4 ms·

The reaction to this article kind of says it all for me. Right leaning readers seem to accept the claims, although anonymous, because they have experience on th

The reaction to this article kind of says it all for me. Right leaning readers seem to accept the claims, although anonymous, because they have experience on the ground that would make them believe such claims. Left leaning readers refuse to accept the claims because they are anonymous and could easily be made up. It's confirmation bias all the way down. I personally tend to lean more on the right here because I went to an "elite" institution and saw firsthand, plenty of times, the same kind of totalitarian ideological bullying and groupthink that the article describes. I do think that the reaction to this article, and the many other articles like it, are a harbinger of the near-future breakup of the United States. There is simply no possible way this country can survive when the value systems are so opposed to each other.

jariel 6y ago
The flaw in this line of thinking is that it's unreasonable to suggest this story is 'made up' or 'propaganda'. It's more like: if this is just the experience of a tiny handful of people, well then it's a perspective but it's not important. If it's commonplace, then it's an issue. There were major divisions in the nation in the past - remember that so many rejected desegregation in the 1960's. I think many progressives will think that we are now re-living those kinds of divisions, i.e. it's their turn to 'fight'. The thing is, it's quite different this time. I don't believe that any movement here has history on their side. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King Jr. This statement is no longer progressive, in fact, it's the hallmark of many social conservatives i.e. 'I don't see race' or 'I judge on the basis of character'. It's the woke/intersectional progressive crowd who want to re-initiate racial awareness using the logic that 'people's racial experiences matter', which while I think has some merit, is also going to be deeply divisive. MLK won. All the way from 1960 to even now, racial disparities have been shrinking (mostly). The vast, vast majority of Americans agree with MLK's statement, and consider it a virtue. The 'New Progressive Radicals' may have a point to make, but the inherent divisiveness of the ideal, and the focus on race/gender above character etc. leads to a pop culture civil war, amplified by social media, it plays into our worst impulses including racism. I don't think history is going to favour this movement outright.
- baix777 6y ago
  If you want to find it, you will see racism in America is alive and well. This is what the black lives matter is all about. People may say they agree with MLK, but this is because they know what should be said in public. The actions of society highlight how far we still have to go to fight racism. I know social conservatives who think they aren't racist but don't care about issues like how many more black people end up in jail than white people. They don't demand justice when police forces overreact to black protests, and don't care when police forces almost don't react (and take selfies instead) to white protests. After all this, not being able to see how serious racism is in America is one of the better signs you are racist.
  - IAmWorried 6y ago
    So not caring is now a form of racism? Trying to tune out the news and live my life means I am racist? I think 1. you need to get a grip on reality, 2. you need to look up some violent crime statistics, and 3. you need to look up the homicide rates between the BLM protests and the capitol riots. Calling everyone who doesn't "demand justice" a racist is pretty stupid and a great recipe for further polarization.
borepop 6y ago
>There is simply no possible way this country can survive when the value systems are so opposed to each other. That strikes me as a rather hyperbolic take. It's rather like the Jordan Peterson vision of reality in which certain ideological shifts in the educational realm are portrayed as being a wholesale reworking of society in general rather than what they actually are -- namely, just some aspects of the life of schools, which don't actually do that much to change or affect anything in the power structures that overwhelmingly dominate the rest of life.
- TerminalSystem3 6y ago
  I dunno, dude - I think to the rational folk on HN it does indeed seem hyperbolic, but there are a lot of really pissed off people who are a little beyond the point of rationality. For instance, a recent survey showing 29% of respondents would support breaking up the US: http://brightlinewatch.org/american-democracy-at-the-start-of-the-biden-presidency/ http://brightlinewatch.org/american-democracy-at-the-start-o... The source is apparently legit and founded by Yale / Dartmouth professors. Combine this with the increasing demands of the new ideology, the massive inequality of the modern age, the future automation job losses, and tons of pressure from foreign nations who would love to see a weaker US - I think in 10 years there could easily be some crisis. Edit: Forgot to mention that I don't think this is constrained to the educational realm. I can certainly tell you that in Big Tech Company Inc, we get emails every day about ending white supremacy, anti racism, yada yada.
  - borepop 6y ago
    Well I agree that there are some bigger societal shifts going on that are indeed pretty destabilizing. I was just commenting that nuances of the curriculum of high schools, or even undergrad education, around questions of race/gender/capitalism (or whatever woke themes) is not really quite as consequential as I think some folks, including the author of the article that is the subject of the post, make it out to be. All these elite schools, no matter what their political posturing, are still basically just manufacturing future elites who will be perfectly content to perpetuate the status quo in whatever way is advantageous to them. If that involves more racial equity, or different pronouns, or whatever, nobody actually gives a shit as long as their own economic ox is not gored.
i_ii__ii_i 6y ago
> I personally tend to lean more on the right here because I went to an "elite" institution and saw firsthand, plenty of times, the same kind of totalitarian ideological bullying and groupthink that the article describes. I hear this kind of claims many times, and it always confuses me because I've had quite the opposite experience. I've just received an AB from an "elite" institution (the one pictured in the Substack version of this article), and despite me being quite the textbook example of a Right Leaning White Male™ (except maybe that I'm not rich), I never witnessed the "kind of totalitarian ideological bullying and groupthink that the article describes." Now, was I surrounded by mostly left-leaning peers? Absolutely. Did I ever feel coerced into keeping my opinions to myself? Never. As a matter of fact, I was given platforms to express my opinions in speaking and writing, and while the average reaction to them was forceful disagreement, it never felt disrespectful to me. I've expressed my oppositions to a bunch of things happening at school (SGSO reform, unionization to name a couple) and I found the resulting conversations to be constructive in most cases. Sure, I arguably never changed anyone's mind, but that never was my goal. I've talked at length about issues like "progressive language" like Latinx/womxn terminology and personal pronouns, and I've never felt attacked in return. What probably puzzles me the most, however, is that some of the forms of oppression that Bari Weiss talks about are so foreign to me that I really wonder whether I've been living in the same educational system as the one she describes. For example, in one article [1] she describes how some "feminists who believe there are biological differences between men and women . . . fear the illiberal left." In my four years of college, I've never once come across someone who suggested that there are no such biological differences--let alone witnessing oppression in the name of this idea. Sure, there are probably niche circles in which the idea has been discussed, perhaps even entertained; but the same can be said e.g. of Mormonism, yet I don't see anyone claiming that U.S. education is falling into the hands of Mormons. Sometimes I wonder what makes my experience so seemingly different from that of many other folks on the conservative side. Maybe it's the fact that I'm international, which might make American interlocutors more accommodating of my different viewpoint. Or it could be that forceful disagreements (often garnished with insults and seasoned with various allegations of *isms) are the norm in the country I grew up in, so much so that I've grown to recognize them as inevitable--if regrettable--aspects of conversations about sensitive topics. One thing that I did notice, however, is how many of my conservative friends were experiencing real anxiety around these topics, and stayed away from bringing them up as a result of the anxiety itself. As a matter of fact, I never joined any explicitly conservative social group, one reason being that most of the conversations going on in those circles were way too angsty and whiny for my tastes. All in all, while I appreciate this kind of reporting for the light it sheds on a relatively unknown part of society, I really dislike how fear-based it is. I feel like it does more harm than good, by making conservative defensive and afraid before they've even had a real discussion with people they disagree with. Case in point: >There is simply no possible way this country can survive when the value systems are so opposed to each other. Nah, many countries (including the US) have been through far greater ideological clashes and got through them, if not unchanged. That's not to say everything is rosy--if you ask me, problems abound; but exceptions are exceptions, no matter how alarming. Let's not stoop to crying wolf while there's time. [1] https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/3/2/22309605/the-silenced-majority-bari-weiss-new-york-times-cancel-culture-free-speech-democrat-republican https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/3/2/22309605/the-silenc...

jariel 6y ago

The flaw in this line of thinking is that it's unreasonable to suggest this story is 'made up' or 'propaganda'. It's more like: if this is just the experience of a tiny handful of people, well then it's a perspective but it's not important. If it's commonplace, then it's an issue. There were major divisions in the nation in the past - remember that so many rejected desegregation in the 1960's. I think many progressives will think that we are now re-living those kinds of divisions, i.e. it's their turn to 'fight'. The thing is, it's quite different this time. I don't believe that any movement here has history on their side. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King Jr. This statement is no longer progressive, in fact, it's the hallmark of many social conservatives i.e. 'I don't see race' or 'I judge on the basis of character'. It's the woke/intersectional progressive crowd who want to re-initiate racial awareness using the logic that 'people's racial experiences matter', which while I think has some merit, is also going to be deeply divisive. MLK won. All the way from 1960 to even now, racial disparities have been shrinking (mostly). The vast, vast majority of Americans agree with MLK's statement, and consider it a virtue. The 'New Progressive Radicals' may have a point to make, but the inherent divisiveness of the ideal, and the focus on race/gender above character etc. leads to a pop culture civil war, amplified by social media, it plays into our worst impulses including racism. I don't think history is going to favour this movement outright.

baix777 6y ago
If you want to find it, you will see racism in America is alive and well. This is what the black lives matter is all about. People may say they agree with MLK, but this is because they know what should be said in public. The actions of society highlight how far we still have to go to fight racism. I know social conservatives who think they aren't racist but don't care about issues like how many more black people end up in jail than white people. They don't demand justice when police forces overreact to black protests, and don't care when police forces almost don't react (and take selfies instead) to white protests. After all this, not being able to see how serious racism is in America is one of the better signs you are racist.
- IAmWorried 6y ago
  So not caring is now a form of racism? Trying to tune out the news and live my life means I am racist? I think 1. you need to get a grip on reality, 2. you need to look up some violent crime statistics, and 3. you need to look up the homicide rates between the BLM protests and the capitol riots. Calling everyone who doesn't "demand justice" a racist is pretty stupid and a great recipe for further polarization.

borepop 6y ago

>There is simply no possible way this country can survive when the value systems are so opposed to each other. That strikes me as a rather hyperbolic take. It's rather like the Jordan Peterson vision of reality in which certain ideological shifts in the educational realm are portrayed as being a wholesale reworking of society in general rather than what they actually are -- namely, just some aspects of the life of schools, which don't actually do that much to change or affect anything in the power structures that overwhelmingly dominate the rest of life.

TerminalSystem3 6y ago
I dunno, dude - I think to the rational folk on HN it does indeed seem hyperbolic, but there are a lot of really pissed off people who are a little beyond the point of rationality. For instance, a recent survey showing 29% of respondents would support breaking up the US: http://brightlinewatch.org/american-democracy-at-the-start-of-the-biden-presidency/ http://brightlinewatch.org/american-democracy-at-the-start-o... The source is apparently legit and founded by Yale / Dartmouth professors. Combine this with the increasing demands of the new ideology, the massive inequality of the modern age, the future automation job losses, and tons of pressure from foreign nations who would love to see a weaker US - I think in 10 years there could easily be some crisis. Edit: Forgot to mention that I don't think this is constrained to the educational realm. I can certainly tell you that in Big Tech Company Inc, we get emails every day about ending white supremacy, anti racism, yada yada.
- borepop 6y ago
  Well I agree that there are some bigger societal shifts going on that are indeed pretty destabilizing. I was just commenting that nuances of the curriculum of high schools, or even undergrad education, around questions of race/gender/capitalism (or whatever woke themes) is not really quite as consequential as I think some folks, including the author of the article that is the subject of the post, make it out to be. All these elite schools, no matter what their political posturing, are still basically just manufacturing future elites who will be perfectly content to perpetuate the status quo in whatever way is advantageous to them. If that involves more racial equity, or different pronouns, or whatever, nobody actually gives a shit as long as their own economic ox is not gored.

i_ii__ii_i 6y ago

> I personally tend to lean more on the right here because I went to an "elite" institution and saw firsthand, plenty of times, the same kind of totalitarian ideological bullying and groupthink that the article describes. I hear this kind of claims many times, and it always confuses me because I've had quite the opposite experience. I've just received an AB from an "elite" institution (the one pictured in the Substack version of this article), and despite me being quite the textbook example of a Right Leaning White Male™ (except maybe that I'm not rich), I never witnessed the "kind of totalitarian ideological bullying and groupthink that the article describes." Now, was I surrounded by mostly left-leaning peers? Absolutely. Did I ever feel coerced into keeping my opinions to myself? Never. As a matter of fact, I was given platforms to express my opinions in speaking and writing, and while the average reaction to them was forceful disagreement, it never felt disrespectful to me. I've expressed my oppositions to a bunch of things happening at school (SGSO reform, unionization to name a couple) and I found the resulting conversations to be constructive in most cases. Sure, I arguably never changed anyone's mind, but that never was my goal. I've talked at length about issues like "progressive language" like Latinx/womxn terminology and personal pronouns, and I've never felt attacked in return. What probably puzzles me the most, however, is that some of the forms of oppression that Bari Weiss talks about are so foreign to me that I really wonder whether I've been living in the same educational system as the one she describes. For example, in one article [1] she describes how some "feminists who believe there are biological differences between men and women . . . fear the illiberal left." In my four years of college, I've never once come across someone who suggested that there are no such biological differences--let alone witnessing oppression in the name of this idea. Sure, there are probably niche circles in which the idea has been discussed, perhaps even entertained; but the same can be said e.g. of Mormonism, yet I don't see anyone claiming that U.S. education is falling into the hands of Mormons. Sometimes I wonder what makes my experience so seemingly different from that of many other folks on the conservative side. Maybe it's the fact that I'm international, which might make American interlocutors more accommodating of my different viewpoint. Or it could be that forceful disagreements (often garnished with insults and seasoned with various allegations of *isms) are the norm in the country I grew up in, so much so that I've grown to recognize them as inevitable--if regrettable--aspects of conversations about sensitive topics. One thing that I did notice, however, is how many of my conservative friends were experiencing real anxiety around these topics, and stayed away from bringing them up as a result of the anxiety itself. As a matter of fact, I never joined any explicitly conservative social group, one reason being that most of the conversations going on in those circles were way too angsty and whiny for my tastes. All in all, while I appreciate this kind of reporting for the light it sheds on a relatively unknown part of society, I really dislike how fear-based it is. I feel like it does more harm than good, by making conservative defensive and afraid before they've even had a real discussion with people they disagree with. Case in point: >There is simply no possible way this country can survive when the value systems are so opposed to each other. Nah, many countries (including the US) have been through far greater ideological clashes and got through them, if not unchanged. That's not to say everything is rosy--if you ask me, problems abound; but exceptions are exceptions, no matter how alarming. Let's not stoop to crying wolf while there's time. [1] https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/3/2/22309605/the-silenced-majority-bari-weiss-new-york-times-cancel-culture-free-speech-democrat-republican https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/3/2/22309605/the-silenc...