Paul Gottfried on Wokeism, Marxism, and Christian Nationalism
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 апр 2023
- Jon Harris talks to Paul Gottfried about his views on Wokeism, Marxism, and Christian Nationalism including the recent controversy concerning James Lindsay's interpretation of one of his recent articles. Paul Gottfried
coined the term paleoconservative and is a former Professor of Humanities at Elizabethtown College. He is the current editor-in-chief of Chronicles and an associated scholar at the Mises Institute.
To support: www.worldviewconversation.com...
To Support the Podcast:
www.worldviewconversation.com...
Become a Patron
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Twitter: / jonharris1989
Follow Jon on Facebook:
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Gab:
gab.com/jonharris1989
Glad to see this, Jon! Gottfried’s Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt is excellent!
It's National Socialists. And well... there we are also talking about people having a right to their own history.
@Mimi M How is he 'historically ignorant'?
I always thought of it as the ”politics of envy”, but envy and guilt go hand in hand as it turns out
@Mimi M How so? What evidence do you have to support this?
Hey!! He was my professor in college! And I met him again a few years ago and we hung out. He's a great guy. He was always even tempered and allowed other (leftist) views to be expressed, unlike some of his leftist counterparts who would get very emotional when their ideas received pushback.
I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Gottfried on this. As a former Lefty, and hugely influenced by Marx in my youth, his analysis dovetails with my instincts, ever since wank Woke blew up. I think Christopher Lasch and Fred Jamison saved me early on. I will be following this distinguished gentleman from now on.
This gentleman is a blessing to academics.
This was wonderful. Gottfried is a joy to listen to. He cuts to the heart of the matter. Thank you.
Thank you for shedding light on this. It should not surprise any God-fearing and discerning Christian that those who propagate lies would have no concern with revising historic realities.
“Never make concessions…stand firm,” is what I took away, as well as, “It’s going to get a lot worse.” It will get worse and that is when we must not sacrifice our ethics and principles.
Whilst conservatives fret over ethics , principles and “muh constitution” progressives are ruthlessly running victory laps and cementing power for generations to come.
Keep fighting!
Brilliant man! I am blessed to have found him!
Thanks, Jon. Excellent interview. I want to find the time to look into Prof Gottfried's work. A lot here to mull over.
John, once again an excellent interview and podcast. Praying for you.
This was a helpful conversation
More Gottfried, please!!! He’s the man
I never trusted James Linsdey's analysis of workerism. It is Nice that Gottfried explains it so well. If you are not talking about the means of production and capital it is not Marxist!
Nice to listen to Mr Gottfried withouth his broken mic!!I must say that this is was one of the best interviews i have listen to... congrats to the big guy and his questions!💯Amazing work
There's a good book by the Polish philosopher Ryszard Legutko that I'm currently reading called "The Demon in Democracy." One of the things he notes are the harmful parallels between Communism and Liberal Democracy. However, I think what is revealed is that even though there are some similarities, what we're seeing in wokism is something closer to a new stage in the evolution of liberal democracy rather than a rise of a new Communist order.
Love that book
Looks like you both attended the Abbeville Institute's functions. Excellent.
Great talk. His ideas on political change are absolutely correct.
I do have a hard time not seeing wokeness as Marxist, having studied Marx. Yes it's not class conflict, but it seems the same when you substitute class with identity categories and follow the progression through the Frankfurt school, which is the origin of critical theory and cultural Marxism. It is conflict theory dividing oppressed and oppressor, proletariat and bourgeoisie along identity categories. Where am I wrong in this? Lindsay calls CRT Race Marxism, and having read the book, it seems true.
YOU ARE CORRECT. WOKE IS MARXIST
You have got this exactly right. It is a version of Marixism or neo-Marxism, if you will, that replaces Marx's economically-oriented groups with the dimension of identity politics. Power is still at the center of it and a form of class struggle. It's still the oppressed speaking their "truth" against the oppressors, just with postmodernism and intersectionality blended in.
He makes so much sense. Wokism is not Marxism, socialism or communism. The believers in wokism would be obliterated under these isms
Marxist regimes prized masculinity generally.
@Mimi M Haha! No, you couldn’t be more wrong. I highly doubt that Paul Gottfried is ignoring any historical data intentionally.
Yes! I was fooled in the early days (2015-2019) in believing woke was marxist in origin. Wrong. This mistake is massive. It comes from American Liberalism. It’s worse than marxism imo. At least marxism doesn’t shit on whites and males as much. These soy boys would’ve been eaten alive in any marxist scheme.
@@jonahamirokay. Which historical data is he ignoring?
Great interview. Wow, thank you!
Great interview! Am going to look this guy up.
Great conversation!
I am certainly glad to see that Paul Gottfried advocates moral conservativism. I miss the days when that was routine in the conservative intelligentsia. I hope some of these millennial conservatives will listen to that aspect of his message in particular. I am curious to know if he has ever had a religious allegiance or affiliation.
Geez! No wonder! I get his analysis!
Gottfried is based
Could you please follow up with a video dumbing this down? 😅I pulled up his original article and it's not really something one can glance over to understand the gist and I'm already listening to this interview a second time. Is this just a matter of semantics?
Some of it is, but there's an underlying disagreement about what the *positive* goal should be. i.e. What world does Lindsay want vs. what world Gottfried wants.
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast gotcha, that's what I figured and would the differing goals stem from a Christian vs atheist worldview or because both of them are arguing that the initial problem is distinctively something else?
The Gottfather speaketh.
I think Lindsay, in calling Woke "Marxism," would not argue it is the *same* project Karl Marx wrote about; merely that it's running the same dialectic and gnosticism-tinged OS. He charts its development through like four or five distinct movements. Perhaps that casts too wide a net for Gottfried? I've rarely taken issue with Lindsay's diagramming and diagnosis of the problem; more commonly I'm unimpressed with his prescription (or broad lack thereof) to treat and cure it.
Lindsay attacked Gottfried.
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast Yeah he seems to have been picking some weird fights lately. I think Gottfried has a point re:liberalism which probably struck a nerve.
Lindsey isn’t fit to hold Gottfried’s jock strap. He’s a grifter who’s never expanded beyond leftist canon: the primary figures and summarizes it for norniecons. He knows nothing about right wing thought. He wants a return to classical liberalism so he can’t admit that the latter is the problem - he’s staked his career on it. The way he spoke to Gottfried was outrageous. Extricate him from the right immediately.
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast where can I find this?
@@roberttg3767 0
Academic Agent did a great cigar stream on this Gottfried article yesterday
I think James Lindsay is on his way out. His "Two Wolves" podcast revealed his true hostility towards Christianity.
Gottfried quoted the introduction to Lindsay’s book. TLDR James thinks drag queens need to go back to the clubs, that’s about the entirety of his “turn back clock to 90s when everything was kewl and no racism / ID politics afflicted us”
Rothbard wrote that the left (socialists) had just taken on the idea of a strong state from conservatives, who themselves were just a reaction to libertarianism.
Ceasar Chavez, who is now revered by the left in the US protested against illegal immigration and the Republicans at least since 1990 have been for immigration and globalism ("free trade"). So I am not so sure that the left is about globalism and the right is about the locality. How do you explain that strong leftist protests in the 1990s against the G7 and international trade?
It annoys me no end when supposed conservatives say they don’t have a problem with transgenderism as long as the trans men stay out of women sports. Ugh!
Did God tell Moses to send all the Hebrews into a land and mix and mingle with all the false gods people?
There is nothing wrong with having a community with strong Christian beliefs and standards
Yeah but Gottfired, we consider Marxism-Leninism to be Marxist and it expanded Marxism to include anti-imperialism and anti-racism and it was Lenin who legalized LGBT and abortion.
It’s very curious isn’t it? Stalin is recognized as the more evil of the two, especially amongst so-called conservatives…..but Stalinism winning out after Lenin’s death arguably represented a more homegrown, Russian nationalist, “socially conservative in practice” strain of communism winning over Lenin’s internationalism. He reversed a lot of the lgbt, wife sharing nonsense the Lenin years had made acceptable. He even reopened the churches.
So I see you your Lenin embraced lgbt therefore woke-ism = communism, and raise you the Peruvian Shining Path bombing lgbt night clubs in the 90’s, because they considered it capitalist corruption of the youth. And their point is reinforced now by every major corporation in the western world changing their logo into an lgbt flag every June. By defense contractors like Raytheon sponsoring pride events, etc. Capital is perfectly comfortable and at home with woke.
There us a difference between Social liberals who are fiscally conservative like the ex Governor of Massachusetts William Weld and Conservatove Govanirs in other states. Totally out of touch.
Love me some Conservatove Govanirs. When they start their morning songs from the azalea bushes, who could fail to be glad of heart?
James Lindsey is not a crusading atheist. He goes out of his way not to offend Christians even though he is a non-believer. He accepts Christians as allies against the woke, sort of like when we allied with Stalin against Hitler because fascism was the greater danger at the time.
Stalin and Hitler were both crusading for their ideologies. I don’t know if I understand this analogy?
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast The Soviet Union was instrumental in helping to defeat nazi Germany. In fact, it was Soviet troops who first liberated the concentration camps. Surely you are familiar with the saying the enemy of my enemy is my friend (when it comes in handy).
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast I understand the animus Christians have towards James Lindsay. Christians and atheists are supposed to be natural enemies. However, James has done great work doing a deep dive into the origins of the radical left, reading the writings of Foucault and his ilk and explaining it so we don’t have to!
@@elainehiggins713 right. So cobeligerants.
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast That’s a new word for me!
PG needs to look closer at feminism and realize the left can hold contradictions for decades and still not fall away.
In my view the important error is not in conservatives allying with moderate leftists but in Christians allying with conservatives. Right and left goes the track of the slithering serpent, but never abiding in the truth (Isaiah 32:5-8). We are to continue in the truth in the love of Christ and not on the right side of the serpent's slithering as if that were better than the left.
I disagree wholeheartedly. Liberalism didn't fail, this is just the logical end result of individualism.
So Trueman?
Absolutely. All cut from the same cloth of rationalism and egalitarianism
@Conversations That Matter I had to search what you meant & I assume that you're referring to Carl Trueman. Up until this point I had never heard of him, but from the snippet I read I'm intrigued by his concept of "liquid modernity." Another book I'll need to read.
@@Razaiel What’s your definition of individualism?
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast That the individual is the primary concern of society & culture. That the shared religion, culture, history & genetics of your nation are of secondary or tertiary importance behind your individual wants & desires. Ultimately this leads to the breakdown of social bonds, because who is anyone else to tell you what you should be doing?
Wow! I know where I'm not spending $90.
Wallace conservatism
In some ways, but not every way.
@@ConversationsThatMatterpodcast I think he really is a great model for the conservative to follow after. His interview with Buckley on his show was fantastic. I truly believe he made Buckley look liberal. You should watch it if you haven’t yet.
@@michaelclark2458 I have. Yes, there's much to admire about Wallace. It's sad to me that elites have reduced him to a pro-segregation one issue politician despite the fact he totally changed his views on that subject.
GOTTFRIED IS WRONG. WOKE IS MARKIST.
Lindsay was right.
Wow. Longtime listener of Jon Harris. I cannot believe just how mistaken Gottfried is about woke ideology and that Jon would buy into this nonsense. You clearly are not paying attention or studying history. There is no greater ideological threat than woke ideology. I'm a conservative Christian disagreeing with Harris and Gottfried but agreeing with Lindsey. Guys, you HAVE to get this right.
No offense at all meant, presumably we all mostly want the same things here, but I think it may be your* historical literacy that’s lacking, otherwise I’m curious where you think Gottfried is wrong.
Also, unless I missed something, I’m not sure either of them said woke-ism wasn’t a threat.
Two very confused individuals... Sigh...
I don’t know who this guy is but he definitely is not the brightest bulb in the string.
????
Paul Gottfried is very intelligent.
@@gch8810 Bonhoeffer would have called him morally stupid.
Clearly modesty is not your thing. How many books on intellectual history can you stack up against his? Have more important things to do than to give us even one example of your disagreements with him?
@stevefuller2755 stick to watching the Daily Wire and Hannity then, you may be out of your depth here