This is a pretty damned good interview with a Democrat who understands what is going on in the real world. She's one of the few.
https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/
https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/
Camille Paglia: ‘Hillary wants Trump to win again’...
- Thread starter NoleSoup4U
- Start date
That was one of the best things I’ve read in a while. Thanks for sharing. This thread needs to stay active so more and more will read this piece.
Best quote:
"From my perspective as an atheist as well as a career college teacher, secular humanism has been a disastrous failure. Too many young people raised in affluent liberal homes are arriving at elite colleges and universities with skittish, unformed personalities and shockingly narrow views of human existence, confined to inflammatory and divisive identity politics."
"From my perspective as an atheist as well as a career college teacher, secular humanism has been a disastrous failure. Too many young people raised in affluent liberal homes are arriving at elite colleges and universities with skittish, unformed personalities and shockingly narrow views of human existence, confined to inflammatory and divisive identity politics."
Pagila is really sharp. I saw her give a lecture in Philly during college and it was great.
Jordan Peterson is also someone who is a great read/listen.
Jordan Peterson is also someone who is a great read/listen.
I've read/watched a lot of Peterson's stuff, but I wasn't as familiar with Paglia. After I finish my last test tomorrow, I'll be looking up more of her stuff.
That's what I hear also. Can anyone confirm?
What does identity politics have to do with secular humanism?
Peterson is highly overrated IMO. I’ve listened to countless hours of his stuff, including the debates with Sam Harris. I agree with a lot of what he says about identity politics but he always comes back to the worn out trope about leftist conspiracies on college campuses. The media’s misrepresentation of him has been inexcusable though. He’s certainly no racist or alt right figure.
I’ve been extremely critical of the DNC in many of the same ways that Paglia is. I think she’s brilliant on most issues. So I have no idea why you’d want to think that. Aside from constantly feeling the need to misrepresent people who disagree with you.
Last edited:
You don't think colleges push leftist policies? I'm taking Finance in a really red area of Florida, and even I have seen it. Luckily it wasn't from any of my Finance professors. It's been more from classes like management.
Society is shifting to the left. It always has. Some professors have liberal biases, but that doesn’t suggest any kind of grand conspiracy to indoctrinate students like Peterson insinuates.
Go clean your room bucko.
I'm guessing that we're talking about social policies, correct me if I'm wrong, so I'll just point out the change from the 1920's to the 1950's and leave you with that.
Intelligent or more educated, and if more educated, then what kind of education are you talking about?
Yes social policies. In the long run, societies tend to become more open and tolerant.
Historically there has been a back and forth, but I hardly want to go back to a repressive point.
I'm not claiming it never regresses. But the long term trend is towards the left socially. You can't force people into a socially conservative box forever. People will eventually push their way out. Even the Catholic Church has largely backed down on issues like divorce or birth control.
Jordan Peterson's argument about postmodernism is completely legit IMO. Liberal social policy must be built on the foundation of individual rights, not group membership or identity. Unfortunately there are many people who misappropriate his argument to advocate for a kind of quasi-religious neoconservative social ideology that dismisses inequality for certain groups. You can't build a free society with identity politics, but you can recognize that certain groups of people are treated differently based on the color of their skin or what's between their legs. Sometimes I think he gets dangerously close to throwing the baby out with the bath water though.
It's not even correct to say "to the left." It's more like moving forward, or changing.
Conservative, I guess, typically refers to wanting everything to stay the way it is now. Resisting any kind of change. I dunno why that got "The Right" moniker and the opposite became "The Left." I guess people need polarities and contrasts to make sense of the things they experience.
Conservative, I guess, typically refers to wanting everything to stay the way it is now. Resisting any kind of change. I dunno why that got "The Right" moniker and the opposite became "The Left." I guess people need polarities and contrasts to make sense of the things they experience.
You'd think they'd act like it every once in awhile then.
The social left is considered to be socially liberal. Forward in this context means more liberal. Progressive vs regressive is better terminology than left vs right though. At some point we have to use some form of relative language to make a comparison.
She said it had failed then stated a bunch of social problems. But there’s nothing to suggest that secular humanism has anything to do with those problems. Most people still come from religious households regardless of where they’re at on the political spectrum.
I know what the cliche meaning is, and I don't agree with it. Can you go into an autoparts junk site and pull enough pieces to build a running vehicle? There are people out there, without a high school education, that can do that. Being intelligent doesn't mean a college education, and neither does being educated. Mind you, this is coming from a man about to embark on his masters program.
What does "moving forward" mean? I think many of us would like to improve upon our situation, but does that carry a left/right connotation? I know that you're a liberty minded fellow, but for many people, in both parties, "moving forward means authoritarianism.
On average, liberals are smarter than conservatives. Lots of studies bear this out. Doesn’t hold true for everyone. But it’s out there
The research is out there. Avail yourself to it. The way your brain functions determines everything about who you are and what choices you make. There has been an observable difference in intelligence between people who identify as liberal or conservative.
Must be that the conservatives are disenfranchised. Damn liberals always keeping the conservatives down, been happening for years. I think a touch of liberal guilt might help to get everyone on a level playing field.
Liberal/conservative are just social constructs by which people identify themselves. People, on average, who identify as liberals are smarter. Perhaps you and your Nole brethren are limited by your brains and are unable to process as such. The roof is your ceiling.
The ceiling is the roof for me.
Similar threads
