Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness
-
@Klaus said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
I think most "woke" people aren't very familiar with critical theory
But that's the beauty of it; they don't have to be. They don't even have to know the theory exists! In fact, pursuing acquaintanceship with the theory would call for the application of reason! Wouldn't work!
No, in this case the woke need only glide along on the coattails of the other zillion social media lambkins. Nothing deeper required. They don't even have to mount any kind of defense for their position. They have catch phrases a-plenty they can grunt at anybody who asks.
-
@Loki said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Liberalism rode on the tails of social justice when it was convenient and created the monster.
Centrists should take little comfort in the hope that liberalism wins back the day.Sullivan is talking about philosophical Liberalism - not liberal used to denote left-wing.
-
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But I don't think that all the destruction you will happily watch in service of it could be termed strictly sane or rational.This is quite ironic given my main opposition to Trumpism is its nihilistic tendencies. Very anti-conservative in the Burkean sense.
In fact my opposition to Trumpism and the progressive left comes from an identical place.
Some day when I'm bored I'll even find your early confession of supporting Trump simply to watch him tear things down. This was before you were fully orange-pilled, it was pure ressentiment talking.
-
Think of his posture and actions with respect to the post-war global order, for example. (Nato, WHO, TPP, NAFTA, WTO, UNESCO, G7, etc. etc. etc.)
But also on a national institutional scale. Norm-breaking is part of his brand.
As Horace himself approvingly noted, he is the horse in the hospital.
-
Hm. Norm-breaking isn't necessarily nihilistic. His foreign policy could be seen as a return of a kind of "splendid isolation" policy, which also isn't necessarily nihilistic. A nihilist is somebody who doesn't care about anything. Trump does care about some things. Not about the right things, but some things are very important to him and have meaning for him (such as: being admired).
Let me think about the top three adjectives that come to my mind. I think they are: Narcissistic, impulsive, populistic.
-
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But I don't think that all the destruction you will happily watch in service of it could be termed strictly sane or rational.This is quite ironic given my main opposition to Trumpism is its nihilistic tendencies. Very anti-conservative in the Burkean sense.
In fact my opposition to Trumpism and the progressive left comes from an identical place.
Yes, I understand you give yourself that much credibility.
Some day when I'm bored I'll even find your early confession of supporting Trump simply to watch him tear things down. This was before you were fully orange-pilled, it was pure ressentiment talking.
Your track record of understanding what I write is not as perfect as you'd like to believe, jon. But your willingness to say that - that my Trump support is by my own confession based on my affinity for mindless destruction - without a willingness to back it up, is in fact revealing of a certain character.
-
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Think of his posture and actions with respect to the post-war global order, for example. (Nato, WHO, TPP, NAFTA, WTO, UNESCO, G7, etc. etc. etc.)
But also on a national institutional scale. Norm-breaking is part of his brand.
As Horace himself approvingly noted, he is the horse in the hospital.
It is part of all prominent political brands to selectively destroy and rebuild.
The horse in the hospital was a joke by John Mulaney which I said was pretty good but didn't lead much of anywhere funny, in the act.
-
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But your willingness to say that - that my Trump support is by my own confession based on my affinity for mindless destruction - without a willingness to back it up, is in fact revealing of a certain character.
You don't think it has even a little to do with the challenges of searching a 15 year database of posts?
-
One of the problems with our populist movements, like populist movements in general, is they are very keen on what they want to destroy and very vague on what or how to build in its place.
-
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
One of the problems with our populist movements, like populist movements in general, is they are very keen on what they want to destroy and very vague on what or how to build in its place.
is that as big a problem as people's psychological blocks against distinguishing a preference for one candidate over the other, from full unqualified love of that candidate?
-
And by the way, the reason you remember what I allegedly wrote so vividly, is because it confirmed your bias that there's something psychologically wrong with Trump supporters. It's been your ground truth about my Trump support ever since, and from that seed of contempt grew your comfortable total dismissal of me as a tribal pill swallower. It's all very lazy of you.
-
Funny, I didn't think you were tribal in 2011, and I did in 2017. Did I just become more lazy in that time?
I'll bet I'm not the only one who
noticed the changebecame more lazy. -
-
I'm looking forward to it.
-
I'm talking to you, aren't I?
