« Previous | Home | Next »

The Newly-Minted Totalitarian Left: Millennial Social Justice Advocacy
Some wise observations by Aristotelis Orginos at Medium.com about the authoritarian left -- which I've renamed the "totalitarian" left, per this blog item I posted a few days ago:

Millennial social justice advocates have warped an admirable cause for social, economic, and political equality into a socially authoritarian movement that has divided and dehumanized individuals on the basis of an insular ideology guised as academic theory. The modern social justice movement launched on Twitter, Tumblr, Facebook, Jezebel, Slate, Huffington Post, et al. is far more reminiscent of a Red Scare (pick one) than the Civil Rights Movement.

When George Orwell wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four (and here some will lambast me for picking a white male author from a historically colonialist power despite the fact that he fought and wrote against this colonialism), he wrote it to warn against the several dangers of extremism on either side of the political spectrum. Orwell's magnum opus is about authoritarianism on both ends of the political spectrum. If the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice, then the arc of the political spectrum bends toward authoritarianism at both ends.

The very fact that I am drawing a connection between the text most referenced when discussing politics-gone-bad is a problem in itself. But it warrants further exploration.

2+2=5

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy."

 -- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

This particular brand of social justice advocacy assaults reason in a particularly frightening way -- by outright denying it and utilizing fear-mongering to discourage dissent. There is no gray: only black and white. One must mimic the orthodoxy or be barred forcibly from the chapel and jeered at by the townspeople. To disagree with the millennial social justice orthodoxy is to make a pariah of oneself willingly. Adherence to the narrative is the single litmus test for collegiate (and beyond) social acceptance these days.

...The version of millennial social justice advocacy that I have spoken about -- one that uses Identity Politics to balkanize groups of people, engenders hatred between groups, willingly lies to push agendas, manipulates language to provide immunity from criticism, and that publicly shames anyone who remotely speaks some sort of dissent from the overarching narrative of the orthodoxy -- is not admirable. It is deplorable. It appeals to the basest of human instincts: fear and hatred. It is not an enlightened or educated position to take. History will not look kindly on this Orwellian, authoritarian pervision of social justice that has taken social media and millennials by storm over the past few years.

I think a big part of the problem is that what was formerly a "culture of debate" on college campuses has become the culture of debate not allowed/debate is racist and mean!

If you aren't schooled in debate -- for example, how to debate and the fact that it's an integral part of a free (and healthy) society -- it's easy to veer off into finding debate disagreeable and mean instead of essential for making problems (and society) better.

Oh, and by the way, without debate, the ugliness that would have been debated doesn't go away; it just goes underground -- where it can't be seen, heard about, or challenged.

Good job, millennial SJWs!

*

Comments