural Marxism with the first suggestion being "meme". Clicked on that...blimey I'd take any form of political correctness over people who genuinely believe that load of crap any day.
Just another form of claiming victimhood.
Just another form of claiming victimhood.
Last edited:
Do you remember all those thought pieces about how Brexit made people on the right think that whatever their views people had just voted with them and their thoughts were now the majority?
If this is just a thread for shouting out our random ill-thought of views - which seems to be the case - then I'm going to go with the fact I think a significant number of young straight white men are struggling to find how they can engage in intellectual debate on social topics, these days. I think they feel they start at a disadvantage due to their assumed privilege. I think many of them understand their privilege exists in many areas of life but find it highly frustrating when in topics of social justice they believe their points will be treated less seriously than if they were from another background. I think there is truth to these concerns.
I think a lot of young straight white men who could offer valuable contributions to discourse are alienated due to this and I think that is unfair. I think the left is too flippant at times in dismissing this due to the belief it does not compare to the difficulties minorities face in being heard. I think it doesn't compare but I think it matters and we're getting it wrong.
EDIT - No one seems to have noticed yet but this was meant to be in that thread where people worry about the trans takeover of society and get oddly determined to prove African athletic superiority.
I think a lot of young straight white men who could offer valuable contributions to discourse are alienated due to this and I think that is unfair. I think the left is too flippant at times in dismissing this due to the belief it does not compare to the difficulties minorities face in being heard. I think it doesn't compare but I think it matters and we're getting it wrong.
EDIT - No one seems to have noticed yet but this was meant to be in that thread where people worry about the trans takeover of society and get oddly determined to prove African athletic superiority.
Last edited:
As per usual I seem to agree with you fully.
Dangerous game.
Pretty sure there's a 'feck white men' post somewhere in the early stages of the Trump thread with my name on it...
Oh well, agreeing with the stuff I've seen you write doesn't mean I'll agree on the stuff that hasn't yet been written or the stuff I haven't seen.
Wow. Speechless. What insufferable people.
Christ almighty
If you want to turn everyone off from your concerns, look no further than this video.Yep i'd say thats pretty true.
There does seem to be a growing element of resentment within them groups.
Sometimes kind of feels like your being painted as the boogey man for a lot of misdeeds that you had nothing to do with.
In many circles our opinion isn't valued in the slightest and in a lot of ways our opinion probably has no real value. What can we add to a discussion on being discriminated against?
Our place in the whole PC topic just doesn't feel very obvious. Kind of feels like we should be standing over to one side looking guilty and shutting up.
I dunno, it kind of feel like were being set up as the antagonist to various movements and its hard not to react or to react in a supportive manner to being their punching bag.
I think they're probably needs to be some pushback though tbh. I by no means think were in an entirely equal flawless state but
I think its necessary just to filter out some of the sillier, more dangerous or more extreme elements, which i think exist.
Harassing white guys for the crimes of a different nationalities white guys great, great, great, great grandfather just feels silly
And demanding a significantly higher standard of work to have 'earned' a promotion or opportunity relative to a minority kind of feels backward.
Were trying to equalise things not just flip the disadvantages around aren't we?
I dunno
were moving forward i think mostly. Progress is glacial but it feels like were moving in the right direction, think we just need to ... check our bearings a bit?
Well, he paints with a broad brush when applying those terms. Seemingly anyone with leftist views is a post-modernist or Marxist in his eyes.
He very publicly and vocally opposed Bill C-16 in Canada on the basis that it infringed on his right to free speech. What was this bill about? It added transgendered and non-binary people to the Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. It essentially extended the same rights to transgendered and non-binaries that the rest of the population already had, and made discriminating against them a crime. THE HORROR! How this infringed on his right to free speech? Feck if I know.
He also said that granting rights to minorities should be dependent on the size of said minority, and the costs to the majority.
The man is a total ass-hat.
Yeah, seems old Jordan definitely believes in Cultural Marxism.
It makes me laugh - & it annoys me at the same time - when I'm somehow classed as 'privileged' purely because I'm a white hetro-sexual male. I was born in north Liverpool 12 years after the end of the 2nd world war. Due to lack of social housing because of the war, me, along with my Mum & Dad, & a sister who came along 5 years later, shared a 3 bedroomed terraced house with my Nan & Granddad, 3 aunties, & 2 uncles. There was just the one tap in the house, an outside toilet, & the only heating we had was a coal fire in the front room. We co-existed like this for 10 years before my parents were able to obtain a council house. 40 years later, my wife & I have our own house in a nice residential area. We have a nice car, & overall are financially very comfortable. Now when I look back at the journey that's brought us to where we are, I know that having a very strong work ethic & an acceptance of change & challenges are the key reasons we are where we are today. My gender, race, or colour, had nothing to do with it. The opportunities I had were there for everyone. The one thing I never had though, which seems highly prevalent in today's society, is a massive sense of entitlement. Far too many people, & groups, pointing the finger elsewhere for their own failings, when in truth it's far closer to home than any of them want to accept. They, not society, are to blame for what they do, & don't do, in life.
I made this same point in another thread and was basically told that since I'm not a part of that minority group that I don't really get it. And that's true. But at the same time, equality of opportunity is as you say there for everyone and that's the important thing in my opinion. Not equality of outcome, like a lot seem to want as they demonise anyone who's made something of themselves, but equality of opportunity.
I generally dislike the “reverse racism” trope so beloved of the right. Like I keep saying, it’s hard to feel sorry for white people who play the race card because it’s almost impossible for them to suffer any serious negative consequences of this “racism”. Whereas the opposite is clearly not the case.
But but but the way “check your privilege” has crept into debates and disagreements like this comes fecking close to fitting any reasonable definition of racism. Sneering at, shutting down and denying people an opinion because of the colour of their skin seems to me to be the worst possible way to create a society based around equality, tolerance and respect. Which is, in a way, shitting on the legacy of people who first fought for racial equality. On that same university campus.
Also. Hats off to the Prof. He handled that very well.
Last edited:
Posted a video below of an interview held by Jesse Lee Peterson in which he interviews 2 young members of Blacklivesmatter. There's a bombshell moment just after 15.30 minute mark in which the interviewer asks the young couple what is it exactly they want from the white folk. Having spent 15 minutes bitching & moaning about how the black community gets a raw deal in life, the silence from these 2 is deafening. You actually feel sorry for them & their apparent inability to answer a straight-forward question. I also feel sorry for them because they come across as 2 decent, intelligent, well-brought up individuals who'll struggle to achieve too much in life because they're focusing on negativity & things that are not really there anymore, especially not on the grand scale they were 30, 40, years ago & beyond. Racial discrimination is a crime today. There are laws in place to enforce this. Whatever racism exists now is strictly in the background & not a prominent part of a civilized society or culture.
Jordan Peterson always struck me as someone who’d set up death camps, not because he’s a racist but because it’d increase efficiency or lessen waste. Seems completely detached from his humanity.
This is head banging on wall frustrating right there. Genuinely it is.
It, in my opinion, shows a complete lack of desire to explore those issues further and understand why those people may feel the way they do.
People who say you have to be part of that group to feel or understand are wrong. You don't have to. But you certainly have to make an effort to do so.
For example, I'll give two examples of women that I can never personally experience but which I can appreciate from the recollections of others.
My wife (and indeed some of my exes) have said the same thing regarding 'comments' from males when they're alone, looks when they're alone. Looks and comments which disappear entirely when I (or any other male) is walking with them.
Now, some may say that its just words and looks right? Whatever, it may just be. But that is an experience that my wife has that I personally can never feel.
Another thing is I can see the effect I have on women when it is two of us walking down a dark street with very few or nobody else around. They speed up. You can tell they feel anxious, worried. I can never truly feel the worry they feel at that moment. Of course sexual assault can happen to males too but the chances are far less likely. I can't feel their worry. But I can try to understand it and change my behaviour in those situations accordingly (I will cross to the other side of the street if I can to make them feel more at ease).
Rather than mouthing off about PC culture or about my own negative experiences, I can try to appreciate the thoughts and lives of other people. What exactly is so horrific about that?
Well, my experience with cultural Marxism is thorough academia (Frankfurt school mostly) where they would use Marxism as a sort of framework for their studies. Basically they took the teachings of Marx and attempted to apply it to any part of society through a lens of class struggle. There is also a subsection of it in history (which is my area) and it's kind of a pain in the ass thb, because not everything can be explained through class struggle
The other sort of "cultural Marxism" where people seriously believe that the jews own the media are are trying to destroy society through conditioning, yeah, those are nutcases
Yeah that's not 'cultural marxism'.
I'm also staggered to see someone dismiss marxist history as a 'pain in the arse' whilst claiming that history is 'their area'. That's a baffling attitude to apply to any methodological approach.
You put the ironic air quotes in the wrong cultural Marxism kid. One's called the Frankfurt school, the other is called cultural Marxism.
Last edited:
All I see there is a couple of people who didnt have the experience or maturity to deal with the interviewer, hardly proof that the racism they perceive is a figment of their imaginations.
The dude in the video is a different Peterson but yeah, listen to Jordan P enough and death soon seems like the best option.
Because it's too narrow and often with theories like that you end up trying to fit history into your theory rather than fitting your theory into history (if that makes any sense). I actually read an article who tried to explain the fall of the roman empire through marxist theory, and while it was an interesting read it failed to mention stuff like hundreds of thousands of germanic people pushing on the borders and corruption/ineptitude at a state level
It's the same as environmental determinism, which of course has it's merits, but often ends up bending the truth a bit to fit a certain narrative.
You are correct, i always though "The Frankfurt School" was more of a broad label than it actually is.
@Bobcat doesnt history always have a prism? You have marxist history, whig history, revisionist history, you have left wing or right wing historians... there's always some kind of agenda. Most historians accept reality is infinitely complex and no one account can ever be definitive, the trick is to look at different angles and weigh up the relative influence of different factors. A marxist history of the Roman empire wouldnt give you a full understanding of that period of history but it would give you a very different perspective to the traditional approach which might enrich your understanding if it was supplementary.
@Bobcat Pretty much what Adebesi said.
All historians have biases (although I think we should get away from any idea that all marxist historians = actual marxists), but the work of those adopting pioneering approaches (back when marxist history was actually groundbreaking) and significantly altering the field are by far the most valuable. They're not valuable because they're necessarily 'right', but because they have fundamentally altered the debate in the field. They create new avenues for research, new methodologies and discussions, and challenge implicit understandings that we hold without even realising that we do.
Taking your own example as a guide you might not necessarily be convinced by the argument presented regarding the 'fall' of Rome (I also don't think you could have picked a worse example to argue your point with here, the period at the end of the Roman Empire into the Middle Ages is one of the most hotly debated topics imaginable), but historians understanding of it has come a long way from Gibbon to where we are now (with the idea that Rome even really 'fell' in the sense first imagined heavily questioned). That shift owes much to different approaches.
Well i might have been a bit rash, and a marxist history framework can sure be useful if you look at social/economic history specifically and try to explain certain developments. The problem though is that it often has an ideological baggage that skews the truth to fit a certain narrative. All this is a bit off topic though
Edit: @NinjaFletch
You make some valid points, and i'm not saying marxist historiography does not bring anything valuable to the table, but even looking away from any biases on part of the author it still has certain ideological bias in it's framework. Marxist history was originally used as a tool to bring about and foster revolutions, much like nationalist history in the 19th and 20th century was used to strengthen nationalism. It's also rather deterministic in it's approach. It has of course gone through some changes since then and as far as i know has largely been pushed aside by the Annales School.
Again, this is a bit of topic.
Something on topic: Halloween is coming up, what is ok/not ok for the kids to dress up as?
Last edited:
I’m not sure what video you mean. I listened to Peterson in Joe Rogan’s podcast and everything he said screamed equal opportunity psychopath.
Was talking about the vid immediately above your post (possibly from someone you have on ignore?) which featured a bloke called Jesse Peterson and hadn’t spotted the Jordan Peterson one at the top of the page.
He’s an odd fella alright. Talks an awful lot of sense and I really like his journalling stuff but he’s an awfully miserable git and when he gets into religion he loses me completely.
@hobbers
Can you explain what is the meaning of the words Marxism and postmodernism, the latter with reference to how it differs from modernism? Thanks.
Can you explain what is the meaning of the words Marxism and postmodernism, the latter with reference to how it differs from modernism? Thanks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-41613260/model-munroe-bergdorf-on-racism-in-the-uk
As a mixed race person I am sick of seeing cnuts like her demonise and attack 3/4s of my family (and the majority of the country) as racist and privileged whilst she stands there from a platform on the bbc of all places and spouts such drivel and is richer than 90% of us. This just makes minorities look bad, and it makes it out like we can get away with racism because of our skin colour, whereas whites cannot. In 2 minutes, it would not surprise me to see the alt right double their already small numbers overnight when this was aired. Imagine if a white person said "black people are the most destructive form of oppression in the world today" we'd all be rightfully livid. This was paid with our fecking taxes. i mean, does she not see the irony in that she's in a mostly white country, and on a mostly white company being allowed to say racist shit from a mostly white company to a mostly white country, yet is oppressed? REALLY? We need to call out racism from every walk of life; white, black whatever, but sadly political correctness only deems white people as racist and this is why there's a far right white nationalist resurgence.
As a mixed race person I am sick of seeing cnuts like her demonise and attack 3/4s of my family (and the majority of the country) as racist and privileged whilst she stands there from a platform on the bbc of all places and spouts such drivel and is richer than 90% of us. This just makes minorities look bad, and it makes it out like we can get away with racism because of our skin colour, whereas whites cannot. In 2 minutes, it would not surprise me to see the alt right double their already small numbers overnight when this was aired. Imagine if a white person said "black people are the most destructive form of oppression in the world today" we'd all be rightfully livid. This was paid with our fecking taxes. i mean, does she not see the irony in that she's in a mostly white country, and on a mostly white company being allowed to say racist shit from a mostly white company to a mostly white country, yet is oppressed? REALLY? We need to call out racism from every walk of life; white, black whatever, but sadly political correctness only deems white people as racist and this is why there's a far right white nationalist resurgence.
Always kind of pisses me off when privilege comes up
You get american citizens going to berkeley or whatever bitching about someone elses privilege
If your american or from western europe your more privileged than 99.9% of the population. If your going to a reasonably notable college then your more privileged than 90% of whats left.
Check your own privilege cnuts
You get american citizens going to berkeley or whatever bitching about someone elses privilege
If your american or from western europe your more privileged than 99.9% of the population. If your going to a reasonably notable college then your more privileged than 90% of whats left.
Check your own privilege cnuts
I've stood up for her on here(The Channel 4 interview she did was interesting)but yes that video in the link is incredibly stupid. In the same way there was criticism towards Bernie Sanders when he would only about the unfairness of the economy and not talk about the role race plays in this unfairness, it seems Bergdorf does something similar and only talks about race.
Fred Hampton in the 1970's destroyed this argument.
How can you stand up for a racist? Also she has yet to actually prove any of this unfairness, that is a false equivalence. BErnie can actually point to evidence of unfairness. When Bergdorf mentions that report, the report just shows hard data and no reasons why. Also white people tend to be in a lot of the lowest positions in that data.
Haven't watched that debate, so I just go by the few quotes. Depicting racism as the acts of a 'white race' towards other 'races' is indeed reproducing racist logic from an alternative perspective. And I agree that (insofar these quotes adequately reflect her stance) political opinions like that should be challenged. Anti-racism has to reject the fictional naturalness of races altogether.
What I don't agree with is the subsequent part of your post.
How can single individuals associated with some minority make whole minorities look bad for any reasonable person? If people make that mental connection, they are already knee-deep in tribalist/racist logic, where every individual is representative of 'his/her collective'. And - not by chance - they also cherry-pick those examples that fit their pre-existing prejudices, because seemingly the also existing members of minorities with more sane points of view can't manage to make minorities look good. So we are not talking about reasons for being racist, but about excuses.
Generally speaking, people talking nonsense in the name of anti-racism does not make anti-racism as such less legitimate, or the embrace of racism/White Nationalism more legitimate. Both claims are becoming increasingly common by now, and to me that's just an apology for the indefensible. Most importantly, White Nationalism is anything but a reaction to a black racism, or its supposed protection through 'PC culture'.
Last edited:
Yeah, if you live in the west and is a celebrity or go to an Ivy League school i don't really feel sorry for you. The whole "oh woe is me" routine from these middle class people combined with telling everyone how horrible they are does not solve a damn thing
Edit: This change in direction from actually trying to make positive change too shouting at professors because the curriculum "triggers" you or getting angry at asian basketball player because they have dreads is just sad
Whatever happened to try and bring poor black neighborhoods out of poverty or have bake sales to help the people of Syria
Last edited: