Listen to this episode in full by subscribing on Apple Podcasts or Spotify - link.chtbl.com/modernwisdom Get my free Ultimate Life Hacks List to 10x your daily productivity → chriswillx.com/lifehacks
the corona is just startet and 4weeks after does hu want the covid19 injection and having it will chance in every way possible the T-VIRUS from resident evil is a cop of THE wit HONEY beside this virus with over 50components we dont no exactcly what but to speed op things in our body and some shooting other things down exeterer bla bla bla and so on and makes drastic convertible things duplication list is long LOvE from VIKINGNORTHLAND-DENMARK awesome man on podcast i could talk with him forever and EVER
If you're going to make a video exploring deep nuances of the English language shouldn't you put in the effort to review your video description in order to ensure it contains no grammatical errors? "I've been exposed the words Social Justice Warrior, Wokeness and Post Modernism a lot over the last year"
Critical theory is garbage, primarily because the power dynamic is ... well dynamic. The person with the power is always changing, and two people may have power over each other in different ways at the same time. Critical Theory is just a way for Marxists and other Fascists to apportion blame, stir up envy and hatred, in order to control the masses by giving them an object of hate. Historically this has been the haves (e,g, the Jews in both the national socialist Germany and the Imperial Socialist USSR (but many more people in the soviet empire)), and has always resulted the mass murder of those labelled as 'oppressors'.
Don't mistake 'Critical Theory' for 'Critical Thinking', 'Critical Theory' is the opposite of the 'Critical Thinking', there is in fact very little the is 'Critical' in 'Critical Theory'. The name is actually the important thing about it, like most things developed to support cultural Marxism the name is close to being the opposite of what the words mean. 2 + 2 =5.
The airplane seats question reminds me that many decades ago, in the eighties, when I was working in a small ad agency, we used to get trade magazines for restaurants. I was shocked when I first read about the new kinds of seats that were designed to be just slightly uncomfortable so that customers in chain restaurants would not linger, and the turnaround (thus profit) would be higher. I wasn't just shocked that these design decisions were happening, but also that the trade magazine would be so open about it. They were bragging about the accomplishments of this design. I mean, they figured out how long a customer could sit comfortably before they started to want to leave. It was brilliant. Of course, they don't actually want people to leave the airplane, at least not while it's moving, but it's the same kind of strategy. Maximize the space for profit, but just the right amount so that people will still use your service. I guess that story wouldn't make a big impression in Fat Studies journals.
I enjoyed this. An intelligent take on a ubiquitous problem. I welcome “the renaissance of traditional liberalism” mentioned at the end. Fingers crossed.
Early on there was the idea that there had to be an objective way to critique Western Society. Marxism was the vehicle that was purported to be that objective system that stood outside Western Society and could view Western thought truly without inherent bias.
@23:39 - Anyone ever thought about reversing some of these linguistic nominalizations? For example, I suspect the reason why these particular words are chosen (normalize, equity, racism etc) is because they have normal terminology on the one side that everyone understands, and (for the most part) agrees with. And their "sister definition" can work within the normal syntactic and circumstantial use of the word, yet mean something completely different. I'm not suggesting doing the same thing for your own ideology. I'm suggesting de nominalizing those words back to their original meanings. You'd do this by using a more precise synonym to the original term. For example: "It's not fair we normalize racism" Is responded to with: You mean it's not fair we shift judging based on skin color at the center of the normal distribution? What is your suggestion? For an intersectionalist, they would likely rattle off EXACTLY what they just said they didn't want. Or even better if they disagree with what you said back to them, you can de nominalize it towards THEIR meaning. Both are useful for getting anyone not steeped in the critical theory doctrine to understand what is actually being said.
A very insightful point. I have wondered whether the - what you call "sister definition" - is in reality a stipulative fallacious persuasive redefinition (defining fallacy). Thus, as you say, you remove the poisonous barb that is the change in the descriptive meaning by reasserting the original reportive definition/meaning that is appropriate from the context. In what you have effectively done is also point out what the person has done. Interestingly, such semantic slight-of-hand has appeared in the trans debate. An analysis was performed here, regarding pronouns... medium.com/@lecanardnoir/the-humpty-dumpty-wonderland-of-transgender-language-e0cbbecedcbc
>For example: "It's not fair we normalize racism" Is responded to with: You mean it's not fair we shift judging based on skin color at the center of the normal distribution? So deliberately misunderstand people by assuming a jargon homonym that the person is clearly not using? And how would that even substantially change their claim, which was that judging based on skin color should not be typical (by some measure of centrality) behavior? I think I need further clarification. What would they say back, in your example? (Please be as concrete as possible.)
@S. E. Z On the other hand, I can see this going wrong. I kinda feel like if we were to respond this way, we'd just be dismissed as arguing dishonestly, or in bad faith. And maybe we would be, if this engagement actually boils down to a semantic game. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's almost what this reads like, although I'm sure your intention is more "intellectually substantial" (for lack of a better term) than that.
@@kmgyening As much as I love the idea--and perhaps this is me being cynical--I feel the same way. A reply like that would come in bad faith to them. Critical race theory and all of it's "children" already operate in bad faith, though..so maybe it might work? Or put fuel on the fire? I'll have to give it a try.
@@michaelstanwick9690 Thank you for sharing this. Being one of those "rainbow people" who has personally been at the end of the nonsense, your link is very concise with how pronouns are being used. I'm saving this!
This guy is so good at explaining things. I think he is displaying knowledge that most activists seem to not know. Not being as clever as James, I feel compelled to say something stupid. It seems to me that most activists are students. Students are individuals that have subscribed to a university, A university is a seat of learning. Students therefore self identify as people that do not know enough, and they identify universities as the place to go to ameliorate their intellectual impoverishment. An old maxim states that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Students, either on a course or who have dropped out, have self identified as having a little knowledge, or not all knowledge of any particular subject. It seems to me that a (small) group of people with a little knowledge, that is not enough knowledge to be qualified to do anything, are telling us all what to do. Could it be that were these students to actually complete their courses they might learn enough to be useful. Another maxim says that the lunatics have taken over the asylum.
What's really interesting is that it's an (possibly) American speaking to a Brit (sorry, don't mean to offend) when critical thinking came about in Europe but mainly England....and actually, having said that, we probably got Critical Thinking from the Greeks...so there's that.
Your guest described the conflict that arises between "marginalised and oppressed" groups as an unfortunate by product of social justice when I would argue that that is indeed the goal.
Interesting to see how James switches backwards and forwards between the Woke meaning of Liberal, which is the way many non-woke use it, and the true meaning of the word.
First women’s studies Sydney 1976 But in New Zealand 1974 at full program Waikato University and at Victoria University of Wellington first paper by Phyllida Bunker - on of my history lecturers
I wonder if the philosophers are lagging the sciences bc we have such increasing access to information we have lost critical independent thinking skills
I'm not sure, really depends on which philosophy and what it's purpose is. Stoicism is used in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. Science only functions when describing the physical. Philosophy deals with the meta-physical. Science stems from philosophy. Morality for example is not a domain that science covers but of philosophy. Which is scary because science is evolving at an insane rate, but nothing is put on a rigid moral investigation. For example what the effects are of social media on the human psyche. At the moment our politics are only focussing on social engineering because the politicians don't understand the sciences, so they need an alternative.
I really wish people would explain why Trump has been a disaster. Lot's of people think he's doing a bad job but no one really explains why (except something stupid which amounts to "I think he's mean").
Criticial theory borders so close to being un-scientific, it should have never been funded or taken seriously. All scientific research is subject to confirmation bias. There are no metrics to measure it - at least during my academic days, we were instructed to be aware of and try to avoid it. It was more of a philosophical and ethical thing, not a hard science you could measure in numbers. Statistics play a role, but they cover all sources of false results, not just specific biased pre-conception. So how do you go from recognizing that science has certain flaws that are hard to isolate and will always be there no matter what- to actively trying to measure these flaws on a massive scale in anither field of science that's a lot less math based 😵💫😵💫
Interesting comment, CrackBaby. Critical Theory, as it has been rolled out in recent years, has become positively anti-Human. As such, it is doomed to destroy itself, the only question being how much of the stable culture will it take down with it. Critical Theory now even questions the "hard" science, and simple logic, the foundations of our modern world. At a certain point, science starts to be less about demonstrable, Newtonian laws, and begins to merge with consciousness, as some cutting-edge physicists are now theorizing.
Thank God for Jordan Peterson! He really was the tip of the spear that punctured through all of these nonsense, and brought out guys like James Lindsay. Those two couldn’t be any more different, and yet they stand for Reason and Sanity.
I've been a huge fan of James Lindsay since he came to my attention when the grievance studies scandal broke. I've watched/listened to pretty much every interview/discussion/podcast/event has been involved in, and I've read many/most of the articles and essays he's written - his essay "postmodern religion and the faith of social justice" inspired a major shift in the PhD research I'm aiming to do, so Jim's legitimately changed my life. With all that being said, his explanation of how "normal" is weaponised starting around 24:00 was a massive lightbulb moment for me. It's given me a new way to explain the problem to people that's infinitely simpler, clearer and easier to communicate. The crux of the problem is the *deliberate blending of the descriptive with the moral.* Everyone is afraid of speaking truthfully, but struggles to articulate exactly why, and this explanation accurately articulates the problem in a fantastically succinct single sentence. _This ideology has made descriptive statements an immoral action._ I'm still processing the brilliance of this encapsulation of such a massively complex mess in a single sentence. Mind blowing. This is exactly why I jump on everything James does, because every instance helps develop and refine my understanding and ability to communicate about it. This one epiphany just made my day. Big, big thanks to both of you for this discussion!
Thank you for your summary. It helped me solidify my understanding of the concepts he was talking about so I can describe them to others when it (inevitably) comes up. 🏵️
>The crux of the problem is the deliberate blending of the descriptive with the moral. I have a really strong example of this. I'm disabled (excuse me for mentioning this in two comments; it's topical) and thus involved in a lot of online disability community stuff. Within our community it is common to include image captions (a bit of text saying what's in the picture, for example one might read: "A young black woman with long blonde hair is standing in a red shirt and green pants in her blue tile kitchen, facing the camera straight-on, holding up a jar of coins in her left hand. she is winking. a cat is walking by in the background.") so that blind people's screenreaders can read the description to them. There genuinely are a lot of blind people participating in these disability communities, so there is nothing weird or fake-woke about that. the irritating part is when people deliberately describe persons in the pictures in such a way that gender or sex information CLEARLY available to anyone looking at the picture visually is concealed from the blind people, and it's done so in a political way. For example if the person is nonbinary-identified (which I have no intrinsic problem with) the caption might say "A young black person with long blonde hair is standing in a red shirt and green pants in their blue tile kitchen, facing the camera straight-on, holding up a jar of coins in their left hand. they are winking. a cat is walking by in the background." While that may be true, if say the person is CLEARLY a biological female who has taken no steps to transition or appear androgynous for example (eg no chest binder, makeup, female body fat distribution, etc), it is not cool imo to decide to politically shape what blind people get to know or not know by leaving that out (especially considering that for example the blind person may be a female who wants to know if they're communicating with a conspicuous male IDing as nb). Even if the person is completely gender conforming, in my opinion if the person is visibly trans, that should be included.
"This ideology has made descriptive statements an immoral action." But it doesn't tell us why this has been done. Is it is because the descriptive claim is being conflated with a normative moral claim? For example, an individual enunciates a descriptive statement but is also interpreted to be enunciating a normative moral statement at the same time. They enunciate the statement but there is also the clothing the statement is wrapped in, and that is the purpose or reason for making the statement. It may appear that making the statement into the discussion to further seek the truth or establish an already held moral position (the moral positions) of the matter. Either way, the descriptive statement's moral clothing is what is at issue because it conflicts with other a priori moral axioms that are more fundamental than the accuracy embedded in the descriptive claim.
Foucault was decidedly abnormal. He went down his road for the same reason some people pursue psychology/psychiatry: they are either looking for answers or they are looking for self-justification.
And he was also wrong in the respect that at least one grand narrative exists: "If you fuck around in the wake of a deadly venereal disease, you will die a terrible lonely death."
Same goes for Gramsci and Satre. They had problems by being accepted from other kids and youngsters. It was no easy childhood. For which I can be sorry. But this is personal, but there is no right or demand to deconstruct the real world. I always look in the whole personal picture. Marx was a narcissist and Engels is Co dependent. Check his personal life out.
In my aircraft design class in college, I was literally taught that the space between seats is to be designed to optimize the number of people you could fit in the plane. Some of the people in the class were overweight. Many of us were taller than average, and had experiences with trying to fit into aircraft seats that were too close together. We ran the numbers, and saw how much it really cost to put an extra inch of space between the seats. We saw how it would affect the price of a ticket, to add that extra inch. We came to understand why Business and First Class cost what they cost, and are designed the way they are.
Yeah, crazy that businesses would make decisions to maximize profits and not, you know, as an extension of their cishetero white male racist patriarchy
Math, science and critical thought are anathema to woke people, there's only what aligns with their ideology. @12:10 he explains this exactly, that woke people are incapable of understanding why the seats are designed that way and possibly fixing it going forward in a meaningful way. They only see power and privilege and only know how to destroy.
@@toobnoobify It's because leftists are ruled by negative emotion and they are poster children for arrested development. They react emotionally to every circumstance, mind-reading and projecting their insecurities and bigotry on others (ever wonder why they are always complaining about race and committing bigotry of low expectations?).
Yeah, but i dont like the "obligatory" far right condemnation all of these guys do. He could have just said nothing at all instead of playing their game, to show that he really are good boy. They will never respect him
@@fredriko.zachrisson9711 The far left is creating the far right. Both are postmodern. You might say that the far right has no relevance in society since they are on the fringe, and you might have a good point there. But online you can interact with them fairly easily so it can grow like the left has if they seriously plot together and use the far left tactics to pull a Hitler.
Social Justice !!! omg, im doing a presentation in 4days and ive violently swung from seeing social justice and defining this for the betterment of all...whilst ive been finding and sourcing the information to support this justification I have come to a complete and utter stop! let me state here, social justice isn't what I thought it was ….
I'm curious to know how your journey has taken you since the explosion of racial issues that have come about since BLM has gone ultra-mainstream following George Floyd's death
All societies have inherent social injustice. We are not insects, although the SJW’s would like to treat us so. Some people, for whatever reason, will ‘do better’ in life in their society than others, so there will always be a sense of grievance felt by some people in that society. What is happening now is that the grievances identified by some in Western society, basically those with a chip on their shoulder who take all things personally (Patriarchy, Inequality of the sexes, Sexual stereotyping, Gender, Race, etc) are being manipulated and used by the cultural Marxists to weaken society from within, in order to be able to create, from the fallout, the sort of society they want, a land of utopian idealism in which all have equity, all experience inclusion and all behave according to the new morality demanded of them, just like an insect. Of course, the reality would be, as was soon discovered in the French and Russian Revolutions, that a new hierarchy would develop, with a new section of society taking up the reins of power and a new section of society feeling aggrieved, and the blood will flow to make sure all the insects abide by the new rules. You have come to your senses in seeing Social Justice Critical Theory for what it is, but be careful; if this was post-revolutionary France, you would be one of the first for the guillotine.
@@nickking-edwards9301 : Indeed. And there is no Western legal system that could support 'social justice', or 'research justice' or 'environmental justice' etc. Because the whole woke cult has its ideological roots in post-modern deconstructionism and cultural marxism - all of which are totalitarian in nature.
I took ASL two semesters when I retuned to college 12 years ago. There was even then a whole narrative tied to deaf identity. Deaf parents happy that their children were born deaf. Families splitting over cochlear implants. It’s one thing to make the most of overcoming a disability. But therein lies the rub: there is a subset of people who look at their deafness as NOT being a disability.
OMG, YES! I remember this and thinking it was nuts. Contact James so he can add it to his examples. From “Black and Proud” to “Gay and Proud” to “Deaf and Proud” to (presumably) “Disabled and Proud”? and, I guess, “Mentally challenged and Proud”? (can’t say “retarded”). A thing can be taken too far😱 As an always-confident Black kid I saw this phrase as overcompensation for weak personal confidence.
Diversity of opinion on a topic is ideal. "One man's trash is another man's treasure." comes to mind. I don't know much about the disabled community, so won't speak directly to that.
In Italy in the seventies they closed all psychiatric hospitals at one single day. The communities were the take over the patients ... of course it did not work out. The patients faced homelessness and hundreds of them committed suicide. This experiment gone wrong is still celebrated as a success and it is hard to find critical material to it.
That's wild. I have encountered similar things among fellow autistic people trying to argue it is a form of identity rather than a disability. This mindset stifles research. Excludes the possibility of some kind of breakthrough in treatments available. To see this same thing applied to a direct, objective, undeniable physical disability like deafness is beyond me.
I've followed these toxic ideologies fpr about five years, trying to understand the madness so that I can resist it effectively. This talk was THE most clearly articulated, thouggt through and well researched account on these cynical theories. Deep gratitude to this man for wading waist deep through 💩 in order to understand, analyze and illuminate this toxic mess 🙏🏻 Will buy and read your book for sure 😁👍🏻
Can Social Justice prosper if the producing man (business owners and workers) stop funding Social Justice departments in public and private universities? Can't we simply, and literally starve them out of existence?
The French postmodernist were academic shit-posters. Intersectionalism by the way, appears to me to work like the dynamics of a narcissistic family played out at a societal level. Subsections of the population are turned against each other like siblings through the golden-child/scapegoat dichotomy and the goalposts are always shifting.
Thank you James. I got a whiff of a nascent form of this as a high school senior in 1981 when I dared question the strategy of my honors school lowering its academic standards to appeal to equity...... I'm excited to form some secret society meet up .......
You are very intelligent young man. I hope you Reconsider your views on the president, as he says exactly what you do, but less eloquently. Don’t be a victim of your own theory; you speak better, you’re better educated therefore person A (Trump) is not as intelligent, honest or clear as me. Trump gets his message out, which is why numerous Trump supporters are listening to you, your ideas and agree with your analysis and research of social culture and society as a whole
Dr. Lindsay says politics don't matter as much as we think we do. To him, I say RWANDA. SOUTH AFRICA. This was on the 5th of December, so I'll give him a pass, but the Democrats response to the Corona pandemic has validated a lot of what was once "conspiracy theories". Starting with glaring abuses of authority and violations of citizen's constitutional rights, like that lady who had her facebook stream shut down because she was somehow violating social distancing by selling stuff online and mailing it to clients. But of course, it all comes down to the Riots. More specifically, to Democrats literally and figuratively knelling to it. The Woke literally behaves like a cult. They have saints and marthyrs: George Floyd and Trayvon Martin. Heresy: Racism. The Born Sinner: White people. Apostates: Black people who don't vote democrat. The Original Sin: something they call Systemic Racism. Devil: Trump. You already know their chants and dogmas. And the worst part is that it's a state sanctioned, countrywide religion. It's extremelly naive to believe something like what happened in Rwanda or is happening in South Africa won't happen in the USA. The Cult has already reached deep into the US system of government. And their dogmas is pretty clear. When they talk about Systemic Racism, they're saying the american society was built to benefit white people. But it was built by white people, therefore whites are more inclined to follow the rules and norms established by it. And Asians and Jews are even better at it than Whites, proving the system is not inherenthly racist. But anyway, when they talk about ending systemic racism, they are talking about undermining civilization. By corollary, "ending witheness" is not a very veiled codeword for genocide. If you think your constitution protects you from that, well, we've had guns confiscated from that boomer couple who were merely waiving them around while on their property and in a Castle Doctrine state (the legal repercussions were a big win for 2A advocates, but that's another issue). People being arrested for peaceufully assembling. Your freedom of speech being deplatformed and banned. Your press omiting details so you reach a conclusion they want you to reach. People getting you fired because you said something mean, because "free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" and aparently those consequences include targeted harassment and slander. If you think that's somehow absurd, I bet the Germans didn't think they would be capable of Genocide not far into the future too during the Weimar Republic. I tell you. Democracies have always died under thunderous applause.
Thank you for taking god time to express what I was thinking as I listened to the discussion. It seems like a lifetime ago when this was published. It has been a free fall in the last 8 months. Now there is a vice president candidate picked from an identity only field, the ultimate racist choice. I would like to hear an update on this presentation.
I saw this happening, even reaching into the English department at my relatively conservative small Christian university, when I was in undergrad pre-2005. It bothered me then, and is one of the main reasons I decided not to pursue graduate level education in History & Literature. It's apparently gotten much worse now, and I'm confident I made the right decision.
Meh, you don't have to like the man. He's entertaining for sure, not exactly stately, bit of a troll, self-interested, but as JL said, he hasn't been nearly as 'problematic' as the left and the media would have everyone believe. No wars, peace talks, good economy (apparently, I don't know, and up to a point). I'd rather have twelve silly Orange Men than any of the other scheming cheating feckers. The fact that he is so hated for no good reason is fascinating to me, but, whatever. He could really improve his attitude and win bigly, but I'm afraid he is too egocentric for that.
"It gave people a way to criticize science without having to _do_ science." I'm gettin familiar vibes. Where tho, from where? (in the distance, abbey bells)
This has been a very interesting piece, thanks gentlemen. Everything he’s talking about is right, the Frankfurt school etc, but... the real land owning bourgeoisie are internationalists... so you can’t get ahold of them and punish them. They begin and cause the revolution, go overseas and wait till the revolution ends, then come back and run the country. They now can control the banks from afar so anyone calling for an overthrow is likely the bourgeoisie themselves, acting as the populace free thinkers, but are in fact conducting a revolutionary overthrow in order to bring in communism. They openly admit this is what they’ve been doing, in fact it goes back as far at least, as the Council Of Vienna, where they decided to perpetually fight free republics. Every revolution of the past three hundred years has been caused by the same group, because it works. And this one is no different. It will bring in a new order with tighter controls, and obviously, they want to link up all nations under one power, a one world government. This is just another one of the tools in their tool belt, a function of the Hegelian Dialectic, which will bring us step by step closer to the state they want. You can read all their own quotes about it. Here’s one from the founder of the U.S. central bank known as the Federal Reserve... Paul Warburg: On February 17, 1950, James Paul Warburg confidently declared to the United States Senate: “We shall have World Government, whether we like it or not. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” James Paul Warburg (1896-1969) was the son of Paul Moritz Warburg, and a nephew of both Felix Warburg and Jacob Schiff, both associated with Kuhn, Loeb & Company which financed the Russian Revolution through James’ brother Max, banker to the government of Germany. A world government is a world without borders, national sovereignty, constitutions, privacy, autonomy, individual liberties, religious freedoms, private property, the right to bear arms, the rights of marriage and family and a dramatic population reduction (two thirds). A world government establishes a slave/master environment wherein the state controls everything. Make no mistake, this is the foundation of “wokeness.” There are lots of full length movies about this on my channel. Check it out if you’re interested. God bless all.
Daniel Wyvern keep in mind... everything you think you know about Trump was told to you by the same people lying their asses off about the election now.
Daniel Wyvern any news agency that’s ever been on cable TV. Either that or Biden is the most popular president in US history. And all from ballots counted after Nov 3 in 6 cities.
@@fledglingbodhisatva4821 - I think you misunderstood my post. I don’t watch any cable channels. If Kamala ultimately becomes the president, we are fucked as a nation.
I love James, think he is spot on regarding this topic. I can't imagine doing my head in with all of the historical research he does... I have a firm grip on various aspects of how mind virus function but going that deep into one would drive me insane. That said, I am always surprised at how much he dislikes Trump. I mean, I did too years ago, but once I came to understand 'woke', Trump made perfect sense as an antidote. And it explains why the woke media will not give him an inch.
PlainsPup Trump is the most anti-war president in decades. I will gladly support him despite his crassness. In fact, I think his crassness and refusal to apologize is vital in 2020. Any President who would kneel to ideology and apologize to radicals for perceived infractions can not lead. And anyone who does not apologize will be called every name Trump is.
@@alphacat9302 Trump is a result of wokeness spread. Is he the answer though? He deconstructs traditional serious leadership. Thus in a way does a similar thing as woke deconstructionists do...
@@tamashumi7961 yes, i think he is the answer. Why? Because any leader who apologizes right now, or bends the knee, will be powerless against the mob. Any leader who does not apologize, or crack under pressure, will be vilified in the same way Trump is. And I would further the type of personality capable of dealing with, and pushing back on, the far left right now is Trump. His sense of humor, and his unwillingness to bend to their pressure, is what garners his supporters respect and admiration. The far left does not care about logic or rationality - those are 'tools of oppression' to them. They instead deal in and respond to shame. And Trump ridicules them, forces them to expose themselves. I called Trump a 'vanity' candidate in 2016, and disliked him intensely. But it has become clear to me he is showing us how to fight off intersectionalism- no apologies, no excuses, just troll them into the ground. Notably, this is exactly how the left stopped the evangelicals in the 80s and 90s - TV shows teased them mercilessly [Church Lady, etc.]. Except now TV is generally part of the cult, so it is left to us.
That's a bit of a weird litmus test of whether something is useful, helpful or valid. They were sociologists, why would they run a business? I mean, if you think about it I guess the Frankfurt School was a kind of business, and by all accounts, it was very successful considering that we're still studying it and talking about it today nearly 100 years later.
@@MorganScribbler running a business requires that you produce something of benefit that people want at a cost that is less than what people are willing to pay for. It's the ultimate test of any idea, because money requires energy to acquire, and so people will not part with it unless they perceive a real need. This is why taxation systems and government spending always degenerates into more waste than benefit. Because you've removed participant will from the transaction. The Frankfurt school wasn't a business. No idea or structure that uses government money as it's primary income stream is a business.
@@timothyblazer1749 I'm just saying. Why is the litmus test for philosophy and ideas... running a business? It's just a very strange ruler to measure with. People don't say "Jesus had no value because he didn't run a multi national company" ...or "Buddah's teachings are useless because he didn't own a fish and chip shop"... does this also mean that the ideas of millions of employees around the globe have no worth?
I don't know. I see Climate Radicalism as more of a top-down agenda. A sort of WEF-conjured means for exerting control and "thinning the herd". Not that the brainwashed minds of the captured Woke don't warm right up to it, as their reasoning faculties have been dulled in our Marxist academies.
There are conservatives who are not freaking out about the expansion of this ideology, who are saying don't complain or act against it. Let it implode. They've been saying that for a couple decades, actually, and I've heard some conservatives complain about them, because they're for taking a passive stance toward it. Meanwhile, the complainers see its influence grow and grow, and their voice for getting aggressive against it grows louder and louder. I've seen how this ideology has its contradictions, and how it will fall as a result. I just wonder whether it will take our civilization down with it. I mean, communism is an ideology that shouldn't have survived, but it managed to do so for 70 years in Russia. It collapsed, but it extended the suffering of the Russian people for a lifetime. Ideas that you'd think shouldn't survive can for an intolerable period of time. I suppose the reason is that these ideologies emphasize human will, to keep them going. I'm not suggesting we will become communist, because there's a critical ingredient missing for that to happen that doesn't exist yet (maybe the far Left will develop that. We'll see), but I think it's possible this ideology could make life pretty miserable for a lot of people, for a long time.
imagine studying a bridge, or a plane, or a political structure, through the lens of, injustices, or perceived injustices. rather than, just simply trying to understand how the thing works, yet, here we are.
This video does not deal with transracial people or transspecies people (or entities). You don’t deal with these. A very good visual novel on Steam called “Dickie A Cumming: The Prequel (Part I)” absolutely smashes it wide open! Criminally underrated!
what are transracial or transspecies people (entities)? that's just another form of delusion that ties into the toxic ideologies -- do you have more info about this, aside from a single steam visual noval?
it doesnt cover those entities because 3 years ago we handn't entered the current level of delusion and thinking that make believe is reality. Save those for the metaverse.
Excellent conversation, so level headed and informative. I especially appreciate the way in which the subject is discussed without condescension or animosity, as this makes it perfect for sharing with others so that they do not feel attacked. Subbed to the channel, and thank you
One of my classes this semester is based on critical theory. It looks at the the power structures between cops and indigenous ppl. I wish I could skip it but it’s a mandatory class. Especially at this time.
James has said it himself in another podcast: listen and take copious amounts of notes. You don’t have to graft any of that stuff to your outlook of the World, but understand it to the best of your ability, and you’ll likely also find yourself, as a amusing bonus, comprehending the stuff several times more clearly than its most frenzied adherents
It's always amusing to come back and listen to James Lindsay's predictions from years ago and compare to what has happened. Dude was always ahead of the curve back then, and his predictions in 2024 are outright scary. Buckle up, boys and girls.
Rerum Novarum Pope Leo XIII 1891 on rights and responsibilities of capital 1892 was one source of social gospel / justice. And Fabian Society far left?! They were gradualist socialists
That's not what you agree with... but you sit back so relaxed BECAUSE of me and my WORK. There will be NO REVOLUTION IN AMERICA NOR CIVIL WAR. DETERRENCE IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH... ALMOST ENTIRELY ENOUGH... Jesus said so.
'What cannot be weighed and calculated doesn’t concern me. I understand nothing of it' 'One will not give the name of ‘perfect scientific knowledge’ to philosophy when it is not at the same time completely mathematical'. - Johann Heinrich Lambert, 'On the Improvement of Method of Proof in Metaphysics, Theology, and Morals', 1762.
James Lindsay lead me to your channel and I heard a Douglas Murray interview mentioned, instant sub! Looking forward to all that content (especially the Murray and Andy Doyle content, they are both hilarious, in different ways)!
That polio example was actually really good. Just sit back & let that play out in your mind, think about how the folks in the 1920's would've reacted to that "genocide" claim. Ok, now, try to emulate THEM.
My son came home today, first day of school, and told me the teacher was talking about bathroom breaks and she said "for girls, I mean people, who are menstruating..." - that's right, she basically said people have periods, not just girls. WTF is going on?
James Lindsey needed to add Capitalism to the conversation. When this was wound up we can see how “wrong” Lindsey got it in just a few Months of saying it. I wonder if Lindsey is open minded enough to look even deeper, maybe he doesn’t understand that the left has hijacked liberalism, it almost doesn’t exist - because the number one quality to liberalism is freedom of expression. And the left has thrown petrol on “speech, communication, discussion” then lit the match. Who will be brave enough to stand up not kneel. One more point...I think it’s a problem that academics as well as twitter users for instance think everyone follows academia or uses twitter. Kinda feel that with Lindsey
I'm finding this really interesting, although as I'm currently studying theoretical frameworks at uni, I don't entirely agree with this overview of critical theory. At its core, Critical Theory is inherently emancipatory, but as I understand it, it also seeks to explain the emergence of their object of knowledge - that critical theory is not (or shouldn't be) merely a moralistic denunciation of false perceptions, but a cognitive undertaking that seeks to analyse WHY they arise in specific situations or contexts. My interpretation of critical theory is that it's about exposing bias of power and uncovering assumptions, AND understanding why these phenomena occur. I can understand your negative view of critical theory as perhaps it has been bastardised and ignores the "why" - but this certainly isn't at its core or how it was designed to be used.
Around 55:00 bravo! This vaccine analogy has been running through my mind for the past 6 months. Yes, if we want to see the silver lining, it is that this is a wonderfully necessary vaccination against something that could have been so much worse. Well done.
Liberalism and the Enlightenment brings us better microphones? Not China? This critique of sjw false theology is invaluable, liberalism itself is the antechamber to all kinds of madness. The US hadn't been faring too well and this created a lot of the grievance necessary to fuel the sjw madness.
James I’m on the Right and a conservative, I understand what your talking about in great detail. However I see the sense able left pouring into the right and seeking shelter there. Trump is a ok guy certainly not a politician, and DC hates him. Is he the best we have at this moment? And the answer is yes. I have many friends on the left that I use to enjoy talking with some I still do but many have gone off the deep end simply by the absolute brain washing from the SJW, I can’t speak to them no more because it’s their way or get lost. Trump he’s a bit of a wacko but at the same time you can not tell he deserved the daily to weekly to yearly onslaught of just flat out insane lies by the Press, or the post modernist. It’s just been completely unhealthy for us as a nation. You must realize that in my circles I am hearing over and over of this war coming amongst ourselves. People are already dying everyday due to the radicalizing of the left. This is no longer about ideas something we once held dearly about our differences in this nation. You must know that no matter what anyone who lives in America thinks of this nation must know if we should fall, or go to war with each other the rest of the world will fall apart. I am a white male 58 who grew up in the south Bronx, and this idea that because I’m white all these doors were opened for me is just crazy. I never ever received anything from anyone except through my hard labor. Labor that has crippled me at this time in my life. I have had a incredible difficult life from the day I was born. 20 years with no vacation because I had to work. This idea that I’m white things were given to me is so unrealistic I just don’t get it. I could right a book on the struggles I have gone through in my lifetime. Still I love my country. I didn’t serve in the military because of my health issues from birth. I’m am afraid for us all of us of every color. I am afraid of what will happen if Trump wins or loses. Life is short and what’s being done to our children is something they can never get back, School and friends and learning as you know has been taken from them. I didn’t finish high school because my father died when I was 17 and I had to leave to take care of my mother and little sister. I am scared for our youth, they have no idea what I pray doesn’t come their way. God be with us. James find a way to make things right for us all. Take care.
@Modern Wisdom 21:50 This is incorrect and immoral. You cannot moralize stealing from me to accommodate someone else. That is little more than rubbing a bit of polish on "well,.. 15% communism is alright.." *No.* Morality aside, we do not accommodate people on the individual level for their benefit. We do so only because, in accommodating them, they are able to become productive members of our society as well as reducing or removing the burden they place on those associated with them and the rest of society. It is a mutually beneficial exchange. They have a right to live, and we have a right to not be hindered by them. Helping them usually serves both goals: something for something.
The scientific method is a biblical worldview. Corpernicus wanted to know how God created the universe. He was able to look outside the box just like Keppler did because his belief system allowed for artistry by an intelligent God. The simplistic view of the universe held by the Catholic church was the view they adopted from the Greeks based on the view that the universe spontaneously arose through naturalistic means. That's true enlightenment.
Thank you James, it's also relatable to being accused of cheating when you know you have not, by a narcissistic boyfriend when young and haven't quite got the vocabulary to combat innocence & the absurdities! You're work is the equivalence of a wise confidant in that situational nightmare. It's interesting that you only came into my awareness Oct 2023, even though I had been trawling YT for sanity! Numbers are still low?! It's taking time to catch up but, 🙏🏻
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
Listen to this episode in full by subscribing on Apple Podcasts or Spotify - link.chtbl.com/modernwisdom
Get my free Ultimate Life Hacks List to 10x your daily productivity → chriswillx.com/lifehacks
ruclips.net/video/sZmCN7DnXYI/видео.html
#JoJorgensen2020
the corona is just startet and 4weeks after does hu want the covid19 injection and having it will chance in every way possible the T-VIRUS from resident evil is a cop of THE wit HONEY beside this virus with over 50components we dont no exactcly what but to speed op things in our body and some shooting other things down exeterer bla bla bla and so on and makes drastic convertible things duplication list is long LOvE from VIKINGNORTHLAND-DENMARK awesome man on podcast i could talk with him forever and EVER
If you're going to make a video exploring deep nuances of the English language shouldn't you put in the effort to review your video description in order to ensure it contains no grammatical errors?
"I've been exposed the words Social Justice Warrior, Wokeness and Post Modernism a lot over the last year"
Critical theory is garbage, primarily because the power dynamic is ... well dynamic. The person with the power is always changing, and two people may have power over each other in different ways at the same time.
Critical Theory is just a way for Marxists and other Fascists to apportion blame, stir up envy and hatred, in order to control the masses by giving them an object of hate. Historically this has been the haves (e,g, the Jews in both the national socialist Germany and the Imperial Socialist USSR (but many more people in the soviet empire)), and has always resulted the mass murder of those labelled as 'oppressors'.
Don't mistake 'Critical Theory' for 'Critical Thinking', 'Critical Theory' is the opposite of the 'Critical Thinking', there is in fact very little the is 'Critical' in 'Critical Theory'. The name is actually the important thing about it, like most things developed to support cultural Marxism the name is close to being the opposite of what the words mean. 2 + 2 =5.
He was so spot on regarding 5 years down the road
yeah he is very intelligent - loveeeee it, this it what makes me wanna socialize with people
The airplane seats question reminds me that many decades ago, in the eighties, when I was working in a small ad agency, we used to get trade magazines for restaurants. I was shocked when I first read about the new kinds of seats that were designed to be just slightly uncomfortable so that customers in chain restaurants would not linger, and the turnaround (thus profit) would be higher. I wasn't just shocked that these design decisions were happening, but also that the trade magazine would be so open about it. They were bragging about the accomplishments of this design. I mean, they figured out how long a customer could sit comfortably before they started to want to leave. It was brilliant.
Of course, they don't actually want people to leave the airplane, at least not while it's moving, but it's the same kind of strategy. Maximize the space for profit, but just the right amount so that people will still use your service.
I guess that story wouldn't make a big impression in Fat Studies journals.
I enjoyed this. An intelligent take on a ubiquitous problem. I welcome “the renaissance of traditional liberalism” mentioned at the end. Fingers crossed.
I would love to return to the classic liberal arts.
killyourtvnotme we desperately need our classic American Liberals to take back the left from these woke idiots
What he wants is to say that the left is not that which we know that the that is their dream come true
Wow, this is how I support parents raising children with additional needs through mainstream education, this is so spot on!!
Early on there was the idea that there had to be an objective way to critique Western Society. Marxism was the vehicle that was purported to be that objective system that stood outside Western Society and could view Western thought truly without inherent bias.
@23:39 - Anyone ever thought about reversing some of these linguistic nominalizations?
For example, I suspect the reason why these particular words are chosen (normalize, equity, racism etc) is because they have normal terminology on the one side that everyone understands, and (for the most part) agrees with.
And their "sister definition" can work within the normal syntactic and circumstantial use of the word, yet mean something completely different.
I'm not suggesting doing the same thing for your own ideology. I'm suggesting de nominalizing those words back to their original meanings. You'd do this by using a more precise synonym to the original term.
For example:
"It's not fair we normalize racism"
Is responded to with:
You mean it's not fair we shift judging based on skin color at the center of the normal distribution?
What is your suggestion?
For an intersectionalist, they would likely rattle off EXACTLY what they just said they didn't want. Or even better if they disagree with what you said back to them, you can de nominalize it towards THEIR meaning.
Both are useful for getting anyone not steeped in the critical theory doctrine to understand what is actually being said.
A very insightful point. I have wondered whether the - what you call "sister definition" - is in reality a stipulative fallacious persuasive redefinition (defining fallacy). Thus, as you say, you remove the poisonous barb that is the change in the descriptive meaning by reasserting the original reportive definition/meaning that is appropriate from the context. In what you have effectively done is also point out what the person has done.
Interestingly, such semantic slight-of-hand has appeared in the trans debate. An analysis was performed here, regarding pronouns...
medium.com/@lecanardnoir/the-humpty-dumpty-wonderland-of-transgender-language-e0cbbecedcbc
>For example:
"It's not fair we normalize racism"
Is responded to with:
You mean it's not fair we shift judging based on skin color at the center of the normal distribution?
So deliberately misunderstand people by assuming a jargon homonym that the person is clearly not using? And how would that even substantially change their claim, which was that judging based on skin color should not be typical (by some measure of centrality) behavior?
I think I need further clarification. What would they say back, in your example? (Please be as concrete as possible.)
@S. E. Z On the other hand, I can see this going wrong. I kinda feel like if we were to respond this way, we'd just be dismissed as arguing dishonestly, or in bad faith. And maybe we would be, if this engagement actually boils down to a semantic game. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's almost what this reads like, although I'm sure your intention is more "intellectually substantial" (for lack of a better term) than that.
@@kmgyening As much as I love the idea--and perhaps this is me being cynical--I feel the same way. A reply like that would come in bad faith to them. Critical race theory and all of it's "children" already operate in bad faith, though..so maybe it might work? Or put fuel on the fire? I'll have to give it a try.
@@michaelstanwick9690 Thank you for sharing this. Being one of those "rainbow people" who has personally been at the end of the nonsense, your link is very concise with how pronouns are being used. I'm saving this!
This guy is so good at explaining things. I think he is displaying knowledge that most activists seem to not know. Not being as clever as James, I feel compelled to say something stupid. It seems to me that most activists are students. Students are individuals that have subscribed to a university, A university is a seat of learning. Students therefore self identify as people that do not know enough, and they identify universities as the place to go to ameliorate their intellectual impoverishment.
An old maxim states that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Students, either on a course or who have dropped out, have self identified as having a little knowledge, or not all knowledge of any particular subject.
It seems to me that a (small) group of people with a little knowledge, that is not enough knowledge to be qualified to do anything, are telling us all what to do. Could it be that were these students to actually complete their courses they might learn enough to be useful.
Another maxim says that the lunatics have taken over the asylum.
Thank you so much for this.
What's really interesting is that it's an (possibly) American speaking to a Brit (sorry, don't mean to offend) when critical thinking came about in Europe but mainly England....and actually, having said that, we probably got Critical Thinking from the Greeks...so there's that.
Your guest described the conflict that arises between "marginalised and oppressed" groups as an unfortunate by product of social justice when I would argue that that is indeed the goal.
Wow YESSSSS!!!! in the first 30 seconds you explained it.
Interesting to see how James switches backwards and forwards between the Woke meaning of Liberal, which is the way many non-woke use it, and the true meaning of the word.
Found this guy the other day... Knew he was from my area, just like the worst crap.. Yep, Oregon or Washington..
Loving your channel and wondering why there are no more handlebar mustaches.
It’s gone. Maybe not forever, but for now
I always disliked Foucault! You guys made it clear why!
First women’s studies Sydney 1976
But in New Zealand 1974 at full program Waikato University and at Victoria University of Wellington first paper by Phyllida Bunker - on of my history lecturers
33:22 The moment James had a mini-stroke.
Who hates being lied to
v
Who hates being told the truth
I wish there was an edited version, I feel like it dragged on for a while
"Trump is a disaster." Compared to what?
In critical theory, who gets to say what constitutes justice?
Whomever is speaking ....
social justice was manipulation to destroy - see yuri bresnov
critical theory, makes a fatal assumption,
that ppl who look alike, get along and agree with each other,
this could not be further from the truth.
The polio vaccine was actually about 65 years ago, not 100.
I wonder if the philosophers are lagging the sciences bc we have such increasing access to information we have lost critical independent thinking skills
I'm not sure, really depends on which philosophy and what it's purpose is. Stoicism is used in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy.
Science only functions when describing the physical. Philosophy deals with the meta-physical. Science stems from philosophy.
Morality for example is not a domain that science covers but of philosophy. Which is scary because science is evolving at an insane rate, but nothing is put on a rigid moral investigation. For example what the effects are of social media on the human psyche.
At the moment our politics are only focussing on social engineering because the politicians don't understand the sciences, so they need an alternative.
I really wish people would explain why Trump has been a disaster. Lot's of people think he's doing a bad job but no one really explains why (except something stupid which amounts to "I think he's mean").
Pretty much. "He said a bad thing."
He lies about the virus in important ways undermining Fauci or anyone doing the right thing
Justice is justice, it should not require a prefix.
Criticial theory borders so close to being un-scientific, it should have never been funded or taken seriously. All scientific research is subject to confirmation bias. There are no metrics to measure it - at least during my academic days, we were instructed to be aware of and try to avoid it. It was more of a philosophical and ethical thing, not a hard science you could measure in numbers. Statistics play a role, but they cover all sources of false results, not just specific biased pre-conception.
So how do you go from recognizing that science has certain flaws that are hard to isolate and will always be there no matter what- to actively trying to measure these flaws on a massive scale in anither field of science that's a lot less math based 😵💫😵💫
Interesting comment, CrackBaby. Critical Theory, as it has been rolled out in recent years, has become positively anti-Human. As such, it is doomed to destroy itself, the only question being how much of the stable culture will it take down with it. Critical Theory now even questions the "hard" science, and simple logic, the foundations of our modern world. At a certain point, science starts to be less about demonstrable, Newtonian laws, and begins to merge with consciousness, as some cutting-edge physicists are now theorizing.
Man, we're fucked.
33:00 Historical summary
explaining critical theory to a layman looks like passing a stone
I don't use the Hate Machine (Twitter - if you need an explanation) so I wont be able to follow James.
woke is very very embarrassing and I will NEVER be in the same livingroom with such a person, never!
Thank God for Jordan Peterson! He really was the tip of the spear that punctured through all of these nonsense, and brought out guys like James Lindsay. Those two couldn’t be any more different, and yet they stand for Reason and Sanity.
You need to watch this video where they trash Jordan Peterson: ruclips.net/video/9sUkmBX8jUE/видео.html
@@squatch545.. Ya the OP's comment is a bit ridiculous considering all the work they put into the Grievance Studies that had nothing to do with JP
@@squatch545 I just listened to the whole thing and they never actually trash him, the host does.
Joe Smith Why? For what point?
anyone who was paying attention was aware of this long before peterson
I've been a huge fan of James Lindsay since he came to my attention when the grievance studies scandal broke. I've watched/listened to pretty much every interview/discussion/podcast/event has been involved in, and I've read many/most of the articles and essays he's written - his essay "postmodern religion and the faith of social justice" inspired a major shift in the PhD research I'm aiming to do, so Jim's legitimately changed my life.
With all that being said, his explanation of how "normal" is weaponised starting around 24:00 was a massive lightbulb moment for me. It's given me a new way to explain the problem to people that's infinitely simpler, clearer and easier to communicate. The crux of the problem is the *deliberate blending of the descriptive with the moral.* Everyone is afraid of speaking truthfully, but struggles to articulate exactly why, and this explanation accurately articulates the problem in a fantastically succinct single sentence. _This ideology has made descriptive statements an immoral action._
I'm still processing the brilliance of this encapsulation of such a massively complex mess in a single sentence. Mind blowing. This is exactly why I jump on everything James does, because every instance helps develop and refine my understanding and ability to communicate about it. This one epiphany just made my day. Big, big thanks to both of you for this discussion!
Out of interest, how did he change the direction of your PhD research?
Thank you for your summary. It helped me solidify my understanding of the concepts he was talking about so I can describe them to others when it (inevitably) comes up. 🏵️
>The crux of the problem is the deliberate blending of the descriptive with the moral.
I have a really strong example of this. I'm disabled (excuse me for mentioning this in two comments; it's topical) and thus involved in a lot of online disability community stuff. Within our community it is common to include image captions (a bit of text saying what's in the picture, for example one might read: "A young black woman with long blonde hair is standing in a red shirt and green pants in her blue tile kitchen, facing the camera straight-on, holding up a jar of coins in her left hand. she is winking. a cat is walking by in the background.") so that blind people's screenreaders can read the description to them. There genuinely are a lot of blind people participating in these disability communities, so there is nothing weird or fake-woke about that.
the irritating part is when people deliberately describe persons in the pictures in such a way that gender or sex information CLEARLY available to anyone looking at the picture visually is concealed from the blind people, and it's done so in a political way. For example if the person is nonbinary-identified (which I have no intrinsic problem with) the caption might say "A young black person with long blonde hair is standing in a red shirt and green pants in their blue tile kitchen, facing the camera straight-on, holding up a jar of coins in their left hand. they are winking. a cat is walking by in the background." While that may be true, if say the person is CLEARLY a biological female who has taken no steps to transition or appear androgynous for example (eg no chest binder, makeup, female body fat distribution, etc), it is not cool imo to decide to politically shape what blind people get to know or not know by leaving that out (especially considering that for example the blind person may be a female who wants to know if they're communicating with a conspicuous male IDing as nb). Even if the person is completely gender conforming, in my opinion if the person is visibly trans, that should be included.
@@SpecialBlanket Wow, that's really wild. Thanks for sharing. I did not realize that was yet another area that's been politicized to that extent.
"This ideology has made descriptive statements an immoral action." But it doesn't tell us why this has been done. Is it is because the descriptive claim is being conflated with a normative moral claim? For example, an individual enunciates a descriptive statement but is also interpreted to be enunciating a normative moral statement at the same time.
They enunciate the statement but there is also the clothing the statement is wrapped in, and that is the purpose or reason for making the statement. It may appear that making the statement into the discussion to further seek the truth or establish an already held moral position (the moral positions) of the matter.
Either way, the descriptive statement's moral clothing is what is at issue because it conflicts with other a priori moral axioms that are more fundamental than the accuracy embedded in the descriptive claim.
Foucault was decidedly abnormal. He went down his road for the same reason some people pursue psychology/psychiatry: they are either looking for answers or they are looking for self-justification.
And he was also wrong in the respect that at least one grand narrative exists: "If you fuck around in the wake of a deadly venereal disease, you will die a terrible lonely death."
Same goes for Gramsci and Satre. They had problems by being accepted from other kids and youngsters. It was no easy childhood. For which I can be sorry. But this is personal, but there is no right or demand to deconstruct the real world.
I always look in the whole personal picture. Marx was a narcissist and Engels is Co dependent. Check his personal life out.
His writing and life just scream insecurity ngl
@debblouin you hit the nail on the head! The crazies are running the show. The rest of us are paying the price for our silent acquiescence.
In my aircraft design class in college, I was literally taught that the space between seats is to be designed to optimize the number of people you could fit in the plane.
Some of the people in the class were overweight. Many of us were taller than average, and had experiences with trying to fit into aircraft seats that were too close together.
We ran the numbers, and saw how much it really cost to put an extra inch of space between the seats. We saw how it would affect the price of a ticket, to add that extra inch. We came to understand why Business and First Class cost what they cost, and are designed the way they are.
In the USA over 40% of people are classed as obese, so soon we'll be looking at them as the norm and describing everyone else as 'under weight'.
Yeah, crazy that businesses would make decisions to maximize profits and not, you know, as an extension of their cishetero white male racist patriarchy
@@delta-9969 Most leftist delusion comes from fundamental ignorance about 1) human nature and 2) economics and 3)their own emotions.
Math, science and critical thought are anathema to woke people, there's only what aligns with their ideology. @12:10 he explains this exactly, that woke people are incapable of understanding why the seats are designed that way and possibly fixing it going forward in a meaningful way. They only see power and privilege and only know how to destroy.
@@toobnoobify It's because leftists are ruled by negative emotion and they are poster children for arrested development. They react emotionally to every circumstance, mind-reading and projecting their insecurities and bigotry on others (ever wonder why they are always complaining about race and committing bigotry of low expectations?).
I love James. What a wealth of information he has.
Yeah, but i dont like the "obligatory" far right condemnation all of these guys do. He could have just said nothing at all instead of playing their game, to show that he really are good boy. They will never respect him
@@fredriko.zachrisson9711 The far left is creating the far right. Both are postmodern. You might say that the far right has no relevance in society since they are on the fringe, and you might have a good point there.
But online you can interact with them fairly easily so it can grow like the left has if they seriously plot together and use the far left tactics to pull a Hitler.
Social Justice !!! omg, im doing a presentation in 4days and ive violently swung from seeing social justice and defining this for the betterment of all...whilst ive been finding and sourcing the information to support this justification I have come to a complete and utter stop! let me state here, social justice isn't what I thought it was ….
I'm curious to know how your journey has taken you since the explosion of racial issues that have come about since BLM has gone ultra-mainstream following George Floyd's death
All societies have inherent social injustice. We are not insects, although the SJW’s would like to treat us so. Some people, for whatever reason, will ‘do better’ in life in their society than others, so there will always be a sense of grievance felt by some people in that society. What is happening now is that the grievances identified by some in Western society, basically those with a chip on their shoulder who take all things personally (Patriarchy, Inequality of the sexes, Sexual stereotyping, Gender, Race, etc) are being manipulated and used by the cultural Marxists to weaken society from within, in order to be able to create, from the fallout, the sort of society they want, a land of utopian idealism in which all have equity, all experience inclusion and all behave according to the new morality demanded of them, just like an insect. Of course, the reality would be, as was soon discovered in the French and Russian Revolutions, that a new hierarchy would develop, with a new section of society taking up the reins of power and a new section of society feeling aggrieved, and the blood will flow to make sure all the insects abide by the new rules. You have come to your senses in seeing Social Justice Critical Theory for what it is, but be careful; if this was post-revolutionary France, you would be one of the first for the guillotine.
Yes. Think twice when you see unnecessary added words ie; "social justice" instead of simply justice.
@@nickking-edwards9301 : Indeed. And there is no Western legal system that could support 'social justice', or 'research justice' or 'environmental justice' etc. Because the whole woke cult has its ideological roots in post-modern deconstructionism and cultural marxism - all of which are totalitarian in nature.
Good for you
An industrial solvent. It has it’s uses but don’t spread it around everywhere. Especially around children!!!
BOOOM
It’s already around all the children
@@newtalking3
They're drowning in it.
This commic subculture has been lurking arround for decades. Dobie Gilles even had his own TV swow!
I took ASL two semesters when I retuned to college 12 years ago. There was even then a whole narrative tied to deaf identity. Deaf parents happy that their children were born deaf. Families splitting over cochlear implants. It’s one thing to make the most of overcoming a disability. But therein lies the rub: there is a subset of people who look at their deafness as NOT being a disability.
OMG, YES! I remember this and thinking it was nuts. Contact James so he can add it to his examples. From “Black and Proud” to “Gay and Proud” to “Deaf and Proud” to (presumably) “Disabled and Proud”? and, I guess, “Mentally challenged and Proud”? (can’t say “retarded”). A thing can be taken too far😱 As an always-confident Black kid I saw this phrase as overcompensation for weak personal confidence.
Diversity of opinion on a topic is ideal. "One man's trash is another man's treasure." comes to mind. I don't know much about the disabled community, so won't speak directly to that.
In Italy in the seventies they closed all psychiatric hospitals at one single day. The communities were the take over the patients ... of course it did not work out. The patients faced homelessness and hundreds of them committed suicide. This experiment gone wrong is still celebrated as a success and it is hard to find critical material to it.
Rich nations problems.
That's wild. I have encountered similar things among fellow autistic people trying to argue it is a form of identity rather than a disability. This mindset stifles research. Excludes the possibility of some kind of breakthrough in treatments available. To see this same thing applied to a direct, objective, undeniable physical disability like deafness is beyond me.
I've followed these toxic ideologies fpr about five years, trying to understand the madness so that I can resist it effectively.
This talk was THE most clearly articulated, thouggt through and well researched account on these cynical theories.
Deep gratitude to this man for wading waist deep through 💩 in order to understand, analyze and illuminate this toxic mess 🙏🏻
Will buy and read your book for sure 😁👍🏻
Can Social Justice prosper if the producing man (business owners and workers) stop funding Social Justice departments in public and private universities? Can't we simply, and literally starve them out of existence?
The French postmodernist were academic shit-posters. Intersectionalism by the way, appears to me to work like the dynamics of a narcissistic family played out at a societal level. Subsections of the population are turned against each other like siblings through the golden-child/scapegoat dichotomy and the goalposts are always shifting.
Thank you James. I got a whiff of a nascent form of this as a high school senior in 1981 when I dared question the strategy of my honors school lowering its academic standards to appeal to equity......
I'm excited to form some secret society meet up .......
I remember reading somewhere that equity = undeserved equality.
@Robin Rickard In high school in 1981!?! We weren’t even doing that here in 1995.
In the old days, we’d call that “fraud”.
You are very intelligent young man. I hope you Reconsider your views on the president, as he says exactly what you do, but less eloquently. Don’t be a victim of your own theory; you speak better, you’re better educated therefore person A (Trump) is not as intelligent, honest or clear as me. Trump gets his message out, which is why numerous Trump supporters are listening to you, your ideas and agree with your analysis and research of social culture and society as a whole
Dr. Lindsay says politics don't matter as much as we think we do.
To him, I say RWANDA. SOUTH AFRICA.
This was on the 5th of December, so I'll give him a pass, but the Democrats response to the Corona pandemic has validated a lot of what was once "conspiracy theories".
Starting with glaring abuses of authority and violations of citizen's constitutional rights, like that lady who had her facebook stream shut down because she was somehow violating social distancing by selling stuff online and mailing it to clients.
But of course, it all comes down to the Riots.
More specifically, to Democrats literally and figuratively knelling to it.
The Woke literally behaves like a cult. They have saints and marthyrs: George Floyd and Trayvon Martin.
Heresy: Racism.
The Born Sinner: White people.
Apostates: Black people who don't vote democrat.
The Original Sin: something they call Systemic Racism.
Devil: Trump.
You already know their chants and dogmas.
And the worst part is that it's a state sanctioned, countrywide religion.
It's extremelly naive to believe something like what happened in Rwanda or is happening in South Africa won't happen in the USA. The Cult has already reached deep into the US system of government. And their dogmas is pretty clear. When they talk about Systemic Racism, they're saying the american society was built to benefit white people. But it was built by white people, therefore whites are more inclined to follow the rules and norms established by it. And Asians and Jews are even better at it than Whites, proving the system is not inherenthly racist. But anyway, when they talk about ending systemic racism, they are talking about undermining civilization. By corollary, "ending witheness" is not a very veiled codeword for genocide.
If you think your constitution protects you from that, well, we've had guns confiscated from that boomer couple who were merely waiving them around while on their property and in a Castle Doctrine state (the legal repercussions were a big win for 2A advocates, but that's another issue). People being arrested for peaceufully assembling. Your freedom of speech being deplatformed and banned. Your press omiting details so you reach a conclusion they want you to reach. People getting you fired because you said something mean, because "free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" and aparently those consequences include targeted harassment and slander.
If you think that's somehow absurd, I bet the Germans didn't think they would be capable of Genocide not far into the future too during the Weimar Republic. I tell you. Democracies have always died under thunderous applause.
Thank you for taking god time to express what I was thinking as I listened to the discussion. It seems like a lifetime ago when this was published. It has been a free fall in the last 8 months. Now there is a vice president candidate picked from an identity only field, the ultimate racist choice. I would like to hear an update on this presentation.
I saw this happening, even reaching into the English department at my relatively conservative small Christian university, when I was in undergrad pre-2005. It bothered me then, and is one of the main reasons I decided not to pursue graduate level education in History & Literature. It's apparently gotten much worse now, and I'm confident I made the right decision.
why doesn't he like Trump? because of his rhetoric? why are all intellectuals so thin skinned?
Meh, you don't have to like the man. He's entertaining for sure, not exactly stately, bit of a troll, self-interested, but as JL said, he hasn't been nearly as 'problematic' as the left and the media would have everyone believe. No wars, peace talks, good economy (apparently, I don't know, and up to a point). I'd rather have twelve silly Orange Men than any of the other scheming cheating feckers. The fact that he is so hated for no good reason is fascinating to me, but, whatever. He could really improve his attitude and win bigly, but I'm afraid he is too egocentric for that.
@Patricia M Pfff every president has been favorable to Israel, it's standard US foreign policy for as long as the state of Israel existed.
"It gave people a way to criticize science without having to _do_ science." I'm gettin familiar vibes. Where tho, from where? (in the distance, abbey bells)
Science be like "you worry about your social engineering, we shall get us to be a multi-planetary species".
Critical Theory is marxism.
Low IQ person: that sounds kinda good
It's why they be blue pilled, truth is scary
As ever, a first class rundown of the roots and ramifications of the SJW impulse.
Thank you, this was a great conversation
@@ChrisWillx You're spoilt for incredible guests it seems - you have a great show here. Lindsay is a prophet.
This guy must write a book about this. He went there and studied it deeply.
@@PauloRicardo-fc4li He's apparently working on one at the moment, called 'Cynical Theories', with Helen Pluckrose.
@@petehill7280 I can't wait! I hear it's been delayed till June; I know I'm going to get it as soon as it comes out.
This has been a very interesting piece, thanks gentlemen.
Everything he’s talking about is right, the Frankfurt school etc, but... the real land owning bourgeoisie are internationalists... so you can’t get ahold of them and punish them. They begin and cause the revolution, go overseas and wait till the revolution ends, then come back and run the country. They now can control the banks from afar so anyone calling for an overthrow is likely the bourgeoisie themselves, acting as the populace free thinkers, but are in fact conducting a revolutionary overthrow in order to bring in communism. They openly admit this is what they’ve been doing, in fact it goes back as far at least, as the Council Of Vienna, where they decided to perpetually fight free republics. Every revolution of the past three hundred years has been caused by the same group, because it works. And this one is no different. It will bring in a new order with tighter controls, and obviously, they want to link up all nations under one power, a one world government. This is just another one of the tools in their tool belt, a function of the Hegelian Dialectic, which will bring us step by step closer to the state they want. You can read all their own quotes about it. Here’s one from the founder of the U.S. central bank known as the Federal Reserve... Paul Warburg:
On February 17, 1950, James Paul Warburg confidently declared to the United States Senate: “We shall have World Government, whether we like it or not. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”
James Paul Warburg (1896-1969) was the son of Paul Moritz Warburg, and a nephew of both Felix Warburg and Jacob Schiff, both associated with Kuhn, Loeb & Company which financed the Russian Revolution through James’ brother Max, banker to the government of Germany. A world government is a world without borders, national sovereignty, constitutions, privacy, autonomy, individual liberties, religious freedoms, private property, the right to bear arms, the rights of marriage and family and a dramatic population reduction (two thirds). A world government establishes a slave/master environment wherein the state controls everything.
Make no mistake, this is the foundation of “wokeness.”
There are lots of full length movies about this on my channel. Check it out if you’re interested. God bless all.
How can we stop this social justice nonsense?
Same person: Trump is a disaster!
😂😂😂😂😂
I’m listening to this on November 6th. It looks like we’ll get a chance to see which disaster is bigger, Trump or Kamala. We are fucked.
Daniel Wyvern keep in mind... everything you think you know about Trump was told to you by the same people lying their asses off about the election now.
@@fledglingbodhisatva4821 - I’m not sure of what you are saying. Who do you think is doing the lying?
Daniel Wyvern any news agency that’s ever been on cable TV. Either that or Biden is the most popular president in US history. And all from ballots counted after Nov 3 in 6 cities.
@@fledglingbodhisatva4821 - I think you misunderstood my post. I don’t watch any cable channels. If Kamala ultimately becomes the president, we are fucked as a nation.
I love James, think he is spot on regarding this topic. I can't imagine doing my head in with all of the historical research he does... I have a firm grip on various aspects of how mind virus function but going that deep into one would drive me insane. That said, I am always surprised at how much he dislikes Trump. I mean, I did too years ago, but once I came to understand 'woke', Trump made perfect sense as an antidote. And it explains why the woke media will not give him an inch.
I think both the Woke Left and the Party of Trump are corrosive to our democracy. Neither should be accepted as viable.
PlainsPup Trump is the most anti-war president in decades. I will gladly support him despite his crassness. In fact, I think his crassness and refusal to apologize is vital in 2020. Any President who would kneel to ideology and apologize to radicals for perceived infractions can not lead. And anyone who does not apologize will be called every name Trump is.
@@alphacat9302 Trump is a result of wokeness spread. Is he the answer though? He deconstructs traditional serious leadership. Thus in a way does a similar thing as woke deconstructionists do...
@@tamashumi7961 yes, i think he is the answer. Why? Because any leader who apologizes right now, or bends the knee, will be powerless against the mob. Any leader who does not apologize, or crack under pressure, will be vilified in the same way Trump is. And I would further the type of personality capable of dealing with, and pushing back on, the far left right now is Trump. His sense of humor, and his unwillingness to bend to their pressure, is what garners his supporters respect and admiration. The far left does not care about logic or rationality - those are 'tools of oppression' to them. They instead deal in and respond to shame. And Trump ridicules them, forces them to expose themselves. I called Trump a 'vanity' candidate in 2016, and disliked him intensely. But it has become clear to me he is showing us how to fight off intersectionalism- no apologies, no excuses, just troll them into the ground. Notably, this is exactly how the left stopped the evangelicals in the 80s and 90s - TV shows teased them mercilessly [Church Lady, etc.]. Except now TV is generally part of the cult, so it is left to us.
So... I got to listen to entire podcast... yes, an hour... my conclusion is... we are f*cked.
😂😬🤦🏻♂️
Maybe not. The ideology is basically rigged to implode. Just a matter of when.
@@filminginportland1654 Don't get me wrong, but Portland is doomed. SF as well. For the rest of the country... let's wait for 3 months.
@@wckvn This presentation by Dr.Lindsay is probably even better. ruclips.net/video/rSHL-rSMIro/видео.html
@@wckvn AS LONG AS PORTLAND KICKS THE CORRECT PINK PEOPLE THE FUCK OUT. SO BE IT
The interesting thing about critical theory is that no one who was involved in its genesis ever ran a business that created something of benefit.
"That's like what other people should do" - Critical Theorist
Gad Saad highlights this very well in some of his talks.
That's a bit of a weird litmus test of whether something is useful, helpful or valid. They were sociologists, why would they run a business? I mean, if you think about it I guess the Frankfurt School was a kind of business, and by all accounts, it was very successful considering that we're still studying it and talking about it today nearly 100 years later.
@@MorganScribbler running a business requires that you produce something of benefit that people want at a cost that is less than what people are willing to pay for. It's the ultimate test of any idea, because money requires energy to acquire, and so people will not part with it unless they perceive a real need.
This is why taxation systems and government spending always degenerates into more waste than benefit. Because you've removed participant will from the transaction. The Frankfurt school wasn't a business. No idea or structure that uses government money as it's primary income stream is a business.
@@timothyblazer1749 I'm just saying. Why is the litmus test for philosophy and ideas... running a business? It's just a very strange ruler to measure with. People don't say "Jesus had no value because he didn't run a multi national company" ...or "Buddah's teachings are useless because he didn't own a fish and chip shop"... does this also mean that the ideas of millions of employees around the globe have no worth?
50:15 Lindsay makes a point which subtly explains how the climate dooming fits into this approach to understanding the world
I don't know. I see Climate Radicalism as more of a top-down agenda. A sort of WEF-conjured means for exerting control and "thinning the herd". Not that the brainwashed minds of the captured Woke don't warm right up to it, as their reasoning faculties have been dulled in our Marxist academies.
Thank you James for your scholarship. I will look for your work on different platforms.
Priceless stuff from James that hasn't aged a day.
If only they knew how prescient their vaccine analogy was!
F.A. Hayek knew that social justice was always the enemy of individual freedom.
There are conservatives who are not freaking out about the expansion of this ideology, who are saying don't complain or act against it. Let it implode. They've been saying that for a couple decades, actually, and I've heard some conservatives complain about them, because they're for taking a passive stance toward it. Meanwhile, the complainers see its influence grow and grow, and their voice for getting aggressive against it grows louder and louder.
I've seen how this ideology has its contradictions, and how it will fall as a result. I just wonder whether it will take our civilization down with it. I mean, communism is an ideology that shouldn't have survived, but it managed to do so for 70 years in Russia. It collapsed, but it extended the suffering of the Russian people for a lifetime. Ideas that you'd think shouldn't survive can for an intolerable period of time. I suppose the reason is that these ideologies emphasize human will, to keep them going. I'm not suggesting we will become communist, because there's a critical ingredient missing for that to happen that doesn't exist yet (maybe the far Left will develop that. We'll see), but I think it's possible this ideology could make life pretty miserable for a lot of people, for a long time.
It's amazing how this guy's eyes take up the entire screen while remaining in their cubbyhole in the bottom left
imagine studying a bridge, or a plane, or a political structure,
through the lens of, injustices, or perceived injustices.
rather than, just simply trying to understand how the thing works,
yet, here we are.
Sounds like an authoritarian version of squeaky wheels get the grease.
This has aged incredibly well. Maybe time to check back in given all of the recent events of the past 3 years
Yes, aged well ...other than his comments about the presidency.
Travelled back here from 2023. Based.
This video does not deal with transracial people or transspecies people (or entities). You don’t deal with these. A very good visual novel on Steam called “Dickie A Cumming: The Prequel (Part I)” absolutely smashes it wide open! Criminally underrated!
what are transracial or transspecies people (entities)? that's just another form of delusion that ties into the toxic ideologies -- do you have more info about this, aside from a single steam visual noval?
it doesnt cover those entities because 3 years ago we handn't entered the current level of delusion and thinking that make believe is reality. Save those for the metaverse.
Thing is they are socially engineering society, that's not a conspiracy.
I wonder if he still thinks the president doesnt matter very much.
A more succinct way to describe Critical Theory is “unmitigated horse sh*t”.
you might not attract a lot of converts with the succinct definition though
What a fascinating conversation. To both men: thank you so much.
So...how Biden workin for you now in 2024?
Critical theory, when abused, sounds like thought cancer.
He’s a very clear and concise lecturer and explains society very well
Good video. Although, if you think President Trump is a disaster just wait for a President Biden.
Excellent conversation, so level headed and informative. I especially appreciate the way in which the subject is discussed without condescension or animosity, as this makes it perfect for sharing with others so that they do not feel attacked. Subbed to the channel, and thank you
The future is Andrew Yang? Eegads!
One of my classes this semester is based on critical theory. It looks at the the power structures between cops and indigenous ppl. I wish I could skip it but it’s a mandatory class. Especially at this time.
James has said it himself in another podcast: listen and take copious amounts of notes. You don’t have to graft any of that stuff to your outlook of the World, but understand it to the best of your ability, and you’ll likely also find yourself, as a amusing bonus, comprehending the stuff several times more clearly than its most frenzied adherents
nothing wrong w/ Trump
It's always amusing to come back and listen to James Lindsay's predictions from years ago and compare to what has happened. Dude was always ahead of the curve back then, and his predictions in 2024 are outright scary. Buckle up, boys and girls.
@ 51:30... yeah, man we're fucked
Oh dear
Rerum Novarum Pope Leo XIII 1891 on rights and responsibilities of capital 1892 was one source of social gospel / justice.
And Fabian Society far left?! They were gradualist socialists
That's not what you agree with... but you sit back so relaxed BECAUSE of me and my WORK. There will be NO REVOLUTION IN AMERICA NOR CIVIL WAR. DETERRENCE IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH... ALMOST ENTIRELY ENOUGH... Jesus said so.
'What cannot be weighed and calculated doesn’t concern me. I understand nothing of it'
'One will not give the name of ‘perfect scientific knowledge’ to philosophy when it is not at the same time completely mathematical'.
- Johann Heinrich Lambert, 'On the Improvement of Method of Proof in Metaphysics, Theology, and Morals', 1762.
James Lindsay lead me to your channel and I heard a Douglas Murray interview mentioned, instant sub!
Looking forward to all that content (especially the Murray and Andy Doyle content, they are both hilarious, in different ways)!
2023, anyone? 😊
That polio example was actually really good. Just sit back & let that play out in your mind, think about how the folks in the 1920's would've reacted to that "genocide" claim. Ok, now, try to emulate THEM.
My son came home today, first day of school, and told me the teacher was talking about bathroom breaks and she said "for girls, I mean people, who are menstruating..." - that's right, she basically said people have periods, not just girls. WTF is going on?
James Lindsey needed to add Capitalism to the conversation. When this was wound up we can see how “wrong” Lindsey got it in just a few Months of saying it. I wonder if Lindsey is open minded enough to look even deeper, maybe he doesn’t understand that the left has hijacked liberalism, it almost doesn’t exist - because the number one quality to liberalism is freedom of expression. And the left has thrown petrol on “speech, communication, discussion” then lit the match. Who will be brave enough to stand up not kneel. One more point...I think it’s a problem that academics as well as twitter users for instance think everyone follows academia or uses twitter. Kinda feel that with Lindsey
I'm finding this really interesting, although as I'm currently studying theoretical frameworks at uni, I don't entirely agree with this overview of critical theory. At its core, Critical Theory is inherently emancipatory, but as I understand it, it also seeks to explain the emergence of their object of knowledge - that critical theory is not (or shouldn't be) merely a moralistic denunciation of false perceptions, but a cognitive undertaking that seeks to analyse WHY they arise in specific situations or contexts. My interpretation of critical theory is that it's about exposing bias of power and uncovering assumptions, AND understanding why these phenomena occur. I can understand your negative view of critical theory as perhaps it has been bastardised and ignores the "why" - but this certainly isn't at its core or how it was designed to be used.
Around 55:00 bravo! This vaccine analogy has been running through my mind for the past 6 months. Yes, if we want to see the silver lining, it is that this is a wonderfully necessary vaccination against something that could have been so much worse. Well done.
I am a big James L fan as well. Can't wait to read his book coming out. Thanks for wading through this shit so we don't have to.
Liberalism and the Enlightenment brings us better microphones? Not China?
This critique of sjw false theology is invaluable, liberalism itself is the antechamber to all kinds of madness. The US hadn't been faring too well and this created a lot of the grievance necessary to fuel the sjw madness.
James I’m on the Right and a conservative, I understand what your talking about in great detail. However I see the sense able left pouring into the right and seeking shelter there. Trump is a ok guy certainly not a politician, and DC hates him. Is he the best we have at this moment? And the answer is yes. I have many friends on the left that I use to enjoy talking with some I still do but many have gone off the deep end simply by the absolute brain washing from the SJW, I can’t speak to them no more because it’s their way or get lost. Trump he’s a bit of a wacko but at the same time you can not tell he deserved the daily to weekly to yearly onslaught of just flat out insane lies by the Press, or the post modernist. It’s just been completely unhealthy for us as a nation. You must realize that in my circles I am hearing over and over of this war coming amongst ourselves. People are already dying everyday due to the radicalizing of the left. This is no longer about ideas something we once held dearly about our differences in this nation. You must know that no matter what anyone who lives in America thinks of this nation must know if we should fall, or go to war with each other the rest of the world will fall apart. I am a white male 58 who grew up in the south Bronx, and this idea that because I’m white all these doors were opened for me is just crazy. I never ever received anything from anyone except through my hard labor. Labor that has crippled me at this time in my life. I have had a incredible difficult life from the day I was born. 20 years with no vacation because I had to work. This idea that I’m white things were given to me is so unrealistic I just don’t get it. I could right a book on the struggles I have gone through in my lifetime. Still I love my country. I didn’t serve in the military because of my health issues from birth. I’m am afraid for us all of us of every color. I am afraid of what will happen if Trump wins or loses. Life is short and what’s being done to our children is something they can never get back, School and friends and learning as you know has been taken from them. I didn’t finish high school because my father died when I was 17 and I had to leave to take care of my mother and little sister. I am scared for our youth, they have no idea what I pray doesn’t come their way. God be with us. James find a way to make things right for us all. Take care.
@Modern Wisdom
21:50
This is incorrect and immoral.
You cannot moralize stealing from me to accommodate someone else. That is little more than rubbing a bit of polish on "well,.. 15% communism is alright.." *No.*
Morality aside, we do not accommodate people on the individual level for their benefit. We do so only because, in accommodating them, they are able to become productive members of our society as well as reducing or removing the burden they place on those associated with them and the rest of society.
It is a mutually beneficial exchange. They have a right to live, and we have a right to not be hindered by them. Helping them usually serves both goals: something for something.
I listen to this in 2024 after assassination attempt and, the extremists’ crack is getting bigger and bigger and clouds of war above…
The scientific method is a biblical worldview. Corpernicus wanted to know how God created the universe. He was able to look outside the box just like Keppler did because his belief system allowed for artistry by an intelligent God. The simplistic view of the universe held by the Catholic church was the view they adopted from the Greeks based on the view that the universe spontaneously arose through naturalistic means. That's true enlightenment.
Thank you James, it's also relatable to being accused of cheating when you know you have not, by a narcissistic boyfriend when young and haven't quite got the vocabulary to combat innocence & the absurdities! You're work is the equivalence of a wise confidant in that situational nightmare.
It's interesting that you only came into my awareness Oct 2023, even though I had been trawling YT for sanity! Numbers are still low?!
It's taking time to catch up but, 🙏🏻