Paglia vs Peterson - now on You Tube

[Alexander Bard]

Dear Brosters

I strongly recommend watching this just released amazing dialogue between Camille Paglia and Jordan Peterson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM

The whole almost two hours is simply edutainment at its absolute best. The world's possibly twp most charismatic public intellectuals finally meet. And of course agree in the most imteresting way possible.

Have fun!

Alexander

PS: I absolutely love Camille's last sentence "We agreed on absolutely everything. I knew it."

[schirin zorriassateiny]

Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

[Alex Curpas]

Thanks for sharing!

They make some fantastic points and I admire them both for risking their careers by standing up for free speech and against this insane brand of political correctness that has corrupted North American academia and society in general. 

I'm a bit confused about Jordan Peterson's stance on violence though, I like to believe I'm not less of a man than him for not wanting to defend my ideas with my fists. Is that really why you can't argue with a crazy fourth wave feminist? 

I think that the big thing they don't talk much about is money. Peterson states that things are getting better globally and that we have halved the number of people living in poverty 5 years ahead of schedule. That may be true on a global level but things are getting worse in the West, with youth unemployment on the rise and inequality at catastrophic levels. He bashes Marxism and he has a point, the left is currently in a pretty sad state all over, but how does he expect women to have children sooner without some serious social safety net? Life doesn't have to be all suffering as he states, we have the means to cover the basic needs for everybody in Western society, but we're trapped in these stupid profit driven games.

You can look at women entering the workforce during the second wave of feminism as one of the biggest swindles of capitalism. It used to be that a nuclear family could live comfortably on one income, now two are barely enough and jobs are scarce.

Another consequence of women entering the workforce is the deterioration of our health. As families have less time to cook, they rely more on packaged foods and as a result, we might be the first generation in a century or more to live shorter lives than our parents. Our modern eating and lifestyle choices have a direct effect on our mental health as well, making us too damn sensitive to being offended, more prone to give in to our psychotic instincts, or too depressed to care. 

//Alex

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 1:35 PM, schirin zorriassateiny <schi...@icloud.com> wrote:

Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Oct 2017, at 09:49, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Brosters

I strongly recommend watching this just released amazing dialogue between Camille Paglia and Jordan Peterson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM

The whole almost two hours is simply edutainment at its absolute best. The world's possibly twp most charismatic public intellectuals finally meet. And of course agree in the most imteresting way possible.

Have fun!

Alexander

PS: I absolutely love Camille's last sentence "We agreed on absolutely everything. I knew it."

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Brent Cooper]

Hey Alex, yes this is why some of us think Peterson is wrong about a lot of things, and we've had lengthly debates about it elsewhere. Peterson doesn't have any of those answers, and many answers exist. The critique of the left is overdone now and has too many believing that the left is weak and incoherent. Things couldn't be further from the truth if you actually listen to the Bernie Sanders of Jeremy Corbyn movements, or read contemporary Marxist literature, or listen to Chapo Trap House. Everybody is in an information echochamber; even Peterson, even some of us. It's a super heroic task to break free and actually seek out quality answers to all these deep problems. 

Regards, 

Brent

[Joakim.grundh]

I would guess that Petersson make the assumption that Marxism (as the political de facto movement) was created by the feudal powers to combat the rising dominance of the big bourgeois. Or big capital. We have to consider this landowning capital against money capital struggle more I would say.

---

-----Originalmeddelande-----
Från: "Alex Curpas" <alex....@gmail.com>
Till: synt...@googlegroups.com
Kopia: Metamodernism <metamo...@googlegroups.com>
Datum: 2017-10-08 18:25
Ämne: Re: {Syntheism} Paglia vs Peterson - now on You Tube

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

 

[Daniel Lundberg]

I wasn't that impressed by Pagilia, especially her comment about LSD destroying lives. She did not elaborate on that comment and it came across as psychefobic (or whatever the terms is).

2017-10-09 15:56 GMT+02:00 Joakim.grundh <joakim...@blixtmail.se>:

I would guess that Petersson make the assumption that Marxism (as the political de facto movement) was created by the feudal powers to combat the rising dominance of the big bourgeois. Or big capital. We have to consider this landowning capital against money capital struggle more I would say.

---

-----Originalmeddelande-----
Från: "Alex Curpas" <alex....@gmail.com>
Till: synt...@googlegroups.com

Kopia: Metamodernism <metamodernism@googlegroups.com>

--

 

[Clive Selwyn]

Your bar must be extremely high then. I thought she was brilliant and inspiring (albeit rather manic and crazy)…

I actually found her more interesting than JP during this interview. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

[Alexander Bard]

I totally agree here with Clive.

Can we please stop expecting people to cover every angle possible in every conversation? This is a dialogue for grown-ups and not for a kindergarden audience.

Camille Paglia is damned brilliant and she is certainly not psychephobic. Anybody who really believes she is psychepohobic must deliberately do their best to not understand her.

She talks about a lot of smart working class people going hippie bananas on drugs in the 1970s leaving academia and the establishment to fake poetit-bourgeois power-hungry people.

Which happens to be historically correct. And is in itself not psychephobic.

And I love mania and craziness. So refreshing!!!

Love

Alexander

2017-10-10 10:10 GMT+02:00 Clive Selwyn <clive....@gmail.com>:

Your bar must be extremely high then. I thought she was brilliant and inspiring (albeit rather manic and crazy)…

I actually found her more interesting than JP during this interview. 

On 10 Oct 2017, at 09:05, Daniel Lundberg <daniel....@gmail.com> wrote:

I wasn't that impressed by Pagilia, especially her comment about LSD destroying lives. She did not elaborate on that comment and it came across as psychefobic (or whatever the terms is).

2017-10-09 15:56 GMT+02:00 Joakim.grundh <joakim...@blixtmail.se>:

I would guess that Petersson make the assumption that Marxism (as the political de facto movement) was created by the feudal powers to combat the rising dominance of the big bourgeois. Or big capital. We have to consider this landowning capital against money capital struggle more I would say.

---

-----Originalmeddelande-----
Från: "Alex Curpas" <alex....@gmail.com>
Till: synt...@googlegroups.com

Kopia: Metamodernism <metamo...@googlegroups.com>

--

 

[Martin Munthe]

Let's agree to not call opinions and views "phobia" if we don't share them.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Alexander,

You have been to my hometown and I am sure you know there are many retired hippies in Claremont where I live.  So what you are saying about the 1970s I know is true, because I meet the people who were there on a daily basis.  

I am going to have to learn more about Paglia.  I believe I remember my hero Terrence Mckenna talking about her.  

Kenneth

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Oh, I am watching this.

Jordan Peterson is very misunderstood by the supposed "Left" in this country.  I put left in quote and use that term very loosely, because they *don't* represent the underprivileged.  They are con artists and hood winkers.  I was living in a low income housing project before I went to the University of California or Riverside.  Now, I am a leftest radical.  I make no apologies about it.  However going to college, and see how what offended college students would just not be offensive to people in my old neighborhood hit me with a hard realization.  The standard of political correctness is not coming from the bottom up, and not even in a Marxist sense.  The standard of what is okay to say, and what is a micro-aggression is being determined by those who have enough economic privilege to be in college.  

An example is the word Ghetto, and how leftest academia in it's utter racist mentality puts an automatic association of that word with black.  But when I was living in low income housing, we did not see it that way.  Come to think about it, I only heard college students who never lived in such a situation use the word in a racial context, or believe it to be automatically racial.  An example would be when I was smoking pot with my friends who lived in my complex.  We did not have a pipe around to smoke out of.  So a someone said "How about we smoke out of a can?"  and my friend replied "No man, that's ghetto."  Most of the people at this place were black and latino.  In this context, this was a word of empowerment for the underclass.  It was a way of saying "You may live here, but you can still take pride and be presentable."  Well I start going to college and get in trouble for using the term ghetto birds (slang for police helicopters) when describing my old neighborhood.  The sound of police helicopters or ghetto birds at night when trying to go to sleep is a nightly thing one has to deal with being low income in America.  Well some student got offended, and there was a mob of them on me before I knew it, for using the word ghetto as if it was a micro-aggression towards blacks.  I could tell that none of the students who were offended ever lived a day in their life in poverty, and it was aggravating for me, having lived in that situation. to have people telling me who did not, what words were inappropriate for me to use.  Especially since it is a class word, and not innately a race word.  

So this chopping up of words as Paglia described, not only kills creativity, but is an insult to people of the marginalized identities, that it is claiming to be for.  As a comic book writer, I am seeing how this dissection of language is ruining comics.  It has got to the point where Marvel is no longer publishing stories, but 30 page public service announcements about what are micro-aggression to some oppressed group.  And it is insulting to make the only point to a superhero's character, their marginalized identity.   It is much more dignified to have characters with back stories, who just happen to be a marginalized identity, than to make the only point to a character their marginalized identity.  Why not just make a bad ass crime fighter, who has a set of values, and an interesting story as to what made the character fight crime, who just happens to be gay, rather than a character where the only thing that makes the character cool is that the character is gay.  

I am posting a link which shows exactly what Paglia is talking about in terms of the dissecting of language killing creativity.  Since I know there are many LBGTQ in Syntheism, I would be curious as to your point of view on this badly written stuff.  

Example of bad writing do to pc culture

Kenneth

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Now that I am done with the entire video, I will put some more two cents in.

I do agree with a lot of what Paglia is saying.  I find the Marxist influence on modern feminism of a division of labor to be innately oppressive, to be highly ethnocentric from my Anthropological view, and further more imposing a western view of equality as ascribed to Marx, on cultures which are not western.  

I frequently go to Native American sweat lodge ceremonies, which are done by a Peiute elder.  The women who were brought up with the traditional ways who I meet at these gatherings, see themselves as maintaining equality through a division of labor.  This is a culture mind you that never had a need for feminism, as they have always had men and women leadership, and equality has always been a given.

I think many modern American feminists are mistaking equality to mean equity.  If there is no biological distinction between male and female, than why fight for maternity leave to begin with?

Where I slightly disagree with Paglia, is that there is no place whatsoever for identity politics like there was in the 1960s.  There are still much of the same issues today happening that were happening in the 60s.  To ignore the racial or gender inequalities all together is not productive, as there is still a long way to go.  I would agree with Paglia however that the identity politics especially after 2013, has gone way overboard and out of control, to the point where the identity of the person saying something is more important, than the validity of what the person is saying.  

It has created a bi-polar dialogue where white people are suppose to pay attention to racism in this country, and speak out against it, yet if you are white and male, you are not allowed to have an opinion whatsoever.  

I think Neo-Marxism is a better word for it, as Paglia describes, than Marxism.  Because even to Marxist standards, the current dissection of language and identity politics has gone ludicrous.  

I personally am more of a Hegelian than a Marxist, and I find Hegel to be more aligned with Syntheism than Marx.  

Kenneth

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh, I am watching this.

Jordan Peterson is very misunderstood by the supposed "Left" in this country.  I put left in quote and use that term very loosely, because they *don't* represent the underprivileged.  They are con artists and hood winkers.  I was living in a low income housing project before I went to the University of California or Riverside.  Now, I am a leftest radical.  I make no apologies about it.  However going to college, and see how what offended college students would just not be offensive to people in my old neighborhood hit me with a hard realization.  The standard of political correctness is not coming from the bottom up, and not even in a Marxist sense.  The standard of what is okay to say, and what is a micro-aggression is being determined by those who have enough economic privilege to be in college.  

An example is the word Ghetto, and how leftest academia in it's utter racist mentality puts an automatic association of that word with black.  But when I was living in low income housing, we did not see it that way.  Come to think about it, I only heard college students who never lived in such a situation use the word in a racial context, or believe it to be automatically racial.  An example would be when I was smoking pot with my friends who lived in my complex.  We did not have a pipe around to smoke out of.  So a someone said "How about we smoke out of a can?"  and my friend replied "No man, that's ghetto."  Most of the people at this place were black and latino.  In this context, this was a word of empowerment for the underclass.  It was a way of saying "You may live here, but you can still take pride and be presentable."  Well I start going to college and get in trouble for using the term ghetto birds (slang for police helicopters) when describing my old neighborhood.  The sound of police helicopters or ghetto birds at night when trying to go to sleep is a nightly thing one has to deal with being low income in America.  Well some student got offended, and there was a mob of them on me before I knew it, for using the word ghetto as if it was a micro-aggression towards blacks.  I could tell that none of the students who were offended ever lived a day in their life in poverty, and it was aggravating for me, having lived in that situation. to have people telling me who did not, what words were inappropriate for me to use.  Especially since it is a class word, and not innately a race word.  

So this chopping up of words as Paglia described, not only kills creativity, but is an insult to people of the marginalized identities, that it is claiming to be for.  As a comic book writer, I am seeing how this dissection of language is ruining comics.  It has got to the point where Marvel is no longer publishing stories, but 30 page public service announcements about what are micro-aggression to some oppressed group.  And it is insulting to make the only point to a superhero's character, their marginalized identity.   It is much more dignified to have characters with back stories, who just happen to be a marginalized identity, than to make the only point to a character their marginalized identity.  Why not just make a bad ass crime fighter, who has a set of values, and an interesting story as to what made the character fight crime, who just happens to be gay, rather than a character where the only thing that makes the character cool is that the character is gay.  

I am posting a link which shows exactly what Paglia is talking about in terms of the dissecting of language killing creativity.  Since I know there are many LBGTQ in Syntheism, I would be curious as to your point of view on this badly written stuff.  

Example of bad writing do to pc culture

Kenneth

[Alexander Bard]

Correct!

I am a Hegelian too, but I can also read and study Marx without resorting to the sort of Neo-Marxist nonsense that Paglia and Peterson righfully dismiss (their mistake is to mix Marx with Neo-Marxism, real Marxists actually LOATHE identity politics as much as Peterson and Paglia do). I believe though that while there is no room for identity politics there is plenty of room for identity culture. But that is an entirely different thing. Politics is about power, resources, class, administration and management. Not about attention culture.

Ushta te

Alexander

2017-12-19 23:05 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com>:

Now that I am done with the entire video, I will put some more two cents in.

I do agree with a lot of what Paglia is saying.  I find the Marxist influence on modern feminism of a division of labor to be innately oppressive, to be highly ethnocentric from my Anthropological view, and further more imposing a western view of equality as ascribed to Marx, on cultures which are not western.  

I frequently go to Native American sweat lodge ceremonies, which are done by a Peiute elder.  The women who were brought up with the traditional ways who I meet at these gatherings, see themselves as maintaining equality through a division of labor.  This is a culture mind you that never had a need for feminism, as they have always had men and women leadership, and equality has always been a given.

I think many modern American feminists are mistaking equality to mean equity.  If there is no biological distinction between male and female, than why fight for maternity leave to begin with?

Where I slightly disagree with Paglia, is that there is no place whatsoever for identity politics like there was in the 1960s.  There are still much of the same issues today happening that were happening in the 60s.  To ignore the racial or gender inequalities all together is not productive, as there is still a long way to go.  I would agree with Paglia however that the identity politics especially after 2013, has gone way overboard and out of control, to the point where the identity of the person saying something is more important, than the validity of what the person is saying.  

It has created a bi-polar dialogue where white people are suppose to pay attention to racism in this country, and speak out against it, yet if you are white and male, you are not allowed to have an opinion whatsoever.  

I think Neo-Marxism is a better word for it, as Paglia describes, than Marxism.  Because even to Marxist standards, the current dissection of language and identity politics has gone ludicrous.  

I personally am more of a Hegelian than a Marxist, and I find Hegel to be more aligned with Syntheism than Marx.  

Kenneth

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristensen11235813@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh, I am watching this.

Jordan Peterson is very misunderstood by the supposed "Left" in this country.  I put left in quote and use that term very loosely, because they *don't* represent the underprivileged.  They are con artists and hood winkers.  I was living in a low income housing project before I went to the University of California or Riverside.  Now, I am a leftest radical.  I make no apologies about it.  However going to college, and see how what offended college students would just not be offensive to people in my old neighborhood hit me with a hard realization.  The standard of political correctness is not coming from the bottom up, and not even in a Marxist sense.  The standard of what is okay to say, and what is a micro-aggression is being determined by those who have enough economic privilege to be in college.  

An example is the word Ghetto, and how leftest academia in it's utter racist mentality puts an automatic association of that word with black.  But when I was living in low income housing, we did not see it that way.  Come to think about it, I only heard college students who never lived in such a situation use the word in a racial context, or believe it to be automatically racial.  An example would be when I was smoking pot with my friends who lived in my complex.  We did not have a pipe around to smoke out of.  So a someone said "How about we smoke out of a can?"  and my friend replied "No man, that's ghetto."  Most of the people at this place were black and latino.  In this context, this was a word of empowerment for the underclass.  It was a way of saying "You may live here, but you can still take pride and be presentable."  Well I start going to college and get in trouble for using the term ghetto birds (slang for police helicopters) when describing my old neighborhood.  The sound of police helicopters or ghetto birds at night when trying to go to sleep is a nightly thing one has to deal with being low income in America.  Well some student got offended, and there was a mob of them on me before I knew it, for using the word ghetto as if it was a micro-aggression towards blacks.  I could tell that none of the students who were offended ever lived a day in their life in poverty, and it was aggravating for me, having lived in that situation. to have people telling me who did not, what words were inappropriate for me to use.  Especially since it is a class word, and not innately a race word.  

So this chopping up of words as Paglia described, not only kills creativity, but is an insult to people of the marginalized identities, that it is claiming to be for.  As a comic book writer, I am seeing how this dissection of language is ruining comics.  It has got to the point where Marvel is no longer publishing stories, but 30 page public service announcements about what are micro-aggression to some oppressed group.  And it is insulting to make the only point to a superhero's character, their marginalized identity.   It is much more dignified to have characters with back stories, who just happen to be a marginalized identity, than to make the only point to a character their marginalized identity.  Why not just make a bad ass crime fighter, who has a set of values, and an interesting story as to what made the character fight crime, who just happens to be gay, rather than a character where the only thing that makes the character cool is that the character is gay.  

I am posting a link which shows exactly what Paglia is talking about in terms of the dissecting of language killing creativity.  Since I know there are many LBGTQ in Syntheism, I would be curious as to your point of view on this badly written stuff.  

Example of bad writing do to pc culture

Kenneth

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Exactly.  A true respectable Marxist would reject identity politics.  As well they seem to assume Marxist automatically means communist.  Marxism is not necessarily communism, but it is materialism.  

I think the difference that you and I have with a Marxism, is that as Hegelians, we accept that to fix the material symptoms of society, we must first cure the ills of the mind which abuses material society.  Rather than starting with changing the material end of society to cure the the mind.  

Alexander my brother, there is a growing strain of anti-intellectualism in the United States which not only sweeps across identities, but political ideologies.  On the left, a new form of prejudice has developed where there is no dialogue, and the merit of what someone says is not as important as the identity of the person who says it.  On the right, you have a growing amount of young libertarians who think that eliminating public schools, is going to make our country more free, because the state should not force anyone to go to school.  Truth be told public schools is what has always preserved free enterprise and competition not just in the united states, but all over the developed world.  It is also the very thing that ensured that if people are given the right to vote, that they are at least informed as what they are voting for.  

Well, now with the budget cuts on public schools, and the use of such non-sense conspiracy media with the likes of Info-Wars, and Breitbart, there has just been a vote to eliminate net neutrality.  This means that internet service providing companies like AT&T or Verizon now have the right to regulate, or disrupt what gets put on the web.  THIS SHOULD ALARM EVERY AMERICAN!!!  Net Neutrality is something I think every Syntheist must hold sacred!

Kenneth

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Correct!

I am a Hegelian too, but I can also read and study Marx without resorting to the sort of Neo-Marxist nonsense that Paglia and Peterson righfully dismiss (their mistake is to mix Marx with Neo-Marxism, real Marxists actually LOATHE identity politics as much as Peterson and Paglia do). I believe though that while there is no room for identity politics there is plenty of room for identity culture. But that is an entirely different thing. Politics is about power, resources, class, administration and management. Not about attention culture.

Ushta te

Alexander

2017-12-19 23:05 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristensen11235813@gmail.com>:

Now that I am done with the entire video, I will put some more two cents in.

I do agree with a lot of what Paglia is saying.  I find the Marxist influence on modern feminism of a division of labor to be innately oppressive, to be highly ethnocentric from my Anthropological view, and further more imposing a western view of equality as ascribed to Marx, on cultures which are not western.  

I frequently go to Native American sweat lodge ceremonies, which are done by a Peiute elder.  The women who were brought up with the traditional ways who I meet at these gatherings, see themselves as maintaining equality through a division of labor.  This is a culture mind you that never had a need for feminism, as they have always had men and women leadership, and equality has always been a given.

I think many modern American feminists are mistaking equality to mean equity.  If there is no biological distinction between male and female, than why fight for maternity leave to begin with?

Where I slightly disagree with Paglia, is that there is no place whatsoever for identity politics like there was in the 1960s.  There are still much of the same issues today happening that were happening in the 60s.  To ignore the racial or gender inequalities all together is not productive, as there is still a long way to go.  I would agree with Paglia however that the identity politics especially after 2013, has gone way overboard and out of control, to the point where the identity of the person saying something is more important, than the validity of what the person is saying.  

It has created a bi-polar dialogue where white people are suppose to pay attention to racism in this country, and speak out against it, yet if you are white and male, you are not allowed to have an opinion whatsoever.  

I think Neo-Marxism is a better word for it, as Paglia describes, than Marxism.  Because even to Marxist standards, the current dissection of language and identity politics has gone ludicrous.  

I personally am more of a Hegelian than a Marxist, and I find Hegel to be more aligned with Syntheism than Marx.  

Kenneth

[Martin Munthe]

You're right about that, Kenneth. Just because of it's insane practices we use the word "neo-Marxism" to describe the racist, prejudice, bigot and anti-human movement that is post modern identity politics. To separate it from Marxism.

And getto is italian and refers to a place where people from the jewish diaspora are kept separate from the rest of a city community. All other definitions are slang.

The Net Neutrality situation will provice a great opportunity for companies that doesn't believe in censorship. I predict booming business for alternative ISP:s. At the expense of the major ISP:s. Adapt or die. 

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com> wrote:

Exactly.  A true respectable Marxist would reject identity politics.  As well they seem to assume Marxist automatically means communist.  Marxism is not necessarily communism, but it is materialism.  

I think the difference that you and I have with a Marxism, is that as Hegelians, we accept that to fix the material symptoms of society, we must first cure the ills of the mind which abuses material society.  Rather than starting with changing the material end of society to cure the the mind.  

Alexander my brother, there is a growing strain of anti-intellectualism in the United States which not only sweeps across identities, but political ideologies.  On the left, a new form of prejudice has developed where there is no dialogue, and the merit of what someone says is not as important as the identity of the person who says it.  On the right, you have a growing amount of young libertarians who think that eliminating public schools, is going to make our country more free, because the state should not force anyone to go to school.  Truth be told public schools is what has always preserved free enterprise and competition not just in the united states, but all over the developed world.  It is also the very thing that ensured that if people are given the right to vote, that they are at least informed as what they are voting for.  

Well, now with the budget cuts on public schools, and the use of such non-sense conspiracy media with the likes of Info-Wars, and Breitbart, there has just been a vote to eliminate net neutrality.  This means that internet service providing companies like AT&T or Verizon now have the right to regulate, or disrupt what gets put on the web.  THIS SHOULD ALARM EVERY AMERICAN!!!  Net Neutrality is something I think every Syntheist must hold sacred!

Kenneth

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Correct!

I am a Hegelian too, but I can also read and study Marx without resorting to the sort of Neo-Marxist nonsense that Paglia and Peterson righfully dismiss (their mistake is to mix Marx with Neo-Marxism, real Marxists actually LOATHE identity politics as much as Peterson and Paglia do). I believe though that while there is no room for identity politics there is plenty of room for identity culture. But that is an entirely different thing. Politics is about power, resources, class, administration and management. Not about attention culture.

Ushta te

Alexander

[Morgan Jarl]

In areas where a company has the Monopoly on high-speed internet like in our area of rural California where anything faster then ADSL is supplied by the one cable company, the adopt or die thing might not work, unfortunately. Just saying...

On Dec 20, 2017 6:54 AM, "Martin Munthe" <mar...@munthe.biz> wrote:

You're right about that, Kenneth. Just because of it's insane practices we use the word "neo-Marxism" to describe the racist, prejudice, bigot and anti-human movement that is post modern identity politics. To separate it from Marxism.

And getto is italian and refers to a place where people from the jewish diaspora are kept separate from the rest of a city community. All other definitions are slang.

The Net Neutrality situation will provice a great opportunity for companies that doesn't believe in censorship. I predict booming business for alternative ISP:s. At the expense of the major ISP:s. Adapt or die. 

[joakim...@blixtmail.se]

Do one even have to be against these people holding these "neo marxist" views? I would instead use a marxist approach to explain how their behavior is rooted in how they try to produce value of and for themselves in the society.

Works are somewhat gone now, the big questions have been rummaged over time and again and failed with occupy movements etc kind of putting nail in the coffins. So how are young people to claim their relevance? I think their subconscious is actually working under an insight that their "privileged" position won't last. That they don't have the same driving forces as those who can make a class journey by simply crossing the border to the US.

The real conflict is a generational one and has been for a couple of decades. Almost all previous generations saw the highest net income in the middle of life, with a drop towards the elder years. Now I don't have the exact figures for this in the US, but in Europe at least things have changed. And the elderly have kept their income lead making them the "new" group with purchase power.

Throw that in the analysis coupled with the rise in number of people studying social psychology, sociology, etc and you have a big fat base of people who are supposed to think about how people act, but lack the economical foundation for creating a real movement.

The identity politics aren't post modern. It is very very modern. Trying to label, structure and make a hierarchy of everything. It has not got what relativism is about, it has not been able to keep values out of structural explanations etc, that would be post modernism.

So the lack of foundation is pushing them back regressing into the modern, searching for that "holy" platform on which utopia can be built (or blame be cast) instead of adapting the more chaotic relativism, and find new fields, or ground to sow in, by letting go of prejudices, and pre-conceptions.

And as a last reflection, isn't it interesting that all this talk is somehow overshadowing the resurgent of slavery, the misogyny that can be seen supported open again instead of being in the shadow?

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

While Jordan Peterson has some interesting views.  A lot of which I agree with, and a lot of which I do not.  He seems to have a huge misunderstanding of Marxism.  When he says there is no cultural appropriation, he oversimplifies it's definition to "when one culture adopts something from another culture."  Truth is appropriation is waaaaayyy more compilcated and specific that that.  Appropriation is when one uses something from a different culture in an arrogant and disrespectful fashion.  Dave Brubeck playing Jazz piano is not an appropriation, because he approaches a black style of music in a respectful fashion.  However Jame Arthur Ray who got people to pay $900 for a spiritual warrior retreat, who held a sweat lodge ceremony, with no regard to the protocol of how sweat lodges have been done for thousands of years by the Native Americans, and eventually killing three people because he had no idea what he was doing, IS AN APPROPRIATION.  

The problem is young privileged campus pseudo leftest misuse the word.  Appropriation is a case by case basis.  Not a blanket, any time you use something of another culture, it is appropriation.

If you use something from another culture, in a way that is respectful of the culture, it is not appropriation.

Kenneth     

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 11:45 AM, <joakim...@blixtmail.se> wrote:

Do one even have to be against these people holding these "neo marxist" views? I would instead use a marxist approach to explain how their behavior is rooted in how they try to produce value of and for themselves in the society.

Works are somewhat gone now, the big questions have been rummaged over time and again and failed with occupy movements etc kind of putting nail in the coffins. So how are young people to claim their relevance? I think their subconscious is actually working under an insight that their "privileged" position won't last. That they don't have the same driving forces as those who can make a class journey by simply crossing the border to the US.

The real conflict is a generational one and has been for a couple of decades. Almost all previous generations saw the highest net income in the middle of life, with a drop towards the elder years. Now I don't have the exact figures for this in the US, but in Europe at least things have changed. And the elderly have kept their income lead making them the "new" group with purchase power.

Throw that in the analysis coupled with the rise in number of people studying social psychology, sociology, etc and you have a big fat base of people who are supposed to think about how people act, but lack the economical foundation for creating a real movement.

The identity politics aren't post modern. It is very very modern. Trying to label, structure and make a hierarchy of everything. It has not got what relativism is about, it has not been able to keep values out of structural explanations etc, that would be post modernism.

So the lack of foundation is pushing them back regressing into the modern, searching for that "holy" platform on which utopia can be built (or blame be cast) instead of adapting the more chaotic relativism, and find new fields, or ground to sow in, by letting go of prejudices, and pre-conceptions.

And as a last reflection, isn't it interesting that all this talk is somehow overshadowing the resurgent of slavery, the misogyny that can be seen supported open again instead of being in the shadow?

December 20, 2017 3:54 PM, "Martin Munthe" <mar...@munthe.biz> wrote:

You're right about that, Kenneth. Just because of it's insane practices we use the word "neo-Marxism" to describe the racist, prejudice, bigot and anti-human movement that is post modern identity politics. To separate it from Marxism.

And getto is italian and refers to a place where people from the jewish diaspora are kept separate from the rest of a city community. All other definitions are slang.

The Net Neutrality situation will provice a great opportunity for companies that doesn't believe in censorship. I predict booming business for alternative ISP:s. At the expense of the major ISP:s. Adapt or die.

[Alexander Bard]

Culture is meant to be appropriated. Appropriation in itself is not a negative thing.

Either you defend that ideas can be owned in absurdum. Or you realise that ideas are always borowed, appropriated and remade.

The "respect" you ask for, Kenneth, is also nothing but a subjective abstraction. It is utterly useless to build any values on.

And I disagree with Joakim on "social justice warriors" being utopian. They are anything but. Because they do not want any of their issues solved. If they did, they would have worked on a solution as empowerment and not turned themselves into victims at every instance. So they are postmodern as postmodernism is the dialectical reaction against modernist utopianism.

The problem however is that postmodernism killed and replaced what it was only meant to criticise. That is today's tragedy.

Best

Alexander

2017-12-22 23:14 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com>:

While Jordan Peterson has some interesting views.  A lot of which I agree with, and a lot of which I do not.  He seems to have a huge misunderstanding of Marxism.  When he says there is no cultural appropriation, he oversimplifies it's definition to "when one culture adopts something from another culture."  Truth is appropriation is waaaaayyy more compilcated and specific that that.  Appropriation is when one uses something from a different culture in an arrogant and disrespectful fashion.  Dave Brubeck playing Jazz piano is not an appropriation, because he approaches a black style of music in a respectful fashion.  However Jame Arthur Ray who got people to pay $900 for a spiritual warrior retreat, who held a sweat lodge ceremony, with no regard to the protocol of how sweat lodges have been done for thousands of years by the Native Americans, and eventually killing three people because he had no idea what he was doing, IS AN APPROPRIATION.  

The problem is young privileged campus pseudo leftest misuse the word.  Appropriation is a case by case basis.  Not a blanket, any time you use something of another culture, it is appropriation.

If you use something from another culture, in a way that is respectful of the culture, it is not appropriation.

Kenneth     

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 11:45 AM, <joakim...@blixtmail.se> wrote:

Do one even have to be against these people holding these "neo marxist" views? I would instead use a marxist approach to explain how their behavior is rooted in how they try to produce value of and for themselves in the society.

Works are somewhat gone now, the big questions have been rummaged over time and again and failed with occupy movements etc kind of putting nail in the coffins. So how are young people to claim their relevance? I think their subconscious is actually working under an insight that their "privileged" position won't last. That they don't have the same driving forces as those who can make a class journey by simply crossing the border to the US.

The real conflict is a generational one and has been for a couple of decades. Almost all previous generations saw the highest net income in the middle of life, with a drop towards the elder years. Now I don't have the exact figures for this in the US, but in Europe at least things have changed. And the elderly have kept their income lead making them the "new" group with purchase power.

Throw that in the analysis coupled with the rise in number of people studying social psychology, sociology, etc and you have a big fat base of people who are supposed to think about how people act, but lack the economical foundation for creating a real movement.

The identity politics aren't post modern. It is very very modern. Trying to label, structure and make a hierarchy of everything. It has not got what relativism is about, it has not been able to keep values out of structural explanations etc, that would be post modernism.

So the lack of foundation is pushing them back regressing into the modern, searching for that "holy" platform on which utopia can be built (or blame be cast) instead of adapting the more chaotic relativism, and find new fields, or ground to sow in, by letting go of prejudices, and pre-conceptions.

And as a last reflection, isn't it interesting that all this talk is somehow overshadowing the resurgent of slavery, the misogyny that can be seen supported open again instead of being in the shadow?

December 20, 2017 3:54 PM, "Martin Munthe" <mar...@munthe.biz> wrote:

You're right about that, Kenneth. Just because of it's insane practices we use the word "neo-Marxism" to describe the racist, prejudice, bigot and anti-human movement that is post modern identity politics. To separate it from Marxism.

And getto is italian and refers to a place where people from the jewish diaspora are kept separate from the rest of a city community. All other definitions are slang.

The Net Neutrality situation will provice a great opportunity for companies that doesn't believe in censorship. I predict booming business for alternative ISP:s. At the expense of the major ISP:s. Adapt or die.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

The example I gave up above of appropriation where James Arthur Ray did a New Age retreat and killed 3 people in a sweat lodge, because he did not have the proper training, to do native american sweat ceremonies, is not subjectively disrespectful.  In this case, it is dangerous.  However, I can care less if a westerner does yoga, or listens to Jazz, or wants to learn Tai Chi, wear moccasins, ect.  These are things which should have never even been in the category of Appropriation, and is not what the word was intended for.  On that note in a day in age when black men are being shot by cops, appropriation is the least of my concerns, so I will just agree to disagree with you.  

I do agree with you that "social justice warriors" and I use the term social justice very loosely in my description of them, are not Utopian at all.  As a matter of fact recent studies have shown that campus liberals have given up on the concept of a Utopia.  Occupy was a fine movement which was something to unite us.  Having been there, and heavily involved with Occupy L.A. and Riverside, I can tell you that it was identity politics which broke the movement.  Now what was once occupy.  A movement to unite, has become different identity movements.  When I was helping organize the Occupy events, I saw immediately the ethnic studies students playing oppression Olympics, and using regurgitated rhetoric told by their professor, such trivial things like "Why do you call this movement occupy.  As a person of color, that makes me uncomfortable, because we've been occupied for years."  Well by that same logic, let's not call protests marches, because people march in war.  From the get go with that movement, there was division and it was all based on identity.  After the split up of occupy, the campus left shifted, where being left was no longer about thinking outside the box.  You had a script that your teacher gave you.  Rehearse it.  Don't be creative with your language now, because even if you are in agreement, if you use any other words other than what is spoon fed, you must be a Trump supporter. 

Peterson and Paglia really misunderstand Marxism though.  The reason why I would spend more time at Socialist and Communist meetings in 2014, (I haven't been in a while), is that they rejected identity politics all together, and would actively criticize the identity movements.  

I post for all of you how SJW culture has been toxic for liberals like myself as well.  And let us just say, it is not liberal.  It is not about free thinking.  It is a con to say they represent the underprivileged because most of them come from a place of privilege and think they can dictate what the underprivileged should think.

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid

Kenneth

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Culture is meant to be appropriated. Appropriation in itself is not a negative thing.

Either you defend that ideas can be owned in absurdum. Or you realise that ideas are always borowed, appropriated and remade.

The "respect" you ask for, Kenneth, is also nothing but a subjective abstraction. It is utterly useless to build any values on.

And I disagree with Joakim on "social justice warriors" being utopian. They are anything but. Because they do not want any of their issues solved. If they did, they would have worked on a solution as empowerment and not turned themselves into victims at every instance. So they are postmodern as postmodernism is the dialectical reaction against modernist utopianism.

The problem however is that postmodernism killed and replaced what it was only meant to criticise. That is today's tragedy.

Best

Alexander

[Martin Munthe]

There is absolutely nothing modernist about gender politics. It's a slow growing movement that started in the 40's with, among others, Simone de Beauvoir's work. Deeply rooted in Marxism when societies saw the service sector outgrow factory working and passing the door step of the information age.

It has now grown into a major political force and a direct threat to democracy, free speech and rational thought.

It's almost impossible to misunderstand Marxism. The only thing you have to do is measure the effect of Marxist thought put into practice. And it's not pretty. It's extremely dangerous and has an almost hypnotic effect on very intelligent people. Mussolini is probably still the brightest brain Europe has ever seen in terms of building a nation on well written laws based on Marxist thought.

On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com> wrote:

The example I gave up above of appropriation where James Arthur Ray did a New Age retreat and killed 3 people in a sweat lodge, because he did not have the proper training, to do native american sweat ceremonies, is not subjectively disrespectful.  In this case, it is dangerous.  However, I can care less if a westerner does yoga, or listens to Jazz, or wants to learn Tai Chi, wear moccasins, ect.  These are things which should have never even been in the category of Appropriation, and is not what the word was intended for.  On that note in a day in age when black men are being shot by cops, appropriation is the least of my concerns, so I will just agree to disagree with you.  

I do agree with you that "social justice warriors" and I use the term social justice very loosely in my description of them, are not Utopian at all.  As a matter of fact recent studies have shown that campus liberals have given up on the concept of a Utopia.  Occupy was a fine movement which was something to unite us.  Having been there, and heavily involved with Occupy L.A. and Riverside, I can tell you that it was identity politics which broke the movement.  Now what was once occupy.  A movement to unite, has become different identity movements.  When I was helping organize the Occupy events, I saw immediately the ethnic studies students playing oppression Olympics, and using regurgitated rhetoric told by their professor, such trivial things like "Why do you call this movement occupy.  As a person of color, that makes me uncomfortable, because we've been occupied for years."  Well by that same logic, let's not call protests marches, because people march in war.  From the get go with that movement, there was division and it was all based on identity.  After the split up of occupy, the campus left shifted, where being left was no longer about thinking outside the box.  You had a script that your teacher gave you.  Rehearse it.  Don't be creative with your language now, because even if you are in agreement, if you use any other words other than what is spoon fed, you must be a Trump supporter. 

Peterson and Paglia really misunderstand Marxism though.  The reason why I would spend more time at Socialist and Communist meetings in 2014, (I haven't been in a while), is that they rejected identity politics all together, and would actively criticize the identity movements.  

I post for all of you how SJW culture has been toxic for liberals like myself as well.  And let us just say, it is not liberal.  It is not about free thinking.  It is a con to say they represent the underprivileged because most of them come from a place of privilege and think they can dictate what the underprivileged should think.

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid

Kenneth

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Culture is meant to be appropriated. Appropriation in itself is not a negative thing.

Either you defend that ideas can be owned in absurdum. Or you realise that ideas are always borowed, appropriated and remade.

The "respect" you ask for, Kenneth, is also nothing but a subjective abstraction. It is utterly useless to build any values on.

And I disagree with Joakim on "social justice warriors" being utopian. They are anything but. Because they do not want any of their issues solved. If they did, they would have worked on a solution as empowerment and not turned themselves into victims at every instance. So they are postmodern as postmodernism is the dialectical reaction against modernist utopianism.

The problem however is that postmodernism killed and replaced what it was only meant to criticise. That is today's tragedy.

Best

Alexander

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Martin,

Not all Marxism is communism.  It is materialism.  As well communism did not start with Marx.  That goes way back, with groups like the Paris Commune, the Diggers, possibly back to how the early Christians lived when they "Gave up all and shared all in common" as it is ascribed in the book of acts.

Abraham Lincoln freeing the slaves was Marxist thought in practice.  Helen Keller was Marxist thought in practice.  So Marxism has not always been destructive, every-time it has been put in practice.  As well even if you read the communist manifesto, in the first chapter, Marx is saying that the state needs to be eliminated.  Lennon, was the one who separated socialism from communism, and promoted the people's revolution over throwing the state, and the state seizing all of production to create socialism.  Within time, there was hope that people would evolve to be more altruistic, and the state would wither away and finally communism could be established.  Mussolini was not a Marxist.

One can be a capitalist and a Marxist at the same time.  Marxism is not a political party, but a way of observing material history and culture.  

For the record though.  My issue with Marxism is that it focuses too much on the material society which does not make lasting solutions, and not enough on the mindset of the society to fix the problem.  To fix the mindset and have it be long term, it cannot be done by force.  

Just out of curiosity, how many books by Karl Marx have you read?  

Kenneth   

On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Martin Munthe <mar...@munthe.biz> wrote:

There is absolutely nothing modernist about gender politics. It's a slow growing movement that started in the 40's with, among others, Simone de Beauvoir's work. Deeply rooted in Marxism when societies saw the service sector outgrow factory working and passing the door step of the information age.

It has now grown into a major political force and a direct threat to democracy, free speech and rational thought.

It's almost impossible to misunderstand Marxism. The only thing you have to do is measure the effect of Marxist thought put into practice. And it's not pretty. It's extremely dangerous and has an almost hypnotic effect on very intelligent people. Mussolini is probably still the brightest brain Europe has ever seen in terms of building a nation on well written laws based on Marxist thought.

[Alexander Bard]

Dear Martin

I agree. But would use Rousseau instead of Marx as the name connecting all these movements of fake phalluses and victimhood culture.

Interesting to hear identity politics ruined Occupy, dear Kenneth, which is what I suspected beforehand would happen and also seems to have happened.

Meanwhile Wall Steet bankers laughed their heads off at the naivety in the streets. Identity politics can onlh ever cause destruction but never properly build anything. Which is also why its pet projects collapse within weeks.

Except for gulliotines for the often innocent. Which is why it is still so destructive and dangerous.

Cheers

Alexander

2017-12-23 17:25 GMT+01:00 Martin Munthe <mar...@munthe.biz>:

There is absolutely nothing modernist about gender politics. It's a slow growing movement that started in the 40's with, among others, Simone de Beauvoir's work. Deeply rooted in Marxism when societies saw the service sector outgrow factory working and passing the door step of the information age.

It has now grown into a major political force and a direct threat to democracy, free speech and rational thought.

It's almost impossible to misunderstand Marxism. The only thing you have to do is measure the effect of Marxist thought put into practice. And it's not pretty. It's extremely dangerous and has an almost hypnotic effect on very intelligent people. Mussolini is probably still the brightest brain Europe has ever seen in terms of building a nation on well written laws based on Marxist thought.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Dear Alexander,

Should we as Syntheists, who believe in equality for all, take a definite stance to reject identity politics?  

I mean, with Occupy, people blame the police for the break up.  And the police did in a sense, but we could have kept on going if we stayed united as one movement, refrained from playing oppression Olympics, and kept the focus on the big issues, like Wall Street, the Military Industrial Complex, and a war based economy.  We forgot Martin Luther King's legacy, and the reason why he was killed, was because he went beyond identity politics.  His colleagues told him not to protest the war, or the oppression of the worker's unions, and to just focus on the black issue, to prevent what happened to Malcom X to happen to him.  Martin Luther King's response was "I can't, they are all inseparable issues."

Often young people in Black Lives Matter (which is a group I over all agree with in premise) will mention Martin Luther King becoming more radicalized.  That part is true, but what they miss, is that he became so radical, that he went beyond identity politics.  

Kenneth

[Alexander Bard]

Identity politics is nothing but a destructive hellhole.

It is also completely incompatible with the Syntheist philosophy of empowerment through technology.

People who are into identity politics are now even at each other's throats over what identity politics means.

And Occupy? Seriously? It was a massive flop due to naivety, lack of strategy and direction.

Sums it all up quite nicely.

Best

Alexander

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

I am curious.

Are SJW's a thing in Europe?  Usually I think of SJW's as an entitled economically privileged American thing.  All I will say is, almost no one who lives in poverty gives a damn about safe spaces and trigger warnings. 

Well, I am missing the good old days when being liberal was about thinking outside of the box, being creative with language, and promoting a sense of humor.  When Chris Rock a prominent liberal comedian, who even has the identity chips on his side, being black, will not perform on college campuses because the students cannot take a joke, than identity politics truly is a disaster.

Speaking of sense of humor.  I post this link to lighten the mood with laughter.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXQkXXBqj_U

Best

Kenneth

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Identity politics is nothing but a destructive hellhole.

It is also completely incompatible with the Syntheist philosophy of empowerment through technology.

People who are into identity politics are now even at each other's throats over what identity politics means.

And Occupy? Seriously? It was a massive flop due to naivety, lack of strategy and direction.

Sums it all up quite nicely.

Best

Alexander

[Alexander Bard]

Thanks a million, dear Kenneth!

The SJWs are quite abundant in Canada, the UK and Scandinavia too. Unfortunately.

I regard their very existence as both an ideological flaw (the Extreme Right is just the inverse of the Identity Left, they are both Rousseauians to the core, just like both Hitler and Stalin were) and a sign of massive decadence in the middle classes. We will refer to the phenomenon as absent phallus syndrome in our next book Digital Libido, set for release in August 2018.

Best

Alexander

2017-12-25 6:06 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com>:

I am curious.

Are SJW's a thing in Europe?  Usually I think of SJW's as an entitled economically privileged American thing.  All I will say is, almost no one who lives in poverty gives a damn about safe spaces and trigger warnings. 

Well, I am missing the good old days when being liberal was about thinking outside of the box, being creative with language, and promoting a sense of humor.  When Chris Rock a prominent liberal comedian, who even has the identity chips on his side, being black, will not perform on college campuses because the students cannot take a joke, than identity politics truly is a disaster.

Speaking of sense of humor.  I post this link to lighten the mood with laughter.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXQkXXBqj_U

Best

Kenneth

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Identity politics is nothing but a destructive hellhole.

It is also completely incompatible with the Syntheist philosophy of empowerment through technology.

People who are into identity politics are now even at each other's throats over what identity politics means.

And Occupy? Seriously? It was a massive flop due to naivety, lack of strategy and direction.

Sums it all up quite nicely.

Best

Alexander

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Look forward to reading it.  Thanks for the info.

On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks a million, dear Kenneth!

The SJWs are quite abundant in Canada, the UK and Scandinavia too. Unfortunately.

I regard their very existence as both an ideological flaw (the Extreme Right is just the inverse of the Identity Left, they are both Rousseauians to the core, just like both Hitler and Stalin were) and a sign of massive decadence in the middle classes. We will refer to the phenomenon as absent phallus syndrome in our next book Digital Libido, set for release in August 2018.

Best

Alexander

[joakim...@blixtmail.se]

In Sweden Most politicians play the game of SJW and it has been institutionalized by demands on companies to have strategies for ”equality”, ”diversity” and the likes.

I think you dismiss the idea that identity politics is modern to quick. Modernism had bauhaus, the positivists and all of the big racist ideologies everything from the idea that identity and essentialities are real and enumerable. Which is basically the same thing we see when lists are done over identifications you can make to measure amounts of oppression etc, or that groups have inherit some kind of essential debts toward each other. Those things goes against things like relativism, structuralism, subjectivism that defined the shift towards post-modernism.

Modernism was a naive project that didn’t predict the hard logical problems of language. The postmodern way is highly complex and I would guess only a slim part of the population are mentally and biological fit to use those methods of thinking. Therefor it cannot be a mass movement.

I can see the critique of the utopist label under a positive definition of the word. But I argue a value free definition, and as such a utopia is where man goes, not a place he builds. And both nazis and communist are utopian, they both built them on the disempoverment of the individual urging the population to go into the ”common realm” of shared values. Where you magical partale in the values of the class, der volk, or in Mussolinis case the aristocracy of the state.

I listened to Judith Butler whom seem to be a bit of a hero for the clique we discuss and she was blatant in promoting paternalism for forcing the strong (like mousollini) to create the values for the weak. She just shifts the values of the fascist ideology but promotes the same structural solutions for reaching the goal.

/Joakim

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.