6 ms·

The ideas of social justice and equality spring from the independent quadrant. These ideas have become the rules that conventional quadrant follow and expose.

by chippy 6y ago

The ideas of social justice and equality spring from the independent quadrant. These ideas have become the rules that conventional quadrant follow and expose. This doesn't seem to contradict itself.

Miner49er 6y ago
Social justice and true equality aren't conformist ideas though. We live at a time when wealth inequality is around the highest since our country has kept track and you think equality is a mainstream conformist idea?
- chippy 6y ago
  Following on from the essay, the ideas are adopted by aggressively conventional minded even if they are "non conformist". Other aggressively conventional minded people believe in the the rules of ever explosive growth, exploitation and free market capitalism. The ideas do conflict with each other obviously. The essay gives the example of abolitionism that some aggressively conventional minds back in history would be in support of slavery and other aggressively conventional mind would be opposing slavery. Within the concept of the essay what does non conformist really mean? Are social justice and true equality ideas that belong only on the independent side of the quadrant?
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    This is a good point. It shows the problem with the whole article. I think many people don't view themselves as "conformist" no matter who they are. PG certainly doesn't view himself as conformist. Everyone likes to think they that are independent thinkers, but most people, by definition, aren't. If a person thinks they're an independent thinker, then they'll simply think that anyone who thinks like them are also independent thinkers. In reality, they're just conforming, but maybe in a way that's different than other conformists. PG seems to be calling out "cancel culture" with this essay, but I think the people on both sides of that argument are conforming. The independent thinkers are busy with things that actually matter and aren't paying attention. I can't think of many people that I would label truly independent thinkers. The first that comes to my mind is maybe Richard Stallman, but that's about it.
    - chippy 6y ago
      Agreed. I think the "opposing" aggressively conventional people would be believing in the rule of law, authority of the police and social and cultural conservatism. These, 10 years ago, would be seen as mainstream ideas.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  Many people have been so misled by education and media consumption that they have no idea what is going on. It is a commonplace that conformists will profess to beliefs that they regularly undermine. E.g., the people who "support the protests" but still whinge about how they're too "confrontational" and "violent".
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    They’re just equal opportunity conformists... if you conform to both sides you never have to risk independent thinking!
  - jschwartzi 6y ago
    Or they recognize that people have a right to protest but don’t appreciate the small minority who use it as an opportunity to incite violence.
    - jessaustin 6y ago
      They're protesting the policing of minorities, and you stand at the ready to police their protesting... by asserting their minority status! In lots of protests this isn't a "small minority". Please think more carefully. The author of TFA would not appreciate your aggressive conformity.
      - jschwartzi 6y ago
        Hey man, I agree completely that the police suck. But what I think is happening is there are two groups here: * Protestors of police brutality who are in the main completely peaceful and capable of self-policing. These people tend to do normal protest things like blocking the streets, yelling at cars, holding signs, and similar. That's totally fine and should be protected by law. Their leaders are often seen keeping the rest of the group from pushing up against barricades and otherwise inciting violence. * Small groups of what I can only describe as fringe counterculture people who are hiding in these protest groups waiting for an opportunity to incite violence. These people use the mask laws in many localities to hide their identity, and are doing things like dropping piles of bricks off in protest zones, throwing molotov cocktails into fast food restaurants and running, breaking windows and looting stores, and pushing the peaceful protestors into the riot control police. These are most certainly non-conformists, but we should not tolerate these behaviors if we want to live in a civil society. And the peaceful protestors are getting caught up in the dragnets. The police make no effort to distinguish between the two groups in most cases. During protests in the 60's there's ample evidence that the police were part of the second group. So it's probable the violence is being incited by certain groups who are interested in silencing the peaceful protestors. If that makes me an aggressive conformist to hold those views, then I will gladly be one. Non-conformity should not be the goal. And frankly if this is how it's defined, it's a stupid label.
- wrren 6y ago
  The current practices and thought-processes of social justice advocates are hyper-conformist in my opinion.
- globular-toast 6y ago
  Virtually all intelligent people take "equality" to mean equality of opportunity. The type of equality you seem to mean is where individual personalities, talents and desires don't exist. In other words, where everyone is the same person. What a boring world. I just don't think inequality matters as long as the poorest in society are never cold or hungry. That's pretty much where we are today.
  - jahaja 6y ago
    > That's pretty much where we are today. What on earth makes you think that?
    - globular-toast 6y ago
      Oh, well obviously there are hungry and cold people in the world, but I was talking about within a developed country like the UK. People who go on about equality are concerned with making themselves richer because of billionaires. They are not concerned with making themselves poorer because of hungry and cold people in other countries.
      - webmaven 6y ago
        > Oh, well obviously there are hungry and cold people in the world, but I was talking about within a developed country like the UK. I see. Perhaps this will change your mind?: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_Kingdom
        globular-toast 6y ago
        Well, I'll wait for the government report in 2021. A lot people who "miss meals" are still overweight, they just make poor decisions with their money. In any case, inequality like that could be solved by everyone in this forum taking a pay cut to something that covers just basic essentials. People who talk about inequality are always, always talking about making themselves richer. Everyone has the power already to make themselves poorer.
notsureaboutpg 6y ago
Well what about if the rules of the conventional quadrant become "Anyone who says or implies 'Crush <outgroup>!' is bad and should never be listened to"?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- chippy 6y ago
  turtles all the way down
dgb23 6y ago
I think you are right in a subculture sense. Many great progressive ideas and movements have been taken over by aggressive conformists. The ideas get perverted into something far less useful and overly specific. Lets move the discussion into something less political! In tech this happens too. Cargo cult engineering anyone? Agile methodology and OOP are two huge examples: they started as radical, useful ideas too. But often today people argue overly specific rules of implementation rather than asking why these things exist, where they came from and where they fit.

by chippy 6y ago

The ideas of social justice and equality spring from the independent quadrant. These ideas have become the rules that conventional quadrant follow and expose. This doesn't seem to contradict itself.

Miner49er 6y ago

Social justice and true equality aren't conformist ideas though. We live at a time when wealth inequality is around the highest since our country has kept track and you think equality is a mainstream conformist idea?

chippy 6y ago
Following on from the essay, the ideas are adopted by aggressively conventional minded even if they are "non conformist". Other aggressively conventional minded people believe in the the rules of ever explosive growth, exploitation and free market capitalism. The ideas do conflict with each other obviously. The essay gives the example of abolitionism that some aggressively conventional minds back in history would be in support of slavery and other aggressively conventional mind would be opposing slavery. Within the concept of the essay what does non conformist really mean? Are social justice and true equality ideas that belong only on the independent side of the quadrant?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  This is a good point. It shows the problem with the whole article. I think many people don't view themselves as "conformist" no matter who they are. PG certainly doesn't view himself as conformist. Everyone likes to think they that are independent thinkers, but most people, by definition, aren't. If a person thinks they're an independent thinker, then they'll simply think that anyone who thinks like them are also independent thinkers. In reality, they're just conforming, but maybe in a way that's different than other conformists. PG seems to be calling out "cancel culture" with this essay, but I think the people on both sides of that argument are conforming. The independent thinkers are busy with things that actually matter and aren't paying attention. I can't think of many people that I would label truly independent thinkers. The first that comes to my mind is maybe Richard Stallman, but that's about it.
  - chippy 6y ago
    Agreed. I think the "opposing" aggressively conventional people would be believing in the rule of law, authority of the police and social and cultural conservatism. These, 10 years ago, would be seen as mainstream ideas.
jessaustin 6y ago
Many people have been so misled by education and media consumption that they have no idea what is going on. It is a commonplace that conformists will profess to beliefs that they regularly undermine. E.g., the people who "support the protests" but still whinge about how they're too "confrontational" and "violent".
- elliekelly 6y ago
  They’re just equal opportunity conformists... if you conform to both sides you never have to risk independent thinking!
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  Or they recognize that people have a right to protest but don’t appreciate the small minority who use it as an opportunity to incite violence.
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    They're protesting the policing of minorities, and you stand at the ready to police their protesting... by asserting their minority status! In lots of protests this isn't a "small minority". Please think more carefully. The author of TFA would not appreciate your aggressive conformity.
    - jschwartzi 6y ago
      Hey man, I agree completely that the police suck. But what I think is happening is there are two groups here: * Protestors of police brutality who are in the main completely peaceful and capable of self-policing. These people tend to do normal protest things like blocking the streets, yelling at cars, holding signs, and similar. That's totally fine and should be protected by law. Their leaders are often seen keeping the rest of the group from pushing up against barricades and otherwise inciting violence. * Small groups of what I can only describe as fringe counterculture people who are hiding in these protest groups waiting for an opportunity to incite violence. These people use the mask laws in many localities to hide their identity, and are doing things like dropping piles of bricks off in protest zones, throwing molotov cocktails into fast food restaurants and running, breaking windows and looting stores, and pushing the peaceful protestors into the riot control police. These are most certainly non-conformists, but we should not tolerate these behaviors if we want to live in a civil society. And the peaceful protestors are getting caught up in the dragnets. The police make no effort to distinguish between the two groups in most cases. During protests in the 60's there's ample evidence that the police were part of the second group. So it's probable the violence is being incited by certain groups who are interested in silencing the peaceful protestors. If that makes me an aggressive conformist to hold those views, then I will gladly be one. Non-conformity should not be the goal. And frankly if this is how it's defined, it's a stupid label.
wrren 6y ago
The current practices and thought-processes of social justice advocates are hyper-conformist in my opinion.
globular-toast 6y ago
Virtually all intelligent people take "equality" to mean equality of opportunity. The type of equality you seem to mean is where individual personalities, talents and desires don't exist. In other words, where everyone is the same person. What a boring world. I just don't think inequality matters as long as the poorest in society are never cold or hungry. That's pretty much where we are today.
- jahaja 6y ago
  > That's pretty much where we are today. What on earth makes you think that?
  - globular-toast 6y ago
    Oh, well obviously there are hungry and cold people in the world, but I was talking about within a developed country like the UK. People who go on about equality are concerned with making themselves richer because of billionaires. They are not concerned with making themselves poorer because of hungry and cold people in other countries.
    - webmaven 6y ago
      > Oh, well obviously there are hungry and cold people in the world, but I was talking about within a developed country like the UK. I see. Perhaps this will change your mind?: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_Kingdom
      - globular-toast 6y ago
        Well, I'll wait for the government report in 2021. A lot people who "miss meals" are still overweight, they just make poor decisions with their money. In any case, inequality like that could be solved by everyone in this forum taking a pay cut to something that covers just basic essentials. People who talk about inequality are always, always talking about making themselves richer. Everyone has the power already to make themselves poorer.

notsureaboutpg 6y ago

Well what about if the rules of the conventional quadrant become "Anyone who says or implies 'Crush <outgroup>!' is bad and should never be listened to"?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
chippy 6y ago
turtles all the way down

dgb23 6y ago

I think you are right in a subculture sense. Many great progressive ideas and movements have been taken over by aggressive conformists. The ideas get perverted into something far less useful and overly specific. Lets move the discussion into something less political! In tech this happens too. Cargo cult engineering anyone? Agile methodology and OOP are two huge examples: they started as radical, useful ideas too. But often today people argue overly specific rules of implementation rather than asking why these things exist, where they came from and where they fit.