Social and political issues

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I'd be more interested in a more granular analysis of what people are actually talking about. Do they think that not being able to call a mentally challenged person a ###### or not being able to call a homosexual person a fag without sounding like an idiot is a real problem? Or do they just dislike the vague idea of political correctness?

There's a difference between calling people 'fags' and worrying if you're going to be scolded for missing the latest letter in the LGBTQ acronym chain. I'd wager the great majority of people who don't use the word 'fag' are also puzzled by the distinctions of the various letters in LGBTQ, and resent the presumption that everyone in polite society has a moral obligation to be up on the latest terms and taboos that emerge from activist culture.

There's a treadmill of language around social issues that never ends. It emerges from academia and then is rapidly adopted by progressive activists as a signal that they're alert and responsive to the latest thing. It's like any other kind of jargon - it's main purpose is to identity yourself as a fellow-traveller who is in the know. And once the jargon becomes mainstream, the tribe creates new jargon, because like all cutting-edge fashion, the whole point is to distinguish yourself from muggles.

As the article remarks:

The study should also make progressives more self-critical about the way in which speech norms serve as a marker of social distinction. I don’t doubt the sincerity of the affluent and highly educated people who call others out if they use “problematic” terms or perpetrate an act of “cultural appropriation.” But what the vast majority of Americans seem to see—at least according to the research conducted for “Hidden Tribes”—is not so much genuine concern for social justice as the preening display of cultural superiority.

There's a reason only 25 per cent of black Americans self-identify as liberal.

As for dismissing the article because it doesn't define political correctness, I'll leave this comment from reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/c...ctness/e7jg3pg

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

...

As for dismissing the article because it doesn't define political correctness, I'll leave this comment from reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/c...ctness/e7jg3pg

That was a great post, actually. Excellent summary.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If you actually read the report

I want my biases confirmed in 50 words or less, thank you.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

“Most people don’t care”

*starts multiple threads about it

Aside from being a bit of an ad populum fallacy, I think the more amusing part of this is that Cliff has been railing about the regressive left boogeyman for how many years now? Which is it, a small vocal minority that no one really cares about, or a tsunami of leftist support in favour of the existential destruction of free speech, equivalent to the more fascist tendencies of the far right?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Aside from being a bit of an ad populum fallacy, I think the more amusing part of this is that Cliff has been railing about the regressive left boogeyman for how many years now? Which is it, a small vocal minority that no one really cares about, or a tsunami of leftist support in favour of the existential destruction of free speech, equivalent to the more fascist tendencies of the far right?

A small but highly vocal minority that is disproportionately represented in some areas (e.g. journalism and academia) that have a significant effect on popular culture?

As for the equivalency with the far right, I think the problem you've got there is that there's really no argument on here about the extent of those tendencies or their potential impact. I described Trump's election as nothing short of an existential threat to the species, one which has (thankfully and somewhat to the credit of the system of inherent checks and balances that don't depend on Republicans growing spines) yet to materialize.

Just speaking for myself, my criticism of this portion of the left wing rather than railing against the far right is borne of a few causes. First, I think the far right is a lost cause (though I have more or less come to the conclusion that the same is true of the far left). Second, there's no real basis for a line of communication between me and members of the far right; I really don't know any of them - even my devotedly religious conservative side of the family despises Trump and the alt-right, and would be never-Trumpers if they were American. More importantly, if I did know any, why would they listen to me? We don't speak the same language. Third, and as part and parcel of not really knowing any of those people, I don't know any of them I like, which is not the case among the activist progressive identitarian (or whatever label you'd like to use) left... I know plenty of people I like and greatly respect for various other reasons who are, I'm sad to say, ideologues in that vein. Fifth, it's a sort of betrayal to see your own back yard, ideologically, veer into the ditch in the way that I consider this vocal segment of the left to have done. I've cared about politics since I was very young; I was following US house races in high school because I thought certain issues were very important and the way the USA dealt with them would cascade to Canada and in any event affect a lot of people south of the border (notably the chickenhawk posture of the GOP in the early 2000s and the Christian right's moralizing and as part of that, gay rights). I was pretty hopeful that with enough activism and conversation and through the right people running (I was a big Obama guy from 2004 on) we'd win the war of ideas and those Christians would become a minority and we'd enter an era without dogmatism and moral orthodoxy where all that would matter would be who had the most rational, convincing argument. That hope was aimed at my side of the ideological spectrum: the left. I had no hope that the right would be the catalyst for that change (though perhaps they could be brought around eventually, given enough time). I expected us to do it. I am, suffice it to say, no longer burdened by that expectation. My criticisms of what's described in that article as "PC culture", to the extent I can be bothered to give voice to them anymore, are mostly the result of that disappointment and frustration with people who I thought wanted more or less the society that I did.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If you actually read the report the article talks about it doesn't really focus on "political correctness" much at all. There is one question, apparently, that asks whether the respondents think political correctness is a problem. The vast majority of the questions are more generally about social attitudes.

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...s_report-2.pdf

Whatever you think the results indicate, I think it's a pretty interesting study.

I did, though obviously not all 160 pages. And the article that was linked focused almost entirely on the notion of political correctness.

Regardless, you can see the same thing happen with the hate speech question. Huge majorities of every cohort other than conservatives saw hate speech as a problem, but does that mean progressive activists are in step with the mainstream in that? Not really, because everyone's definition is going to be different just like it is with political correctness.

As for the rest of the report, I don't know that it's all that surprising. Liberal activists and diehard conservatives are at the extremes and everyone else is a sliding scale in about how you'd expect it to end up. And obviously those in the middle are going to have more varied and nuanced opinions on various matters and are more open to compromise while being less dogmatic than those on the fringes.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

A small but highly vocal minority that is disproportionately represented in some areas (e.g. journalism and academia) that have a significant effect on popular culture?

Is this actually true though? The right, specifically neo-conservatives, have basically demonized academia into irrelevancy and mainstream journalism mostly exists in the centre of the political spectrum. And I'd even argue that mainstream journalism has far more high-profile far-right outlets than far-left ones in Fox News, Breitbart, talk-radio, etc. The left obviously has its own outlets in HuffPost, Salon, etc., but most of those are still toeing centrist or centre-left line economically. I'm having a hard time coming up with the names of any high-profile Marxist mediums.

To the rest of your post, it just kind of reminds me of this.

Spoiler!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Okay, well, I don't really get the joke on that meme, but I assume it was written to titillate you, not me. In any event, like I say, I'm no longer burdened by the expectation that the problem can be fixed through conversation with people who want somewhat similar social outcomes, so best of luck to you.

As for the media stuff, depending on when you're watching it, Fox News varies from the "traditional right" to the crazy far right, and MSNBC does as well on the left, though not to an equivalent degree, I suppose. The stuff that leaked from inside the New York Times after the Bari Weiss tweet is essentially the culture I'm describing. I think it's a stretch to suggest that the New York Times is alone there, even though on the whole, they publish a lot of very well considered and sober material. I can't imagine what's flying around the internal communications platform at somewhere like the Guardian.

Originally Posted by opendoor

As for the rest of the report, I don't know that it's all that surprising.

Here are some of the items that I considered surprising or at minimum interesting.

• 40% of female respondents sided with "today's feminists just attack men" over "today's feminists fight for important issues"
• Moderates and the politically disengaged are split about 50-50 on the proposition, "Nowadays white people do not have any real advantages over others".
• The general population is more or less evenly split over whether Police are fair to people of every race.
• Even significant chunks of traditional liberals and passive liberals responded that America needs more faith and religion rather than science and reason (FFS)
• The median on whether Islam is more violent than other religions is just 33% (which seems like a far more left-leaning average than other questions in the poll)
• Literally every group has a stronger positive response towards women than men, with "traditional conservatives" the closest to an equal response
• The progressive activist group is by far the highest response on how dangerous they see the world as (which dovetails with much of what Haidt and Pinker have to say)
• Every racial respondent group had a majority response that people are too sensitive about race, except for black respondents, who went overwhelmingly the other way
• A significant majority of women responded that sexism was neither "very common" nor "very serious"
• In terms of racial preferences, nearly every group had a fairly positive view of whites, hispanics and blacks, except BLM supporters and Clinton supporters (who were majority negative on whites and to lukewarm about hispanics) and Trump supporters, who somehow were negative about all three.
• More than 50% of respondents think pro football players should be required to stand during the anthem, including 68% of the "politically disengaged". That is way more than I'd have thought.
• Two thirds of respondents see social pressure in america to think a certain way about racism and islam, which doesn't hold on the topics of immigration or LGBTQ issues (which is a 50-50 split)

If I would have guessed at the numbers on any of those, I think I might have come up with a different answer.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Aside from being an ad populum fallacy, I think the more amusing part of this is that Cliff has been railing about the regressive left boogeyman for how many years now? Which is it, a small vocal minority that no one really cares about, or a tsunami of leftist support in favour of the existential destruction of free speech, equivalent to the more fascist tendencies of the far right?

It's a small minority that has the power to establish and enforce norms out of proportion to its numbers, especially in areas where it's strongest (academia, the media, cultural industries, increasingly the corporate world). But the only reason zealots can enforce norms is because a larger group of people who don't really believe the dogma go along with it.

Some go along out of misplaced partisanship ("at least they're not as bad as the nuts on the other side"), some out of cowardice, and some because insincerely playing the game is a way to gain status. It's no different than church-going Victorians - for every parishioner passionately singing in the pews, there were two who were just there going through the rituals because it's what respectable citizens are seen to do.

Why do I care? Because as an educated, liberal person under 50 who's a bit of a geek, I encounter the folly of progressive identarians every day. I've seen them gradually take over forums and hobby sites and drive dissenters away. I've seen how parroting their pieties has become pretty much mandatory for anyone who has a profile in those communities. I hear it whenever I turn on Canada's national public broadcaster. And it has ramped up dramatically in recent years.

Liberals need to recognize that the far right isn't the only threat to their values. Moderates need to speak up against the bad ideas and uncompromising zealots in their world. It's more likely to effect change than gathering in echo chambers to denounce Those Other Guys.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

A small but highly vocal minority that is disproportionately represented in some areas (e.g. journalism and academia) that have a significant effect on popular culture?

I completely agree with what you are saying. Small but highly vocal minority that is disproportionately represented in journalism.





Small but highly vocal minority that is disproportionately represented in academia.



Same empty yet titillating garbage repeated to the point of it taking root and becoming entrenched as "ideas" in the zeitgeist.

[CliffFletcher]

Carrying on a discussion from the American Politics thread.

Why the working class has turned its back on the left

1) Anxiety over globalization and the triumph of corporate giants has left many of the losers in the modern economy hostile to the establishment. That's why they aren't turning to traditional conservative parties and politicians - they're looking to outsiders who they see as uncorrupted by the system.

...The unsurprising result of this combination – more trade, declining unionization and more industry concentration – has been to shift political and economic power to big corporations and the wealthy, and to shaft the working class. This created an opening for Donald Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery, and his presidency.

Now Americans have rebelled by supporting someone who wants to fortify America against foreigners as well as foreign-made goods. The power structure understandably fears that Trump’s isolationism will stymie economic growth. But most Americans couldn’t care less about growth because for years they have received few of its benefits, while suffering most of its burdens in the forms of lost jobs and lower wages.

The power structure is shocked by the outcome of the 2016 election because it has cut itself off from the lives of most Americans.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ns-us-election

...Going global allowed the third-way leftists to enjoy real success -in the short term. But they were not magicians. Somebody had to lose in the competition against low wage, high tech economies not burdened with much democracy and with a rough way of handling strikes. The victims in this contest turned out to be Europe’s indigenous, unskilled and semi-skilled workers and their families. These were the people the left was supposed to protect; in fact, the left was perceived to have done the reverse. The anti-immigrant, anti-trade, anti-free market right now finds itself the repository of the hopes of men and women who see relief in their policies. That they are unlikely to get that relief will lead our societies into ever more stormy waters.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-l...-idUSKBN13Y07B

Furthermore, the educated and cosmopolitan elite may have left crude nationalism behind, but the working class have not. While the Anywheres are happy to uproot themselves to find education and work and consider themselves citizens of the world, the Somewhere still look for strong social unifying community bonds and traditions rooted in geography.

...Those who see the world from anywhere are, he points out, the ones who dominate our culture and society, doing well at school and moving to a residential university, and then into a professional career, often in London or abroad. “Such people have portable ‘achieved’ identities,” he says, “based on educational and career success which makes them . . . comfortable and confident with new places and people.”

The rebels are those more rooted in geographical identity – the Scottish farmer, working-class Geordie, Cornish housewife – who find the rapid changes of the modern world unsettling. They are likely to be older and less well educated. “They have lost economically with the decline of well-paid jobs for people without qualifications and culturally, too, with the disappearance of a distinct working-class culture and the marginalisation of their views in the public conversation,” Goodhart writes.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politic...xit-inevitable

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Carrying on a discussion from the American Politics thread.

Why the working class has turned its back on the left

Stupidity and lack of self-awareness. /end of argument

[CliffFletcher]

Why the working class has turned its back on the left

2) Whipped up by the outrage machine, culture wars have come to dominate political dialogue. Educated professionals and tech-savvy knowledge workers who are the face of liberalism today have found themselves on the opposite side of this cultural divide from the less educated and less skilled. Few of the former even try to hide their contempt for the latter any more.

Reflecting on what he called “the woke identity,” Freddie DeBoer observed a tendency among some leftists to forcefully reject the work of persuasion with excuses like, “It’s not my job to educate you.” The not-yet-woke are to be chided, not engaged.

“The problem with making your political program the assembly of a moral aristocracy is that hierarchy always requires exclusivity,” DeBoer argues. “A fundamental, structural impediment to liberal political victory is that their preferred kind of moral engagement necessarily limits the number of adherents they can win. It’s just math: you can’t grow a mass party when the daily operation of your movement involves finding more and more heretics to ostracize from the community.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ft-win/522102/

Cosmopolitan liberalism is the culture of the elites and is deeply divisive. Identity politics, in its libertarian pursuit of self-realisation and its judging and dividing into victim status hierarchies, is corrosive of society.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politic...bourgeois-left

...It was and remains extremely counterproductive for the left to treat Trump supporters as a “basket of deplorables,” especially given how tiny a percentage of his followers would need to be converted away from the president to reorient political power in Washington, D.C. For directing me to a Lincoln speech I’d never read before, I thank Andrew Sullivan, who quoted it to support the argument that “you will not arrest the reactionary momentum by ignoring it or dismissing it entirely as a function of bigotry or stupidity. You’ll only defuse it by appreciating its insights and co-opting its appeal.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ft-win/522102/

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

Stupidity and lack of self-awareness. /end of argument

Pretty feeble argument.

"If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great high road to his reason, and which, when once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing his judgment of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause really be a just one.

On the contrary, assume to dictate to his judgment, or to command his action, or to mark him as one to be shunned and despised, and he will retreat within himself, close all the avenues to his head and his heart; and tho’ your cause be naked truth itself, transformed to the heaviest lance, harder than steel, and sharper than steel can be made, and tho’ you throw it with more than Herculean force and precision, you shall no more be able to pierce him, than to penetrate the hard shell of a tortoise with a rye straw.

Such is man, and so must he be understood by those who would lead him, even to his own best interest." - Abraham Lincoln, address to the Washington Temperance Society in 1842.

[Red Slinger]

Okay, so you state two reasons why the working class is leaving the left:

1) Economic anxiety, and;
2) Political correctness/identity politics

So, what's the solution for #1? Most left-leaning politicians and parties tend to argue that taxes for the middle class and poor should be lowered while taxes for the wealthy should be increased. Most left-leaning types argue that social safety nets should be in place for those displaced by automation or other economic circumstances. They also argue that, at least in the case of the US, healthcare should be universal and a trip to the ER shouldn't bankrupt a family.

What solutions are right-leaning types offering for this economic anxiety? If anything, it's the stuff that doesn't actually help those suffering from it. Instead, they wrap their programs with lies and tell the gullible that it's actually good for them when it's not.

Regarding #2:

The argument that political correctness is running amok has been overstated. Every case is reported in the media like it's a plague. If each case of campus rape was reported in the media like it is for campus censorship there would be a massive outcry. Yes, censorship happens and it usually sucks. So what is okay censorship? Is the "N" word okay to say? Not in most circles. We censor ourselves. The loudest cry against political correctness and censorship is usually by those that have 'deplorable' things to say.

Additionally, I don't buy the "identity politics" is driving people to the political right. The right uses identity politics just as much, if not more, than the left. The argument of identity politics just ends up being a convenient excuse to say and do stupid stuff.

So, you've presented two points of view as to why the WHITE working class is leaving the left. Both of which are, as New Era stated, mostly due to "stupidity and lack of self-awareness". You seem to beat this drum fairly regularly. What are you suggesting for a solution? Or to put it more crudely: what's your point?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

So, what's the solution for #1? Most left-leaning politicians and parties tend to argue that taxes for the middle class and poor should be lowered while taxes for the wealthy should be increased.

The problem is nobody likes to regard themselves as 'the wealthy.' Obama tried to remove tax breaks for college savings plans, which are used almost entirely by the wealthiest 10-20 per cent of Americans. But members of his own party convinced him he had to back down because their constituents would scream bloody murder if they were cut. Those are people who politicians cannot afford to piss off.

The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

Dream Hoarders: How the American Upper Middle Class Is Leaving Everyone Else in the Dust, Why That Is a Problem, and What to Do About It

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

They also argue that, at least in the case of the US, healthcare should be universal and a trip to the ER shouldn't bankrupt a family.

Most Americans support universal health care. It's a case of the Republicans being captured by extremist elements of the party. So championing universal public health care is definitely a vote-winner, and something the left should continue to do.

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

What solutions are right-leaning types offering for this economic anxiety?

Pulling back from globalism. Closing borders to immigration. Tariffs. Devolving authority to local bodies.

I'm not suggesting those are good ideas. But the reason the right has been able to make political hay with economic protectionism is because the center-left has failed to sell the working class on the merits of globalism, or offered a way forward for those who struggle to succeed in a rapidly changing global economy. Everyone should move to the big city and become software developers or open artisinal bakeries isn't much of a solution to the mass social dislocation caused by globalism.

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

The argument that political correctness is running amok has been overstated.

You can't watch a newscast, turn on a talk show, or look at the front page of MSN, without people censuring others over transgressions of speech. A week doesn't go buy without a politician or celebrity being publicly denounced and shamed, often for saying things that the average person doesn't see any problem with. Of course this fosters resentment.

Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

You seem to beat this drum fairly regularly. What are you suggesting for a solution? Or to put it more crudely: what's your point?

I substantiate my arguments thoroughly. Read the links I post. Or don't.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You can't watch a newscast, turn on a talk show, or look at the front page of MSN, without people censuring others over transgressions of speech. A week doesn't go buy without a politician or celebrity being publicly denounced and shamed, often for saying things that the average person doesn't see any problem with. Of course this fosters resentment.

Sure but that goes back to my point about the coverage in media (of all forms) far exceeding the actual occurrence. This speaks to the 'outrage culture' and the 'outrage about outrage' culture.

I substantiate my arguments thoroughly. Read the links I post. Or don't.

You continue to bring up issues but you don't seem to offer potential solutions. I understand that you're not responsible for fixing what's wrong but to continually state the problems eventually just comes off as complaining and not productive. I'd like to hear what YOU suggest.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I'm not suggesting those are good ideas. But the reason the right has been able to make political hay with economic protectionism is because the center-left has failed to sell the working class on the merits of globalism, or offered a way forward for those who struggle to succeed in a rapidly changing global economy.

How would you sell the merits of globalism to the working class?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Pretty feeble argument.

Better than coming up with these two beauties, as if they make any sense what so ever.


1) Anxiety over globalization and the triumph of corporate giants...
and
2) Whipped up by the outrage machine, culture wars have come to dominate political dialogue...


Both are a result of the same group of people, and they are on the far right end of the political spectrum. The problem in the world is that the globalists and capitalists are the same industrialists who argue their interests need greater freedom, at the expense of the very poor they are claiming to be akin to protecting.



It is the whole astroturf Tea Party movement where the uneducated rubes we coerced into believing that good times were just ahead by giving into these robber barons. The coal mines jobs would come back. The manufacturing jobs would come back. Repatriating money from offshore would drive great innovation and more jobs!


As it would turn out, these corporatists did nothing but buy and sell Congress and state legislatures to institute laws that would shelter their profits and allow them to skate on their responsibilities to the greater public. So all of that repatriation of offshore money did not spurn new economic activity, it just generated more profit and more money for the already uber rich. Those jobs in the coal mines and the manufacturing sector never came back, because there are no jobs to bring back. Automation has all but eliminated the very jobs these hopeful fools were counting on.


What these people need is a reality check. Conservatives don't care about them beyond making sure they show up to work to turn a screw and make a product that generates profit. They don't care about their current state or their future state. They don't want to provide an environment where people can better themselves, they only care about profit.


2) The outrage machine operates at two very different levels. Sure, the left has some blowhards, but they are not organized blowhards and they don't affect policy. Conversely, the blowhard mechanism on the right is entrenched into the machine and is mart and parcel of spreading the message and affecting change, both on a societal and policy level. There is a massive industry the right has created to spread lies and disinformation. This is not a situation of both sides being equally responsible for the current sad state of affairs.



Finally, “Always remember... Rumors are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.”
― Ziad K. Abdelnour

[redforever]

Originally Posted by New Era

Stupidity and lack of self-awareness. /end of argument

The working class has turned on the left because of comments just like yours. These type of comments close the conversation before it even starts.