Post-election: Re-dedicating myself to skepticism and open discourse

I don’t know if political correctness led to Trump or if it’s just an issue in my Ivory Tower. What I do know is that I was too cowardly to challenge my own side (liberals, the left, the Dems) when I had no doubt that I thought they wrong simply because of social pressure. I let other leftists gaslight me for years because I thought my tribe had to be right even if nothing I could see backed up that conclusion. I’m questioning a lot right now after Trump’s win, but one thing I feel more confident about than ever is the importance of facts and rationality in our discourse.

Trump deserves the opposition he’s getting whether the left was wrong or not. But when I criticize him and use whatever democratic means are at my disposal to oppose his future abuses, I want to do that from the moral high ground. I ceded the high ground when I let myself be cowed and I suborned skepticism to “the narrative” about oppression.

I want to take the high ground back, repudiate tribalism, and re-dedicate myself to skepticism and open debate. Maybe if more of us had done this earlier, we wouldn’t be in this situation now. I don’t know. What I do know is that if I hadn’t swallowed identity politics bullshit for so long, I wouldn’t feel this guilt and regret now.

H/T Simon Headland:

” The left now equates mere disagreement with bigotry – simply critiquing their narrative on BLM, the wage gap, gender binary issues constitute hate crimes and warrant social ex-communication.
The victiminsation culture has 4 connected manifestations:

(1) if you disagree with us, you’re a bigot and deserve excommunication from society. The erasure of marginalised speech thus proceeds. Conservatives are thus otherised. Debate is now not about exchange of ideas, it’s about erection of safe spaces, and indoctrination.
(2) the “post-truth” consensus. In leftwing group think, if you repeat bs enough, it becomes true. I guess it worked for the Bible and Koran. Thus, Islam is a religion of peace; gender is purely a social construct and in your brain, yet simultaneously, there are no differences between men and women; blacks are more likely to be shot by police, but we can’t mention they are many more times likely to commit homicide; the wage gap is ONLY the result of discrimination (cf Chess rankings). Blacks do worse than whites in school because of discrimination only, but we accept Chinese do better because of culture (eg the Japanese beat locals in Brazil – must be positive discrimination hey). Labelling male culture as “toxic” is mandatory, but all other cultures are impeccable, virtuous butterflies. Piercing the veils of these post-truths results in social pariah status. The ability to reconcile cognitive dissonance is thus the most prized trait of social justice warriors
(3) the “offence culture”. Contrary to cognitive psychology practice, we are now encouraged to ruminate over subjective emotions, and subjective emotions are definitive proof of truth. If you are offended, your interpretation and feelings are to be validated. This is a curious repudiation of evolved psychology practice. Thus, being offended is now for an unintelligent person, the best strategy to win arguments. We fetishize offence and exalt it, and thus otherrise problematic discussion. As a subpoint of offence culture, if you question a victim’s account on event, you commit the horrible crime of “erasure”, and are “race/man-splaining”.
(4) Manipulation of language: words and statistics now are not means of succinct communication, they are redefined for activism. Apparently black people can’t be “racist” as this now denotes structural hierarchy; violent words like “erased, violence” are weaponised in expansionistic fashions. For example, even discussion that obesity may be connected to health is “violence against fat people”. Misgendering is “violence” – per Slate/Huffingtonpost, a transwoman strangling a cisman using the wrong pronoun is acting in “self-defence”. The word “problematic” is used to define a problem that is so much of a problem, you can’t actually say what it is. The word “misogyny” is used for even chivalrous sexism. “Transphobia” occurs for not subscribing to gender theory developed for the last 2 years, or even more recently, not wanting to date a transwoman because cis straight men should be desirous of “people with penises” if they call themselves female. This topic warrants future discussion. Everything SJW dislike is a “social construct”, but paradoxically, everything they like is rooted in biology or somehow protected from post-modernism. Relatedly, social justice warriors see statistics and numbers as emotional, social constructs, not spatial or numerical relationships. Thus, the more exaggeration of numbers the better – eg safe schools says 1/25 people are trans; or a classic from everyday feminism “asian people work twice as hard for 1/2 as much money – literally”.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s