|That guy |
Oh my god, it's full of stars.
I highly recommend watching everyone's facial expression through it.
YOU PEOPLE KNEW WHAT YOU WERE SIGNING UP FOR.
How much do I have to pay to get a video where Triumph does this to a room full of Republican presidential candidates.
Actually, I bet that happens all the time at Sheldon Adelson's house.
oh hell yes, gonna watch the shit out of it asap
I wish I could give you every star for this.
I was already thinking about ordering pizza, now it's settled.
Oh my god.
|Binro the Heretic |
The old backlash against political correctness was about privileged White men frightened and angered because they had to learn to share with women and non-Whites.
The new backlash is about old people frightened and angered because the young are slowly edging them out of power and refusing to stay off their lawns.
.....whatever it takes to keep telling yourself that the left-wing shits chocolate.
So in order to force old white men to share with women and non-whites, you're voting for Marc Rubio, the 2nd generation son of Cuban immigrants AND the youngest candidate, automatically making him more virtuous? Oh wait, wrong party.
How about Hilary Clinton then? The first woman U.S. president in history! Oh, you don't like her because you get a FEELING she's "not genuine".
So who are you supporting in order to usher out this era of old white men running things? It can't be Bernie Sanders, the oldest and whitest......wait, you are?
Gosh. It's like this politics stuff is more complex than boiled-down, childishly simplistic impulses!
Binro the Heretic
I'm 45, Nominal. I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years, when right-wing old White men started using the term "politically correct" in a sneering derisive manner to describe the push to view people as people and not stereotypes.
Did all old White men dismiss political correctness? No, of course not, but just about everyone who did was an old White man. They called those of us who denounced discriminatory language & attitudes crackpots. They accused us of censorship & tyranny. Young White men were on their side because they wanted to automatically inherit all the privilege & power the old White men and keep everyone else "in their place."
And now the same tactics are being used. Young people are being mocked and shamed for wanting society to be less hateful and more welcoming to everyone, not just a select few.
I am an old White man, Nominal. As such, I have an even better insight into how spiteful and frightened old people, White people and men are. Because I share superficial commonalities with them, all these groups feel safe sharing their real opinions around me. When I point out how awful they are being, they treat me with disgust and derision.
Believe me or don't I really don't give two squirts of piss what you think of me. I was just making an observation based on years of experience.
racist assholes calling any correction of them "PC bs"
DOES NOT EQUAL
different people call multiple things "PC bs"
EVEN IF THEY USE THE SAME PHRASE
That is such a stupid rhetorical move, Binro, that I'm saddened that you tried it. I'm sad for how you're making yourself look. It's sad.
Is it the term itself that's permanently dirty for you because shitty racists use it frequently??
Or are you making the stronger claim that absolutely no left-wing language-policing should be criticized because racists falsely called a number of things "PC bullshit", so now criticizing it is FOREVER only a pure right-wing thing to do?
Is your head completely binary on this?
Also, if you're just stirring the pot or trolling or some shit, good job.
This actually inspired me to look up the Wikipedia page on the term, since I thought it was more a product of the early to mid 1990s.
Turns out it originated some time in the 40s in the left as a pejorative against Stalinism but started to be self applied as a positive label by leftist academics in the 70s, and while it did become a pejorative used by the right against the left in the early 90s, they were typically using it to criticize things that the left itself had already been applying it to nonpejoratively for decades. Who knew?
"When I point out how awful they are being, they treat me with disgust and derision."
Maybe there's another factor you're overlooking.
hah, cheap jab
I'll agree with Binro there. You can hear some shitty shit in certain social milieus when people think you're part of their club.
So to reiterate, while what the right perceives as totalitarian tendencies on the left are usually dubious at best, their use of the term "politically correct" to call out those perceived totalitarian tendencies is a historically correct use of it, and actually comes from socialist and communist intellectual circles. Also, historically, the groups that the right tends to accuse of political correctness had already been self applying the term for years, so the right labeling the things they were criticizing "political correctness" was, in fact, a completely appropriate use of the term INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTENT OR VALIDITY OF THE CRITIQUE, both in that it was already a term those being criticized had been using as a label for the things they were being criticized for and in that linguistically speaking their use was in fact the more proper use - as a pejorative description of perceived totalitarian tendencies on the left, only this time it wasn't the left critiquing itself internally, it was the right critiquing the left (mostly) spuriously.
The real question, though, is what on earth were new-left academics thinking when they started self-applying a pejorative term for cryptostalinist ideology? That's almost as wrongheaded (but nowhere near as universally adopted) as the nonpejorative use of "meritocracy."
I'm just going to keep Evilhomering you two about armchair etymology, OK?
What do you feel like? The obvious segue would be into a lecture about the transition of the term "meritocracy" from a pejorative to a laudative since the mid 20th century, and how that ties in to the subtle creep of Social Darwinism into the mainstream American zeitgeist during the 70s and 80s that facilitated the rise of neoliberalism. I could even tie it in to the atomization of the basic social unit from family to individual i the wake of the industrial revolution, the harnessing of the mythology of sovereign individualism by the marketing industry in the 20th century, and the grave implications that meritocracy and social Darwinism pose for society as technology forces a transition into a post-work economy in the 21st century.
It's all true though, go right ahead and fact check anything I said up there.
I'm not enjoying this, it's just the comment thread version of turning the hose on a couple dogs that won't stop humping on your front lawn.
-2 for "the left critiquing itself internally" when that's hardly what they were doing
+5 for laudative, which never gets used enough
-5 for claiming etymology/history of the phrase as of predominant importance
+6 for not actually claiming that, just using it to Evilhomer me
+1 for Evilhomering, which I'm not sure I want to encourage.
Old Zircon 5 - 6 That guy
How I worked out my own score:
+5 giving shit to Binro
+10 just being my self, doin' what I do
-8 probably getting baited by Binro
-3 refusing to admit to myself that I'm a pig for wanting to bang that lil 19 year old PC minx in the middle of the group
+2 hating BENNR and jimmyboblahey immediately
Binro the Heretic
More and more, the media is mocking college kids who demand tolerance and denounce bigotry. It also exaggerates people who promote tolerance, making them look like evil overlords who want to become the new Big Brother.
"Oh, look, that uppity Black girl is shouting down that venerable old bearded White man. She wants to feel safe in an institution of higher learning? She won't tolerate hate and spite in the name of freedom? POLITICAL CORRECTNESS HAS GONE TOO FAR!"
They left out the part where the college nicely asked everyone to please show respect when dressing up for Halloween. No threats of punishment, just basically, "please don't be an asshole." And the venerable old bearded White man's wife jumps in with, "WHAT ABOUT THEIR FREEDOM TO BE OFFENSIVE? WHY CAN'T PEOPLE JUST OPEN A DIALOGUE IF THEY FEEL OFFENDED?" And then she avoided every attempt by the offended students to open a dialogue with her.
So her husband tries to defend her by being a condescending asshole and, as a MASTER OF THE COLLEGE, tells them that speaking out against bigotry and intolerance in the college isn't his job, man. Maybe it's not in the job description, but what about your duty as a fucking human being, mother-fucker?
And when this young woman, who deals daily with White students and faculty saying bullshit like she doesn't really belong there, she's only there because of affirmative action, she took the position from a more deserving better-qualified White student, etc. loses control and shouts at him, some other huge asshole whips out their phone, records her and posts it online for the delight of other assholes.
I am a great believer in and lover of freedom, but It's wrong to say people should have to put up with assholes degrading them at school or work because, "THOSE PEOPLE HAVE FREEDOM." Yes, they have freedom. That's why we allow them to say whatever the fuck they want. But we really shouldn't be patting them on the back and giving them a cookie because, "OH! YOU USED YOUR FREEDOM! YES YOU DID! YOU'RE SO RIGHT TO USE YOUR FREEDOM."
They have every right to say what they want AND every right to face whatever consequences come as a result.
Oh, fuck. That's your complexity-free, one-sided view of this?
My fault, Binro. I thought I remembered your blind spots being in a totally different area.
That's a fair and balanced assessment, That Guy. You deserve at least two more points.
"-2 for "the left critiquing itself internally" when that's hardly what they were doing"
Fair point, I'll change it to "WWII era socialists and communists telling Stalinists to back the fuck off."
"Binro the Heretic
More and more, the media is mocking college kids who demand tolerance and denounce bigotry. It also exaggerates people who promote tolerance, making them look like evil overlords who want to become the new Big Brother."
Binro, there is a certain amount of truth to that but trust me. I'm someone who has been in pretty regular contact with academia for my whole life: raised by a university professor, have been working on an ivy league campus for the past three plus years, have lived and/or worked within 10 blocks of ivy league schools with virtually no interruption since 2002, was involved in the MIT music department for 3 years, even lectured at MIT one time (well, me and one other guy). The media may be exaggeration the ubiquity of the totalitarian fringe of the academic left but it DOES exist and it HAS seen a significant increase in influence on and off campus over the past decade, and it is deeply toxic to progressive political and social causes in the big picture.
Oh, I see what you meant now. I didn't know anything about that specific subject area being the origin, your brief summary notwithstanding.
There are some left-wingers that seem to absolutely refuse to believe that censorship is a liberalism problem, not a conservatism one. The story of the major liberal horror shows of the 20th century (namely, the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and East Germany) is one of insanely restricted free speech. These are the places where people were harassed, assaulted, imprisoned, send to labour camps, and killed for holding dissenting opinions or being part of (or perceived to be a part of) a despised group. As mentioned, it's where the term "politically correct" comes from.
The right-wing, or at least the American right-wing, doesn't have a free speech problem. Evangelicalism does, but this is an area where I think a distinction between strongly religious and conservative needs to be made. I think it's entirely safe to say that people like the Bushes, Bill Kristol, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and most of the other GOP power brokers are lip-service Christians. The overarching conservative media, meanwhile, has a strategy of drowning people in ideas. Consider how they handled the run-up to the Iraq War, when it became nearly impossible to understand what information was credible. Consider the "both sides of the story" approach to handling issues. Consider conservative pundits trying to out-bombast each other for the past two or three decades. They aren't trying to get evolution out of the science classroom to nearly the extent that they're trying to get creationism in. It's an important difference.
There is a growing "you shouldn't say certain things" problem in America, and it is not coming from the right.
Hooker, for your first paragraph, FTFY:
liberal or liberalism -> left-wing, communist or socialist, etc
....because you're really specifically talking about what the genesis of "liberalism" vs communism is/are, where they intersect, and where they don't.
I'm just using them interchangeably because:
1) It doesn't really matter to my point
2) Who gives a fuck?
Well, liberalism isn't the same thing as left-wing, and probably the best point in case would be how liberalism sees life under Stalin, Mao, the Stazi and so on, which is exactly what you were talking about......right.....??
Never mind, LET'S EVERYBODY FIGHT EVERYBODY!!!!
Five stars for political analysis so amazing, so impressive, so ideal...
...for me to poop on.
I don't really understand the distinction you're making (was the RSDRP not considered left wing in Russia?), but the semantics of it are besides the main point, which is:
Every time a "people should say this and shouldn't say this" gains enough power, people have inevitably used it to position themselves above other people. The upside is that retarded people might feel a little better about the language used to describe them? The downside is that you've given monstrous people a way to disenfranchise and polarize people. We're a ways from that point, but we can already see people's lives being destroyed by this stupid bullshit. Take note of the way Binro casually describes two people's lives being destroyed for trying having a discussion about whether or not to allow people to wear Apache headdresses - they all agreed it was offensive, of course.
Oh, I see what you meant now. I didn't know anything about that specific subject area being the origin, your brief summary notwithstanding."
That guy, all joking aside, the Wikipedia article on the term "politically correct" is a pretty interesting read.
Also skimming the rest of this thread I see that I seeded enough pedantry that it took root, my work here is done.
Also read this book, it's certainly imperfect (and the writing isn't the greatest) but on the whole it's a pretty incisive, much needed critique BY A LEFTIST of some of the toxic, reactionary action that has been seeping out of the extreme fringe of the left and causing a lot of damage:
Again, it's far from a perfect book but if you care about the future of progressivism or science it should be mandatory reading.
It's also worth pointing out that the obsession certain highly visible factions on the left have with policing language* is exactly what Trump's campaign has been exploiting this whole time has contributed very directly to a lot of his success so far.
*Instead of addressing the underlying systemic problems hat the language is a symptom of, which are a lot messier, implicate the left as well as the right which undermines the tidy - and profitable - "us vs. them" narrative, and generally hard to monetize because nuance doesn't pull the ad revenue that outrage does.
Hey Binro, fuck you and fuck those piss-baby college students you're defending.
Those particular students were saying they had a right to a "safe space" that requires firing an admin for writing an e-mail disagreeing with a college email about offensive Halloween costumes. They're complaining that someone disagreed and explained why they disagreed.
"Shut your wife up with her wrong ideas." I'm sorry, these people are awful. Nothing but contempt for them. They weren't just disagreeing with the argument. They were saying SHE SHOULD BE FIRED FOR MAKING IT. Jesus. People like that only want a narrow range of views to be expressed in their safe spaces and anything that makes these delicate blossoms "uncomfortable" requires metaphorical torches-and-pitchfork times. People should be fired and hounded. WAH AN E-MAIL I DISAGREED WITH, I CAN'T EVEN. I MEAN, THIS IS THE CURRENT YEAR, WHY IS SUCH A THING ALLOWED.
OZ I put that book on the end of my book queue.
So I'll check it out in 2019- probably around November.
|The Mothership |
This is really funny.
|Caminante Nocturno |
"That's the best professor you'll ever have in this school! You've learned more in the last 90 seconds than you're going to learn in a lifetime in New Hampshire!"
Making fun of dumb idealistic college kids seems like low-hanging fruit.
I like when Triumph mixes it up with public figures, tho.
Yes, low-hanging fruit for sure.
...also totally necessary, especially since their dumb ideals have turned them into grotesque clones of a dangerous extreme.
We had a famous video on here about bible-belt high-schoolers talking about evolution and race. Laughing at them was low-hanging fruit, and also totally necessary since their dumb ideals have turned them into grotesque clones of a dangerous extreme.
I'm not a big fan of Secular Talk because Kyle's shouty delivery style makes me feel like I'm listening to progressive Alex Jones, but he's on point about UNH and political correctness here (still gets annoying every few minutes though):
Not saying anything that hasn't been said plenty before but it still bears saying.
Zirc, didn't you just say that "what the right perceives as totalitarian tendencies on the left are usually dubious at best" or was that the opening move in your Evilhomering?
I did, but that doesn't mean that there are also genuine totalitarian factions on the left. Weren't you the one earlier who pointed out that just because some racist accuses anyone who criticizes his racism of being "PC" doesn't negate the valid criticisms that can be made of certain varieties of left wing ideology?
Also I hardly ever listen to that guy because his shtick annoys me but I'm under the impression that he's a generally progressive leaning sort.
Or did I misunderstand what you were implying there? I read your comment as saying that the content of the video I posted was incongruous with the statement that the criticism of so-called "political correctness" that comes from the right is usually dubious. Just to be clear, the stuff from the right I had in mind was the common accusations of "political correctness" (as a pejorative) aimed at someone who calls them out for bigotry or other assholishness, whereas whats being criticized in the video above (although clumsily, and a few of the specific examples he calls out don't bug me too much - like I don't see anything wrong with "other gender" for example) is the act of making formally banning certain forms of speech. In both cases, the problem is that one side is trying to silence dialogue, in the one case the conservative reactionary "anti-PC" strawman is silencing dialogue by writing off opposing viewpoints as "politically correct" rather than engaging them, on the other side the "politically correct" are silencing dialogue by writing off opposing viewpoints as :offensive/shaming/whatever" rather than engaging them. That the opposing viewpoints may well actually BE "politically correct" or "offensive/etc." is beside the point, the problem is the attempt to silence rather than engage (or disengage, since sometimes the best strategy is to just rise above).
I tend to have more ire for the variety on the left because THEIR GOALS ARE NOMINALLY MY GOALS but they're fucking it all up for us. The right wing variety I gave up on years ago, I don't have the patience, eloquence or social skill to engage with that shit productively.
Incidentally, a few weeks ago, I forget where, I was reacquainted with a fantastic term I hadn't heard in years, in this case being used by a somewhat older, more experienced feminist to describe the stereotypical (and all to real) tumblr/twitter/facebook hashtag-activist version: "baby Feminists," as in they're people who've just recently become politically aware and have a whole lot of passion about it but not much understanding so they just, well, you know what Tumblr can get like. The sort of people who say shit like the friend of a friend I once saw make a 100% unironic Facebook post saying Bob Dylan should be assassinated because he's a mouthpiece for patriarchy and deserves death.
Is there a similar term for the embarrassing, teenage "FIGHT THE POWAH" anarchists who give that whole school of thought such a bad name? I'm sure there is but I don't know it, help me out here!
tl;dr the media greatly exaggerates the scope of the reactionary fringe on the left, but the mainstream left is also frustratingly reluctant to acknowledge it even exists much less distance themselves from it because, I don't know, solidarity or tolerance or something? It's just frustrating all around.
I've got to go to bed, EH want to step in and talk about ponies or medieval law or niche fetish subcultures or something? I can already tell this election cycle is going to need a constant barrage of finely honed pedantry to keep us from turning into Poe-news.
whoa, I am ALL turned around now
I think you left out a 'not' here:
>> I did, but that doesn't mean that there are also genuine totalitarian factions on the left.
But, that aside, I was joking about whether you'd accept that criticism of the left from Mr. Secular Talk (and his audio peaking), after you said that what the right perceives of it was dubious at best..... but you were Evilhomering to some degree when you said it, so.... and also 'what the right perceives' is a key clause there..... so..... I don't even know where I am now.
Also I see my secret agenda to get "evilhomering" into the PoeTV lexicon (out of no disrespect for evilhomer!) is working!
I mean wait, shit, no, I had nothing to do with that, it was ITT.
Thanks for that, OZ. I'm going to start thinking about "sewing the seeds of pedantry" for one's own amusement as "evilhomering" from now on. I got a hearty laugh from that.
Also, I miss EH. Amidst all this talk about everyone having to tolerate people with whom they don't agree, I'm always a little sad when anyone leaves and therefore deprives this site of their comments and viewpoints, however misguided they may be. Every time that happens, the site dies a little bit and, if anything, we get a little less perspective, insight and amusement out of our time here as a result. As a long time lurker, I've skipped or skimmed many an EH post--maybe even the majority of them--but I don't feel like my time here is better for his absence.
Anyways, not to hijack your convo. Please continue to tend the bumper crop of pedantry. It is your tribal birthright as POEsters and I salute your efforts.
Triumph still has it!
the shin guard gag, oh my god
His voice was better in his early matierial, though.
This was OK and then it got REALLY OK.
Hahaha the "Make America Great Again" hat almost made me pee my pants.
It's amazing how many politicians can be entirely accustomed to speaking publicly, often off the top of their heads, yet be completely wooden robots.
I assume that's par for the course just like it is a comedian or band on tour. Maybe insert a little quip, anecdote or joke about wherever it is you are, but other than that it's pretty much the same thing you did last the day before, or even earlier that day, at least until the debates themselves.
Trump's probably the only one who doesn't do it, but often it will come out something like (and I think I'm quoting verbatim) "I was chosen by God to be the Best President Ever." And it's weird because as much as I really really hate him I have some respect for speaking one's mind and not being a robot (kinda too bad that this was probably filmed before the Rubiobot thing). It's one of the reasons why I don't go see comedians live that I've already heard of, because I've heard that one before.
0:50 - 1:25
| Register or login To Post a Comment|