GirlChat #734800

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Abolutely, I will elaborate if I can,

Posted by Human on Wednesday, June 03 2020 at 2:43:32PM
In reply to I tend to agree posted by hieronymus on Wednesday, June 03 2020 at 03:14:55AM

But I actually have mixed feelings about him to be honest. Sometimes I can say very harsh things about him and then very positive things the next. As I said I think he means well, he is a decent man and I respect him on a personal level, I enjoy his lectures and I like to see him in debates. Obviously he's a fantastic psychologist, I don't doubt that. He also has some interesting biblical analyses. It's also fun to see him attack political correctness (though not so fun when it is his sole target). I think it is healthy for there to be a courteous and sensible opposition to left-wing dogma, and he, if anyone, represents that (as opposed to pathetic excuses for intellectuals such as Ben Shapiro or Charlie Kirk).

My opinions change however when he starts attacking what he stupidly terms 'cultural Marxism', which is a misnomer, as well as a debunked conspiracy theory. It's even weirder when he starts equating the Frankfurt School with his warped notion of socialism, when the School was founded upon the basis that all economic and social theories were inadequate (specifically Marxism). I think he gravely misunderstands what he criticizes, and that is one of the biggest intellectual sins there is. For example, in the debate with Slavoj Zizek about Marxism, the first thing he does is pull out the Communist Manifesto, as though he believed this represented Marxist philosophy, when in fact it was just some little pamphlet that he (and Engels) wrote when they were young to inspire semi-literate workers to fight for their rights. He doesn't even mention Das Kapital, which is a behemoth of societal analysis and in many ways the touchstone of all sociology. The fantastic thing about Das Kapital is that it didn't even state the need for revolution, it only identified and analyzed the problems with a precision that had never been seen before, thus changing the way we view human interaction. He also equates postmodernism with Marxism which doesn't even make any sense, and Zizek actually called him out on this. Postmodernism was a bizarre movement that had nothing to do with traditional socialist theory. If anything it was at odds with Marxist notions of universal truths and individual enlightenment, and the Frankfurt School certainly wouldn't have supported postmodernism.

I call him a charlatan in this light because of the legions of fans who follow him thinking he is some sort of intellectual messiah, and thence reject everything even remotely left-wing as being an attack on freedom. His social theories hold no weight whatsoever and for someone who claims to be fighting indoctrination and dogma he only seems to be creating it without realising. He also speaks with a very high level of arrogance and scorn on these things which is shameful for someone who doesn't even understand 'these things'. He seems incapable of thinking objectively and I see him as inseparable from the SJWs he claims to despise, by immersing yourself in a ridiculous debate you become part of that ridiculousness (especially if you start talking about lobsters, 'cultural Marxism' and cleaning your room). I think both sides of the debate are just as whiny as each other, I haven't the patience for political correctness nor those that are excessively triggered by it. It's a slight annoyance at worse, I recommend not wasting our brain power on fighting either side. There are much bigger issues and I think that debate just feels like a distraction sometimes.

Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)

Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?