James Lindsay sits down with American Thought Leaders host Jan Jekielek to discuss Critical Social Justice, the Grievance Studies project, and neo-Marxism in education and culture at large.
From American Thought Leaders:
To “expose the political corruption that’s taken hold of the university,” James Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose made headlines in 2018 with a series of hoax papers that were accepted in peer-reviewed journals. Since then, Lindsay has made it his life’s mission to understand the ideas and theories underpinning what they dubbed “grievance studies.” Just how are these identity-oriented academic fields rooted in deeply flawed methodologies? And how has neo-Marxism and what Lindsay recently named “critical social justice” permeated the education system in America? Lindsay documents his work on his website “New Discourses”, where a constantly updated “Social Justice Encyclopedia” can also be found.
11 comments
@ A Frog So what about Trump? What’s so abnormal for a conservative president about the results of his policies? And what about Obama and Clinton for example invading Libya to end the African dream Khadaffi was brewing of a sovereign currency of the continent used to free all African Africans of the yoke of the white man’s oil dollar? Of course sold to the public through the media as a liberating peace project. As with Syria. What about Trump avoiding new military conflicts compared to what Obama has instigated? You have any clue about that? What about Obama and the whole apparatus abusing their powers to try to entrap and bring down a dully elected president with some retarded Russian narrative that has burdened this presidency in unforgivable ways. Talking about election interference in the mid terms with this bullshit being dragged over it. Or are you still on that train because you can’t find the facts on Wikipedia? FYI: It has derailed, lies at a bottom of a canyon where some prosecutors have been investigating what happened and they are on their way up to the valley again. Are you ready for the results of that or have you already prewritten a narrative for that a.k.a. the unprecedented abuse of the judicial system by your fascist in the White House. What about a media that willingly and knowingly furthers the corrupt agenda with a constantly bashing narrative that you have your self so properly aligned with? Why is it an argument for you to point out that a conservative outlet supports a conservative president, a president who has a particular style but in the end solely works for the benefit of the American people in general as he sees it. Indeed, can’t you just argue the content of the video, what you do now is exactly the problem with the far left; shaming and shouting people into submission by a complacent and factually made up narrative and having no intellectual will or tools to engage in a dialogue. Absolutely disgraceful.
This discussion was epic. A deep dive, but accessible for non-professionals somewhat educated on the issues, clear and to the point. Appreciate it.
Just some comments on how far the social-justice world view is spread. I was in academia in Germany for a long time, having been schooled in this kind of thought for years, and left after struggling with my PhD for five years because, as James says in the interview, when one engages this worldview one asks oneself: Why try in the first place if there is no meaning in anything? … except for, as Derrick Bell put it, “harassing white people through scholarship” (which for me back then worked as well with regard to gender or sexual identity) and being paid well by doing that. That in itself seemed wrong to me. There I was, a teacher at uni, telling students that work is meaningless and oppressive. I really hope they left my seminar not taking it seriously.
I had changed to an educational provider where I taught gender theory to migrants and refugees who wanted to become translators and intercultural mediators. That work itself made me rethink if not discard entirely the stuff I had been learning at uni, especially the constructivist world view. I have noticed during that work that Marxist ideas are of course well-spread internationally in different conflict areas so that the term intersectionality made sense to them because they saw the connection between their ethnic group being in conflict with an oppressor and how class and sex played a vital role in that conflict. I have changed my approach now bringing in the critique of intersectionality as done here on this page and pointing out the pitfalls of group identity.
Among some gay refugees I have noticed that they are already (through the internet and global connections among LGBT activist groups) familiar with the social-justice approach and talk about how they are being confronted with white privileged gay males here (i.e. helping them as refugees is in itself patronising). A friend told me about a queer people-of-color group in Berlin where whites were not allowed in order to create a safe space. When they realised at one point that the three darkest persons in the group were the ones doing the dishes they started a conversation on how they all had internalised racism. One last example: I was at an event here in Cologne recently on the topic of the gender pay gap (a concept of which I disagree with) and there was a young participant pointing out to the almost-all-female audience that the audience was being too white to have a full discussion on this subject. So the whole idea of positionality and “you have to learn about race but ultimately cannot understand POCs so you have to kowtow to them” is everywhere. There is a lot to disentangle and a lot of teaching ahead of us.
James,
On your comment about your visit to the National Gallery in WDC, I had a similar experience during a visit to the Smithsonian National Museum of American History in the early 1990s. There was an exhibit dedicated to one of the SW Native American tribes and there was virtually no information about their history, their accomplishments, their culture, … — the exhibit was dominated by repeated statements of how they had been oppressed and victimized.
Also in the 1990s, there was a major controversy at the Air & Space Museum about an exhibit on the dropping of the atomic bombs. WW2 veterans and many others (including me) felt that it demonized the US and excused Japan.
I am more sensitive than most because, in the 1970s, I was at an elite University in a discipline that had some overlap with one in which that-stage Feminism was strong and PC-language policing was often present.
@A Frog: Ah, yes. Guilt by association. If I were to quote your comments in a comment posted to The Epoch Times, that would invalidate your claims.
Does that answer your “What exactly is inaccurate about what I’ve said?” ?
Okay, here’s NBC saying the same thing
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/trump-qanon-impending-judgment-day-behind-facebook-fueled-rise-epoch-n1044121
Here is also a Snopes article about more dubious things The Epoch Times has done
https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/10/11/pro-trump-outlet-linked-epoch-times/
So please, tell me: what exactly is inaccurate about what I’ve said? Can you identify anything I’ve said that’s factually wrong?
Started reading the *opinion piece* posted on NBC’s website, and 1/2 way through concluded it was a waste of time. It is carefully crafted to present a narrative — standard brand leftism.
WhatEVER. Dude. Watch the video. It is tremendously intelligent and has nothing to do with Trump or China. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.
For your consideration: American Thought Leaders is part of a publication called The Epoch Times.
“Though the newspaper is known for general interest topics with a focus on news about China and its human rights issues, it has become known for its support of U.S. President Donald Trump and favorable coverage of far-right politicians in Europe; a 2019 report showed it to be the second-largest funder of pro-Trump Facebook advertising after the Trump campaign.”
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times
Ah yes, Wikipedia; the most reliable of all sources on the web. This wouldn’t even be permissible on a junior high research paper.
Yawn. Yeah, we know. Everyone who doesn’t submit to (the latest version of) political correctness is a woman hating, right-wing, neo-Nazi, poor-people-hating, puppy-torturing, yadda yadda yadda…