Oddbean new post about login | logout Eh, I admit I have a problem with self righteousness, but this isn't an example. I saw too many people tricked and hurt by CT in 2020 to let it pass. Also, to be clear I wasn't asking anyone to mute her, just to not tolerate CT. I realize that was not clear.
i think it will still be a teachable moment... tbh when i read it, i was sorta ho hum, yeah, ok the fancy people post and don't read, but i didn't catch the other parts so much i would appreciate a point at the exact parts of the expression that resembled or were vicious rhetorical elements so i can recognise them better, i'm already pretty good at catching propaganda word tricks but this is something i missed
The big one is point #10, which is another way of saying "if you reject my framing, that is evidence that my framing is correct". This lays several traps for the so-called "elite": If they say there is no elite, that will be evidence that there is one, and they are in it, and a liar to boot. If they grovel and apologize and offer to "be better", that legitimizes the framing, and will only be used against them. The only feasible options are to join in as part of the mob, or literally say "I reject your framing". The former solution has the obvious downside of reinforcing the attack on whatever characteristic defines " the elite" - usually not a specific indictment, just an instance of "privilege" (whiteness, maleness, grant-recipient-hood). The latter solution means that unless one of you gives way in the framing question, it kills the possibility of having a conversation. And of course this will be used as evidence that you, the "elite", are exercising your power to suppress the purported victim. You can't argue with someone using CT. It turns your reasonableness against you. This is particularly true when one of the defining virtues of the elite is "western rationality" as in critical race theory. But CT is inherently fallacious and circular, so there is always an attack on reason involved on some level. Even though the Frankfurt School was reacting against marxism and communism, CT has some of the same characteristics, since it works by inventing novel class divides and then appeals to egalitarian justice to split people along those lines. The end result when you always attack the "upper class" is of course the denial of everything that elevates, in other words, of virtue.
You know i respect you. And like you. And it did model CRT. If anyone understands having an anger response to cultural Marxism is me. In fact, I’d wager my struggles with anger and violence make you look quite gentle. What is being missed is both you and her are courageous enough to take a stand against perceived injustice. I want to see that courage unified. Against a much more dangerous foe. Especially considering what we will all be facing soon. And in case you’re missing it, this is a backroom brawler attempting to become a peacemaker.
Exemplary. nostr:nevent1qqsx0cflx8xr8cts6sshwzasazylw54lddxa89jlqyc60h73d26mhrqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzqcgxv5zxzlh8jwrsy8scez0m08gam0p700l3nneznr6qgehcw90fqvzqqqqqqyvlqswy
Yes, I completely agree with this. There is no need to draw us/them lines here (which is basically what I was objecting to by my criticism). And you're right that my mute comment played into that, which I regret. nostr:nprofile1qydhwumn8ghj7argv4nx7un9wd6zumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qpqm4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvs36jfsv none of this was intended to be a personal attack. You are attacking your own side, however. You should realize that and stop.