4 ms·

> this is the result of postmodern, social-constructionist ideology The activist part of what you described comes from a 1965 paper by Herbert Marcuse called "

> this is the result of postmodern, social-constructionist ideology The activist part of what you described comes from a 1965 paper by Herbert Marcuse called "Repressive Tolerance."[0] The ideas from Marcuse's paper are widely mis-attributed to Karl Popper in that infographic everyone's seen floating around.[1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Critique_of_Pure_Tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Critique_of_Pure_Tolerance [1] https://www.libertarianism.org/sites/libertarianism.org/files/styles/optimize/public/picture1.png?itok=4Lyjcocx https://www.libertarianism.org/sites/libertarianism.org/file...

whoooooo123 6y ago
Yep, I'm familiar with Marcuse, and I recommend the book Cynical Theories for a critical introduction to this ideology that's spreading through our once-cherished institutions like a malignant tumor.
- vzcx 6y ago
  The funny thing is, the critiques of Marcuse, Foucault and the like are 100% applicable to these status and sinecure seekers in the academy. They are worth reading for this reason alone. Lindsay defends the old-academy classical liberalism. The sort of gentlemanly debate that arises from such values is good, but only possible between people with a collegial relationship who both prefer truth over power. They cannot be used against enemies. When dealing with enemies, one must bring weapons, and the postmodernist weapons can be made to work in anyone's hands.
  - erichocean 6y ago
    Curtis Yarvin has new, much-more-concise explanation of the "cathedral" and domininant power ideas up on his Substack that's worth a quick read: https://graymirror.substack.com/p/a-brief-explanation-of-the-cathedral https://graymirror.substack.com/p/a-brief-explanation-of-the... (An oligarchy inherently converges on ideas that justify the use of power.) I think it's as good of an explanation as any for why old-academy classical liberalism is losing (and will continue to lose): truth is not dominant, and least on the timescales the game is played. 100% agreed that post-modernists are still worth reading, and that many of the critiques are relevant. Disagree that doing so will change anything—because truth isn't dominant in the short-term.

whoooooo123 6y ago

Yep, I'm familiar with Marcuse, and I recommend the book Cynical Theories for a critical introduction to this ideology that's spreading through our once-cherished institutions like a malignant tumor.

vzcx 6y ago
The funny thing is, the critiques of Marcuse, Foucault and the like are 100% applicable to these status and sinecure seekers in the academy. They are worth reading for this reason alone. Lindsay defends the old-academy classical liberalism. The sort of gentlemanly debate that arises from such values is good, but only possible between people with a collegial relationship who both prefer truth over power. They cannot be used against enemies. When dealing with enemies, one must bring weapons, and the postmodernist weapons can be made to work in anyone's hands.
- erichocean 6y ago
  Curtis Yarvin has new, much-more-concise explanation of the "cathedral" and domininant power ideas up on his Substack that's worth a quick read: https://graymirror.substack.com/p/a-brief-explanation-of-the-cathedral https://graymirror.substack.com/p/a-brief-explanation-of-the... (An oligarchy inherently converges on ideas that justify the use of power.) I think it's as good of an explanation as any for why old-academy classical liberalism is losing (and will continue to lose): truth is not dominant, and least on the timescales the game is played. 100% agreed that post-modernists are still worth reading, and that many of the critiques are relevant. Disagree that doing so will change anything—because truth isn't dominant in the short-term.