226
227

Cultural Marxism vs Cultural Libertarianism with Lauren Southern (youtube.com)

IMissSplashyPants が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]anonveggy -60ポイント-59ポイント  (41子コメント)

guys if you want to be taken seriously you should maybe stop continously linking yourself to the right wing world, especially when it doesn't have anything to do with games.

[–]Wolphoenix 45ポイント46ポイント  (28子コメント)

Calling someone or something right wing doesn't invalidate it. Bet they didn't teach you that at SRD.

[–]HarithBK 13ポイント14ポイント  (6子コメント)

gotta love that tribal us v them bullshit. the idea that there are people that are just evil is such a wrong idea (it is often a big issue i can have with games i play).

simply put there is no evil person in the mirror looking threw there eyes.

pretty much people don't see themself as evil they can't if they did they would change.

[–]AllotropicHorsePoopD 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well, u/Wolphoenix is making the same "tribal us v them bullshit" argument when he said:

Bet they didn't teach you that at SRD.

The first half of his post is perfectly valid:

Calling someone or something right wing doesn't invalidate it

But, similarly;

Calling someone or something SRD doesn't invalidate it

:-( Learn some basic rhetoric, friends, 'cos shit like that is embarrassing.

[–]Earl_of_sandwiches 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Everyone who believes in tribal bullshit is an idiot."

Go nuts.

[–]AllotropicHorsePoopD -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

"This sentence is a lie"

Fuck this shit, I'm done with philosophy for today :-)

[–]HariMichaelson 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Nope. Recognizing the general traits of a group isn't necessarily tribalism. The fact is, SRD and SRS both have clearly defined "sides" that they're on and that they challenge. There's not much room for nuance in the eyes of most people who support those groups. That's just a simple statement of fact.

Arguing that a link with the "right-wing" automatically damages someone's credibility is kind of silly though.

[–]AllotropicHorsePoopD -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

We're arguing relatively subtle semantics.

Saying: "Bet they didn't teach you that at SRD" is a shorthand, that covers a lot of concepts; it is to say:

  • "I, the poster, am opposed to SRS/SRD"
  • It serves as an insult
  • It invites readers of that post to disagree or dismiss the person who they are posting at.

Which in a lot of contexts is perfectly reasonable if you've validly argued against their point.

However, my point is that I'm being sensitive to the hypocrisy of labelling someone with a pejorative label, having literally just argued that labelling people with a pejorative label is not a good argument.

In this case "right wing" and "SRD" are the two pejorative labels in question.

It's a really bad way to argue your (legitimate) position. Indeed, if the poster had written "Calling someone or something right wing doesn't invalidate it, so fuck off", I'd find that less rhetorically less objectionable, albeit slinging curses is less likely to win you any converts.

Does that explain my position better?

Edit: Duplicate "less"

[–]HariMichaelson 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I get it. I just don't think that the phrase in question was a pejorative. I took it as it was literally written. Let me put it like this; if I was asked to put money on whether or not SRD, in general, promoted tribalism, I'd put my money on the affirmative. That's not an indictment of SRD or the people that post there, that's just a descriptive statement. Yeah, it would absolutely be incorrect to broad-brush everyone who posts at SRD as close-minded herd-animals, but in a statistical sense, at SRD, you're more likely to run into someone like that than not. In other words, I too, would bet that the poster wasn't "taught that" at SRD.

Was it meant as a dig? Probably, at least a little. Is it going to help or hinder communication? Given peoples' propensities to respond to even a light-hearted jab as though it were a grievous insult, probably hinder. I don't think there was any hypocrisy in the post, but as for effectiveness of argument...someone can be a total hypocrite and still be right. I could argue against heavy drinking by citing all of the known negative effects of heavy drinking, and it would be a reasonable argument, but, I could at the same time engage in heavy drinking, and my argument could still be perfectly valid, despite me being a total hypocrite. The only thing hypocrisy in a position does is damage one's credibility in the eyes of people who care more about the person than the point. It's a comparatively minor hit to ethos, that's true, but the logos of the argument is spot-on.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Many libertarians would dispute being characterized as "right-wing."

In addition, just because something is "right-wing" doesn't make it wrong, nor does something being "left-wing" make it right. Classical Marxism has been rejected by academic economics for a very long time now, but that's a leftwing ideology.

[–]Limon_LimeSeven-37k Get. Eleven more drug deals. 48k Get. 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

We are mostly left wing, but unlike you sheep, we are open minded to the ideas of the right since you know we are a coalition of people all over the political spectrum.

[–]Washuchan73 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

You need to educate yourself.

There are two axes that political schools of thought are commonly measured against.

The first axis is the left/right political axis indicates the economic stance of the ideology.

And the second axis is the libertarian/authoritarian axis that indicates the degree of enforced control that the ideology seeks to impose on people.

So it is possible for there to be left wing authoritarians (Marxists) and left wing libertarians (anarchists) as well as right wing authoritarians (fascism) and right wing libertarians (classical liberals)

So libertarianism is entirely separate from the right wing.

[–]tony_abutthead 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

So you're saying nobody takes the right wing seriously?

Step outside your bubble, darling. You've drunk the koolaid for too long.

[–]anonveggy -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

No I didn't. try not intentionally misunderstanding things please.

[–]baconatedwaffle 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

part of the coalition experience imo. it's a bit much to hope that each and every member of the various parties of the coalition can resist the urge to use the coalition to push their agenda or the temptation to lay claim to its soul

[–]Mech9k 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hello Joseph McCarthy! Odd you switched to being a left winger.

[–]sexy_mofo 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Somehow I doubt linking to Leftist Nazis would be better than linking to The Rebel Media.

[–]anonveggy -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

No one asked you to...

[–]cvillano 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Libertarian =\= "right wing"

Learn to see shades of gray instead of just black and white. I used to believe everything "right wing" was evil when I was a kid in college too, but then I spent 10 years in the real world and grew up.

[–]anonveggy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is true but my point is that they claim to be libertarian just to avoid saying that they are in fact deeply conservative in the us meaning of that word.