4 ms·

Leftists argue your mindset is a symptom of the toxic mantras of neoliberalism. It's basically a Protestant work ethic: Highly individualistic, and little sense

Leftists argue your mindset is a symptom of the toxic mantras of neoliberalism. It's basically a Protestant work ethic: Highly individualistic, and little sense of commonality or cooperation. Thats the reasonable argument against your ethics, in that a community or team can do things that are impossible for any individual. It's absolutely true, and can't be refuted. But that's also the trap that modern society is falling into. We do not operate in nuance. We *could* combine ethics such as yours with community efforts and empower everyone, but instead we're trying to squash individuality, and enforce toxic mantras of community! The modern left eschews nuance and reacts with self-destructive vengeance, and that's the core problem with their politics. They equate liberals with neoliberals, neoliberals with conservatives, conservatives with Nazis, and Nazis with the boogeyman. To them the individual is absolute evil. So, I think the best thing to do is attempt to assuage their fears: show them that individuals can work together to improve society for everyone, without destroying individual values.

zmgsabst 3y ago
I view their politics as a meme prion: perhaps there’s some reasonable interpretation — as you’ve outlined here — but that’s not what they’re arguing. For example, despite saying that they’re staunchly against bigotry, they’re defining commonality by race and sex — rather than common circumstance. That’s inherently toxic because it foments the very bigotry they (pretend to) decry: look at their proud anti-Asian racism at Harvard, using 1950s style arguments there’s “too many Asians”. They absolutely detest the people who when viewing things through the lens of individualism, conclude that they should form partnerships with people that have aligned values, principles, and goals. After all, they’d have to admit their beliefs were a return to racial and sexual essentialism to have that realization — and they’re Good People (TM) who would never do such a thing. One of the most important choices an individual makes is who to have “on your team” — and their entire world view is built on assigning those roles based on protected class. I don’t think your attempt to “assuage their fears” will be met with anything but rabid anger — because we already did that and it already produced superior results. They’ve intentionally destroyed that system, as anathema.

zmgsabst 3y ago

I view their politics as a meme prion: perhaps there’s some reasonable interpretation — as you’ve outlined here — but that’s not what they’re arguing. For example, despite saying that they’re staunchly against bigotry, they’re defining commonality by race and sex — rather than common circumstance. That’s inherently toxic because it foments the very bigotry they (pretend to) decry: look at their proud anti-Asian racism at Harvard, using 1950s style arguments there’s “too many Asians”. They absolutely detest the people who when viewing things through the lens of individualism, conclude that they should form partnerships with people that have aligned values, principles, and goals. After all, they’d have to admit their beliefs were a return to racial and sexual essentialism to have that realization — and they’re Good People (TM) who would never do such a thing. One of the most important choices an individual makes is who to have “on your team” — and their entire world view is built on assigning those roles based on protected class. I don’t think your attempt to “assuage their fears” will be met with anything but rabid anger — because we already did that and it already produced superior results. They’ve intentionally destroyed that system, as anathema.