Lefty loonies and liberals, what the hell happened to us?

[Poeticus]

At root is a severe hatred of the West....

Frankie,

Hear me out on this ... I can't, for the life of me, understand certain White Liberals at all. As a person of color, I truly fail, utterly and hopelessly, in understanding such an anointed breed that seems to speak on behalf of us downtrodden colored folks. Allow me to explain:

A few weeks ago, we had many of them condemn American Sniper, along with various other patriotic expressions. And these are individuals that are American-born citizens. Now here's the thing, bro: my parents and I came here in the late nineties and became naturalized citizens in the early years of the following decade, in 2002, I believe. What baffles the mind is how one can see citizenship of a country (in response to Blumenthal's statements), for which my parents underwent rigorous preparation to become citizens of (insert image of my Indian mother struggling heavily over the citizenship exam, trying desparately to articulate the words and sentences as well as she possibly could; my father frantically searching for directions to get to the place where it all goes down and praying fervently to the gods that it all goes a-okay) as something regressive.

Many born citizens of the US will never ever understand how big of a day that was for us! It was one of the most important days for my parents. That very day, my father and mother went out and bought a huge flag of the US and we hung it on the stand that comes prepackaged with various houses with garages (that little stand that juts out). I guess what I'm trying to say is ... "born-citizen privilged" folk need to understand that many members of minority groups like my parents and me are very proud to be patriotic and citizens of the US, we worked very hard (especially my parents; mostly my parents) to get where we are now. Sorry not sorry for Uncle Tom-ing it up, ya'll.

​

 

[Sunstone]

As a white, cis-gendered male, I most certainly have privileges that many others in our society don't. That's not what I was really talking about.

What I mean is that, in the effort to being politically correct, it seems that nothing ever gets done. That what is considered important to some is not important to others. What really seems to be more important is whose theory is more correct, or which professor/feminist/cultural marxist is more relevant.

To use a very subjective example, I used to be a part of my colleges LGBT support group. I only went to a few meetings before I stopped going. Mainly because I didn't feel welcomed there. When I had mentioned that I was religious, and that maybe we could have a function for other religious LGBT, I was basically told that a queer being religious was "being hypocritical" and had my ideas totally shot down. I was also called a neo-colonialist and cultural appropriator, because I'm a white male who practices Hinduism. No real inclusiveness, no working together with the knowledge of diversity, just a fixed idea of what constituted what being LGBT is "supposed to be" and a near rejection of what differed.

Granted, this is a very personal example, but it's very similar to what I see with liberalsim and political correctness and academia in general. So to answer your second question, no, I guess there's no real way to discuss anything without upsetting someone or pissing other off. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is the crux of the problem with modern liberalism. Everyone seems too busy crying "I'm the true victim" instead of working together to actually fix the problem.

This is a major reason I pay so little attention to many -- maybe even most -- academic articles on feminism, etc. I hate to say that, though, because I have in general a high regard for academics. But I learned years ago, when attending university, that it's fairly easy for them to go off the deep end, especially in departments that are too homogenous. Unfortunately, that cuts both ways. Go back far enough, when most academics were politically conservative, and read up on their support for fascism. It's got more to do with the way people in groups feed off each other, than with any particular ideology.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not all muslims are arab, and not all arabs are muslim.
If someone doesn't know the difference between race and religion then they have no business participating in such discussions/debates.

But who needs to be in such discussions more than they?

You might be interested in this:
http://journals.cambridge.org/images/fileUpload/documents/Duarte-Haidt_BBS-D-14-00108_preprint.pdf

Rascal!
Trying to get the thread locked up, eh?

 

[Sunstone]

Groups of like-minded people tend to feed off each other in ways that lead to excesses and a departure from realism. The effect is not confined to liberals. People of all ideologies do it.

Folks need intellectually honest people with opinions and views that differ from their own as reality checks. Unfortunately, studies are beginning to show that people are increasingly coming to live in information bubbles where they get only the views that reinforce and exaggerate, but never really challenge, their opinions. As that trend increases, you can expect to see more and more extremism.

 

[Poeticus]

I was also called a neo-colonialist and cultural appropriator, because I'm a white male who practices Hinduism.

That's ironic, because it was neo-colonialist of them to dictate what religion you can and cannot be a part of---not to mention the fact that the origin of the notion that Whites can't convert to Hinduism was Colonial to begin with. OooOooOOOoo, I'm on a roll, yo! Starry, I should have been there. I would have helped you out, holmes. Youz my dude, aight?

 

[StarryNightshade]

OooOooOOOoo, I'm on a roll, yo! Starry, I should have been there. I would have helped you out, holmes. Youz my dude, aight?

Yep, youz my dude.

*fist bump*

 

[Poeticus]

Yep, youz my dude.

*fist bump*

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm just going to go ahead and address this bit separately since I'm mostly happy to go along with the rest of your post.

If I seem extra snarky on this point it's because this in particular is what caused me to start questioning whether I've really been on the right side of things recently and I don't mind acknowledging my views here are more muddled and generally less solid than elsewhere. I've always considered myself a feminist (insofar as male humans are permitted this title) since I understood what the word meant and as far as the broad "dictionary definition" goes, I still believe strongly in it's stated principles and feel that the movement has achieved a lot of good, perhaps more than it sometimes given credit for.

Basically, I've had my personally held and fairly well cherished views on this subject battered recently and I'm still trying to figure out what the house is going to look like it when I've finished rebuilding it.

Where I've come a cropper lately is whether it, as an independent unit or as a part of a great progressive political movement, has succeeded on the backs of it's luminaries and in-practice machinations or in spite of them. Whether it is capable - as a movement - of recognising it's successes and examining it's own continued relevance in Western societies or whether it's simply become a self-sustaining vehicle for learned helplessness and the people at the top who make a ton of money from selling the narrative that women are natural perpetual victims and should be expected to be "situational adults" without being questioned.

I look at this and wonder why the women in my life allow themselves to be infantilised in this way and will brook not even the slightest disagreement.

I look at it and I see people like Mary Koss lobbying for and succeeding in having definitions of rape used for social science studies broadened in ways to capture as many women as possible and narrowed in others to exclude men (and then outright ignoring the actual responses of some of the subjects) to deliberately skew stats to fit a preferred narrative. I just don't see this kind of dishonesty helping anybody. Nor do I see hyperbolic exaggerations of the wage gap that fly around - in spite of some excellent studies published last year that actually show we've really made HEAPS of progress in this area - really helping to address what real issues remain here.

I look back at the history of people like Kate Millett, Andrea Dworkin or Susan Brownmiller - all extremely intelligent people whose writings have been hugely influential in shaping modern feminism - and see them, since the 1970s advocating the co-opting of minority rights movements to further theirs, engaging in vicious shaming of male homosexuals and generally opining that the solution to any problem that touches on gender is more feminism (even when a case can made that feminism helped cause or exacerbate the problem in the first place).

And when I've questioned this, I've been told "Oh we're not all like that" as if I hadn't just been on the receiving end of a polemic informing me that "#NotAllMen" (or whatever taunt is fashionable) is a cop out. I mean, am I nuts or am I really a misogynist for expecting people who self-identify with and support a movement to own their ****?

Anyway, there's my small personal irrational rant on that subject. Like I said, I'm muddled on it and not sure where I fall anymore. I absolutely support gender equity in society but I'm having a little bit of a personal ethical crisis on whether supporting 21st century feminism is really a way to achieve that anymore and apparently should know where I'm not wanted. We'll see.

I have some thoughts on this, but I'm not going to share them here to avoid derailing the thread. If I may make a recommendation, though, I suggest reading some of the more popular feminist blogs if you are interested. Some of them talk about men's rights from a feminist perspective. I have personally found them very thought-provoking and often spot on.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hey, don't leave me out!

 

[Poeticus]

Hey, don't leave me out!

Yea, I gotchu on 'da dap, yo, don't worry:

 

[Revoltingest]

I have some thoughts on this, but I'm not going to share them here to avoid derailing the thread. If I may make a recommendation, though, I suggest reading some of the more popular feminist blogs if you are interested. Some of them talk about men's rights from a feminist perspective. I have personally found them very thought-provoking and often spot on.

Aye! Feminism is no single movement, group or culture. Polarization & lightning rods often obscure this. Even I have voiced support for feminism (True!).

 

[Debater Slayer]

There is a proverb in Arabic, "mixing poison with honey," that comes to mind here. There is legitimate criticism of some tendencies among today's progressives, but some people seem to use said criticism as a pretense to keep making their erroneous and evasive claims and then complain that progressives are too intolerant or harsh when they criticize them. I think all too many liberals fail to give liberal values due credit. They downplay the ideology itself more than is warranted and, in turn, enable the equivocators to slip themselves in as mere supporters of a cause that "rejects" them.

 

[Revoltingest]

There is a proverb in Arabic, "mixing poison with honey," that comes to mind here. There is legitimate criticism of some tendencies among today's progressives, but some people seem to use said criticism as a pretense to keep making their erroneous and evasive claims and then complain that progressives are too intolerant or harsh when they criticize them. I think all too many liberals fail to give liberal values due credit. They downplay the ideology itself more than is warranted and, in turn, enable the equivocators to slip themselves in as mere supporters of a cause that "rejects" them.

Liberals downplay their own ideology? How so?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Liberals downplay their own ideology? How so?

Some liberals do by saying things like "we should stop criticizing others; we have our own problems," "we should respect all cultures and religions even if we disagree with them," etc. The OP touched on a related issue, which is the hesitation of many liberals to criticize harmful religious ideas due to political correctness.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some liberals do by saying things like "we should stop criticizing others; we have our own problems," "we should respect all cultures and religions even if we disagree with them," etc. The OP touched on a related issue, which is the hesitation of many liberals to criticize harmful religious ideas due to political correctness.

Ah, very clear now....I see that too.

 

[dust1n]

Wowser, do I have far different experiences with the people on the left than others.

I still don't think I've ever met a progressive who was pro-Islam in anyway and secondly, I don't know where these notions that leftists are in actuality politically correct, although criticism is everywhere in regards to basically anything. I really have never encountered anything like political correctness outside of a media outlet or a workplace. Which by the way, if any real leftist material landed in an media outlet or a workplace, someone would get fired. There are few notable exceptions.

Put perhaps that's the difference between a liberal and a progressive in general.

But seriously, do you guys expect anyone in America to be smart. Most people don't have the time or the drive (it's not like there are any real clear incentives) to be philosophically intimate with the institutions which govern various landmasses?

In appears to me that most leftists in America dropped out shortly after 9/11. The biggest protests to keep Bush out of office by judicial dictate was squashed. The biggest protests to stop both wars were squashed. In effective, I think anyone my age quickly understood that the power system is far stronger and money-backed than imagined. Most drop out and go back to trying to live their lives and start families, often trying to drop out of society as much as possible.

Heck, I don't blame them. I want nothing more really than to leave America.

 

[Revoltingest]

But seriously, do you guys expect anyone in America to be smart.

Yes. I'm sometimes disappointed....but sometimes I'm not.

 

[dust1n]

Yes. I'm sometimes disappointed....but sometimes I'm not.

People's intelligence's tend to aimed a particular suite. I meat lots of smart people who can build computers, run an audit, teach 30 kids, write shows, and generally hold on to fascinating and deep knowledge of all kinds of specific weird subjects.

But most people don't get the opportunity to seriously study public policy, political history, law, city planning, etc. Whether on the right or the left, how effective, legitimate, and well-reasoned are you expecting their opinion be in regards to the complex nature of any given talking point?

 

[Revoltingest]

But most people don't get the opportunity to seriously study public policy, political history, law, city planning, etc. Whether on the right or the left, how effective, legitimate, and well-reasoned are you expecting their opinion be in regards to the complex nature of any given talking point?

I'd say that many people just don't take advantage of the opportunities they have.
My expectation:
Opinions will vary widely in how reasoned & interesting they are.
Note: Extensive study doesn't necessarily translate into superior grokking...sometimes people just reinforce whatever they already need to believe.

 

[dust1n]

I'd say that many people just don't take advantage of the opportunities they have.
My expectation:
Opinions will vary widely in how reasoned & interesting they are.
Note: Extensive study doesn't necessarily translate into superior grokking...sometimes people just reinforce whatever they already need to believe.

Many people don't take opportunities because they unforeseeable and equally lack in failure. But since there is no real economic net holding anything in society together, than the risk is far too great for many people, at least in their eyes.