4 ms·

The same has occurred in regards to race. For decades the ideological left preached, quite aggressively and consistently, that we must move to a post racial so

The same has occurred in regards to race. For decades the ideological left preached, quite aggressively and consistently, that we must move to a post racial society, that race should not matter. This was the clear majority belief on the left as recently as the beginning of Obama's first term. My entire childhood was filled with that preached gospel: a person's character is what matters, do not pay attention to their skin color, look beneath that, their skin color is not what's important, what is important is what's on the inside. And so on. That ideology made tremendous sense to me. Now they are saying the exact opposite 24/7. Their messaging has entirely changed. Now race is paramount, the color of a person's skin matters in a huge way, everyone is to be divided by race, everyone is to be treated differently depending on their race. Society must be splintered by race. They're segregating everyone into tribes and pitting them against eachother. So was the former ideology bullshit, or is the new ideology bullshit. Their credibility is shot, not that anyone cares. Next week they'll switch it again if it serves their pursuit of power, and proceed to memory hole whatever the last ideology was that they were pushing as though it never happened.

at_a_remove 5y ago
That's been my feeling -- one of them had to be wrong. And if you're wrong once, you can be wrong again, so perhaps it would be wise to be less certain of oneself.
wetmore 5y ago
I think the "they" in your post is actually a bunch of disparate groups. You are acting like there is internal inconsistency, but that's because the conflicting beliefs came out of different camps. Anyway, I think most people in support of the "new" ideology, as you call it, would say that the "old" ideology was flawed. Some might say it was bullshit, some might just say it was misguided or overly hopeful. Ideas change over time, I'm not sure why you think society's views on race should remain static, especially considering that the Civil Rights Movement was only a few generations ago. Every generation our theories of race change. The ideological right has also changed its stance on a lot of things. Do you also think that makes them have no credibility?
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  > Anyway, I think most people in support of the "new" ideology, as you call it, would say that the "old" ideology was flawed. Some might say it was bullshit, some might just say it was misguided or overly hopeful. While there are of course real injustices, which different people think motivate different responses, what we're talking about here feels manufactured in (mostly) American universities. Nothing like deliberately splitting people along the lines of immutable characteristics to create problems for social scientists to "solve".
- jollybean 5y ago
  It doesn't matter if the ideas are nuanced, we know they are. It's deeply hypocritical and exposes lack of intellectual consistency if morally shaming people into doing 'XYZ' for several decades, then castigating them as literally 'Upholding White Supremacy' for doing those very same things some time later. The 'internal conflict' that will arise in anyone of those people will be insurmountable, and the 'New Camp' will never have legitimacy in their eyes, just the opposite in fact, even if there is some validity in their ideals. This is borne largely out of the absolution, radicalism, lack of self awareness, inflexibility and binary thinking of the 'New Camp' (it's usually that way with 'New Camps') and because those who are 'just a bit older' have the life experience to reflect back on their own experiences of being 'too black and white' and can therefore contextualize any of the supposedly 'New' ideals at least in terms of individual's own life progress. The assumption by the 'New Camps' is that they are the righteous inheritors of the fairly unambiguous social victories of the 1960's, that among them are the MLK's and JFK's who will have statues made and words etched in stone as the new moral impetus etc. - but this would be wrong. Despite some obvious things that can and will be improved, most of today's social populism is nowhere near unambiguously on the right side of history. And finally: I'm not discounting any single idea presented by any individual or group acting in good faith. I'm discounting whether or not they should or will be recognized universally, and pointing out the problems with their assertive posture.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tabtab 5y ago
I suspect you are confusing using characteristics to correct for existing bias versus using characteristics for discrimination itself. Specific scenarios may help us explore this better.
- jpttsn 5y ago
  Okay, how about Michael Jackson’s ”Black or White?” Is this scenario “correcting for existing bias” or “discrimination itself?”
  - tabtab 5y ago
    What specific part, or what's your interpretation of the general message?
mudil 5y ago
May I also add that prior to the current wave, educators were of opinion that kids need to be protected, at any cost, even to the point that grading system discriminates against kids, it can make them feel inferior. Now they basically shove every kid into corner, either as an oppressor or a victim.
blacktriangle 5y ago
By the reasoning of today's left, MLK's I have a dream speech is white supremacy.
dang 5y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27608388 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27608388.
- beckman466 5y ago
  > We detached this subthread What does that mean?
  - dang 5y ago
    Explained here: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22original%20parent%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... More details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27132402 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27132402

at_a_remove 5y ago

That's been my feeling -- one of them had to be wrong. And if you're wrong once, you can be wrong again, so perhaps it would be wise to be less certain of oneself.

wetmore 5y ago

I think the "they" in your post is actually a bunch of disparate groups. You are acting like there is internal inconsistency, but that's because the conflicting beliefs came out of different camps. Anyway, I think most people in support of the "new" ideology, as you call it, would say that the "old" ideology was flawed. Some might say it was bullshit, some might just say it was misguided or overly hopeful. Ideas change over time, I'm not sure why you think society's views on race should remain static, especially considering that the Civil Rights Movement was only a few generations ago. Every generation our theories of race change. The ideological right has also changed its stance on a lot of things. Do you also think that makes them have no credibility?

robertlagrant 5y ago
> Anyway, I think most people in support of the "new" ideology, as you call it, would say that the "old" ideology was flawed. Some might say it was bullshit, some might just say it was misguided or overly hopeful. While there are of course real injustices, which different people think motivate different responses, what we're talking about here feels manufactured in (mostly) American universities. Nothing like deliberately splitting people along the lines of immutable characteristics to create problems for social scientists to "solve".
jollybean 5y ago
It doesn't matter if the ideas are nuanced, we know they are. It's deeply hypocritical and exposes lack of intellectual consistency if morally shaming people into doing 'XYZ' for several decades, then castigating them as literally 'Upholding White Supremacy' for doing those very same things some time later. The 'internal conflict' that will arise in anyone of those people will be insurmountable, and the 'New Camp' will never have legitimacy in their eyes, just the opposite in fact, even if there is some validity in their ideals. This is borne largely out of the absolution, radicalism, lack of self awareness, inflexibility and binary thinking of the 'New Camp' (it's usually that way with 'New Camps') and because those who are 'just a bit older' have the life experience to reflect back on their own experiences of being 'too black and white' and can therefore contextualize any of the supposedly 'New' ideals at least in terms of individual's own life progress. The assumption by the 'New Camps' is that they are the righteous inheritors of the fairly unambiguous social victories of the 1960's, that among them are the MLK's and JFK's who will have statues made and words etched in stone as the new moral impetus etc. - but this would be wrong. Despite some obvious things that can and will be improved, most of today's social populism is nowhere near unambiguously on the right side of history. And finally: I'm not discounting any single idea presented by any individual or group acting in good faith. I'm discounting whether or not they should or will be recognized universally, and pointing out the problems with their assertive posture.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tabtab 5y ago

I suspect you are confusing using characteristics to correct for existing bias versus using characteristics for discrimination itself. Specific scenarios may help us explore this better.

jpttsn 5y ago
Okay, how about Michael Jackson’s ”Black or White?” Is this scenario “correcting for existing bias” or “discrimination itself?”
- tabtab 5y ago
  What specific part, or what's your interpretation of the general message?

mudil 5y ago

May I also add that prior to the current wave, educators were of opinion that kids need to be protected, at any cost, even to the point that grading system discriminates against kids, it can make them feel inferior. Now they basically shove every kid into corner, either as an oppressor or a victim.

blacktriangle 5y ago

By the reasoning of today's left, MLK's I have a dream speech is white supremacy.

dang 5y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27608388 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27608388.

beckman466 5y ago
> We detached this subthread What does that mean?
- dang 5y ago
  Explained here: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22original%20parent%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... More details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27132402 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27132402