I've heard this a lot with regards to topics like white privilege male privilege and so forth also there's the other phrase that goes with it. I need to bring awareness to... It only ever seems to be a very arrogant people who deliver these lines who really want to tell you you need to sit down you need to shut up and you need to listen to me I demand an audience from you, not just an audience but compliance. So anytime someone says we need to have the discussion it means you must listen while I educate you. That's my position anyway. How about yours?
Exactly so. Any time any leftist says we need to have a discussion about something what he means is a ten hour lecture series in your only contribution is your ears and a positive nod of you head when demanded.
The condescension of it that Orthodox tone strikes me is more of like a Sunday school teacher, it an arrogant clergy member that's going to tell you how you're just not good enough. Like they're in a position to do that I suppose some people will engage and sit and listen so they don't get called names. But I'm leaning to the end of **** that call me all the names you want.
I don't think this attitude is exclusive to that particular segment on the left. I see the same attitude in some segments of the right as well. WIth the latter it is usually phrased with religious language.
Well yeah there's the religious aspect of it and they can be pretty damn annoying. Outside of maybe a few guys at the gay pride parade I didn't see or hear any of this from religious people online sure but who cares online is fake. And if someone proceeds to lecture me I proceed to ignore them
I am likely one of the more knowledgeable religious people on this board. I don't generally do lectures on religion though I certainly will if someone asks. What I do is explain why this view is.what it is and how it has been shaped over the centuries you want to argue the point be my guest in fact I expect you to, I will cheerfully defend my position and unlike many on the left my defense not consist of the words, "Shut Up"
And the media is always telling the republicans they need to reach across the aisle and compromise with the democrats. But you never hear the media telling the democrats they need to reach across the aisle and compromise with the republicans.
The left brings up stuff, like Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project because they don't want harmony among the races. They want to keep people stirred up and even have a few hating each because of race. They can use that to push their agenda, which greater government control, more taxes and more regulations. The left believes that everything that is good comes out of Washington, so long as they control Washington. When the Republicans are in power, everything is wrong and resistance in their pubic duty. The right can also drive you nuts with their absolutism that is based on religion. Everything in the Bible is right according to their interpretation, and if you don't agree with them you are a heretic who must be shunned. What they won’t tell you, or don’t realize themselves is that the King James version of the Bible was written by a group of 47 scholars who wrote it during the time of King James I (ruled 1603 to 1625). They weren’t about to write anything was critical of the king or might limit his power. It was also intended to solidify the power of the Church of England as opposed to any other religion. While there are many good and moral teachings in the Bible, one must realize that it was not created without a political point of view. Therefore there nothing wrong with questioning some people interpretations of it.
I wonder too if heart of this isn't the fact that a lot of white leftist people really are racist. A lot of them lives in communities where they only encounter other white liberal people or very much like them people of minority types. And I'm talking about the actual people at this point not the politicians. I wonder if they feel some sort of guilt because they never really knew what real minority person essentially they have Ivory Tower syndrome. I grew up poor in a poor neighborhood with just all sorts of different people mixed together. Good buddies that were Hispanic black and Asian and I'm a white guy and I didn't care when I was nine years old. I think these people live in these little white picket fence very very sheltered communities maybe their parents didn't but they grew up there and they don't know anything. They want to lecture me on they're understanding of dealing with and interacting with people of A different race when I figured that crap out when I was 9 years old. It's like they've just had this stunted growth and they're thinking that everyone else lived the same kind of Life they did and we didn't. I lived in a neighborhood my neighbor on one side of me were Vietnamese across the street from me or Colombian the ones next door to the Colombian where Guatemalans the ones behind me where black people the ones two doors down where Hispanic the ones next to them were white then black then I'm not sure because they didn't have kids my age. I grew up in the late '80s early 90s so I love these kids the boys at least are interested in ninjas and Ninja turtles and Kung Fu and all that sort of stuff. Tell the neighborhood kids would get together and play Ninja. So you had to learn this crap that people in these white bread communities don't learn until they're in college when you're like in second grade. The two black boys that need to couple houses down me and my brother were the same age as them and she always had a watermelon she would cut up and we would eat and I never thought that was racist when they came over to my house we had watermelon and we cut it up and eat it. So I really think these people are just out of touch and really don't want to let it on that they are.
That seems pretty accurate to me. The demagogues who want to have these "conversations" aren't really interested in having a conversation at all. Conversations are two way streets that require listening to other people and their viewpoints, and God forbid, facing the prospect that you just might be wrong.
So they overcompensate, and they project their own insecurities and inadequacies on to others. What you see there is the same fear, ignorance and discomfort one encounters with most racists. There's also the awful racist tendency on the parts of those White "progressives" to infantilize minorities, just as they infantilize many non-Whites in other cultures. This is where you get the racist "poverty of expectations" that is based on the racist premise that other racial, ethnic, national and religious groups are inferior to Whites and their inferiority has to be accepted and accommodated in some way, shape or form.
Exactly they want you to shut up and listen while the peach at you. They don't want to hear a damn word you say. it always comes off as a pyramid scheme sales pitch
They infantilize minorities because they think they are lesser people. It truly is the worst bigotry of all. The bigotry of low expectations. I belong to a minority I hate being treated like I'm fragile special and weak. Like I'm a little puppy that needs protection. I HATE that.
Yeah I agree it's not exclusive both parties do this. But only one party says we need to have a discussion. I remember getting this crap from the right wing when I came out didn't act like they were going to listen to they let it know that they're going to tell me how long I am I'm not saying one's better than the other.
People who subscribe to the notion that society's hierarchies have been corrupted through the illicit exercise of power can think of no other remedy than the illicit exercise of power. They are in deconstruction mode. The want to tear all systems down, and hope that somehow in the future they will reconstitute into better functioning systems. They fully subscribe to the notion of sacrificing the good on the altar of perfection. They don't care about how individual systems interact with each other. They don't care about the benefits of current systems. They believe that reason, logic, & debate are tools that have been corrupted because those were the tools that created the corrupt hierarchies they seek to dismantle. So they will use reason logic and debate in the same ways they perceive them to be corrupt. The most extreme believe in the destruction of all hierarchies. They will tell you they don't believe in them. But such a position is untenable. Every choice you make to act in the world contributes to the creation of a hierarchy. Even within the systems they are attempting to establish. This leads them to fight not only against established systems, but the concepts of the systems they seek to establish. Intersectionality is a prime example of this nightmare. It's clear that they have a lot of problems within their own systems that they can't agree how to solve. Those problems grow exponentially with every letter they add to the identity alphabet soup. Don't get me wrong. In some cases they have valid points about corruption. They have valid points about flaws within systems. But they have no way of assessing the opportunity cost of addressing these flaws because they don't believe in hierarchies.
You've got the outcome right. Not so sure you're right about the cause. They are focused on inequality and motivated to equalize. Any equality they identify is assumed to be caused by corruption of a system. The reason for this is two fold. First, is the premise that everyone is perfectly equal. Inequalities therefor must be the result of the system they interact with. (see wage gap argument) Second, they believe that it's possible to create a perfect system without inequality and without corruption. So in both cases, it's the system that must be blamed. The cause of all inequality then must be institutional racism, sexism, bigotry, phobia, bias etc. A person's own behavior within a system cannot be a contributing factor because everyone is equal. The second you absolve anyone of the potential for fault you also remove their agency. Without agency everyone is an infant that must be controlled by the system.
Maybe some, but I don't think it's fair to come to this conclusion about the majority motive. I truly believe that for most the underlying motive is harmony and equality. The problem is that their analysis of the inequality is superficial. The systems they are concerned with are way too complex to apply universal standards to, but they want everything to be controlled by a universal system. They don't know how these systems function. They don't know what causes the disfunction. They don't know how changes within the system will change the output of the system. They have no way to measure the evolution of the system.
Here's the problem: 1. Start with the premise that universal equality is achievable 2. Regret exists. 3. Regret is caused by a poor choice. 4. The consequences of poor choices produce inequalities. 5. The consequences of poor choices must be eliminated through control of systems. Eliminate the consequences of poor choices and you also eliminate individual agency. We can see this problem in every debate about what to do about our universal system of government, not just the woke ones.
I think this plays into some character flaws as well I'm certain individuals. Some people like to feel like they're a victim because it takes any accountability or agency away from them for struggles they might face. It also gives them an it's not my fault mentality. This means they don't have to fix themselves you do. And then there's the people that really irritate me. The ones that player like they're protecting you from something. Like if it works for them the words they say and the people they blame you wouldn't have any of your freedoms.
