The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 3
Because of the Covid-19 pandemic and the need for strict interpersonal distancing, many classes are being forced online, both in colleges and universities and in our primary and secondary education systems. In this new environment, many teachers and professors have expressed concerns, not wanting to livestream their classes because the curriculum and teaching methods might be made public and thus subjected to greater public scrutiny. Some have specifically worried that their teaching materials will be leaked to “right-wing media” sources.
These are reasonable concerns, in a way. Teachers in our K-12 system are likely to readily agree that angry parents often make their jobs far more difficult than they need to be. Further, some professors are certainly right to worry that cherry (or nut) picking of their teaching will be used by unscrupulous actors in right-wing and other media to unfairly portray their classrooms and teaching as leftist indoctrination projects. These concerns should be recognized and treated fairly when discussing the issue.
At the same time, there is the issue that our education systems have been heavily influenced by the methods and mindset of Critical Social Justice. There’s also a recognition that, caught in this uncomfortable moment of increased transparency due to the online shift in response to the pandemic, some purveyors of those methods would much rather the public not find out what and how they’re teaching. Why, though, if they’re so certain that they’re right?
Here, I take a few minutes to dig deeply into the mindset of Critical Social Justice to explain exactly why they are so reluctant to be seen applying their work in administrative and educational spheres, where they can be properly held to account or prevented from institutionalizing their aims, while they’re so brazen about it essentially everywhere else. In short, it’s because Theory predicts pushback to their ideas and then casts all resistance as an unfair application of power to maintain dominance over the oppressed. This, they believe, maintains dominance in and of itself, so it must be avoided.
Join me here for a deep-diving explanation of this phenomenon. Hopefully you’ll come away with a better understanding of how Critical Social Justice thinks about itself, you, and the world in the process.
Subscribe to this podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or by RSS.
Previous episodes of this podcast are available here.
6 comments
There is push back, but there is no debate. Which is why I bought your book, Cynical Theories. Thank you.
Pushback against Marxian Critical Social Justice, CRT etc
is an effort to maintain Western Civilization against an onslaught of Woke irrationality meant to corrode its Enlightenment foundation and collapse it from within.
So yeah
Pushback against descent into a
Woke New Dark Ages
CSJ lunatics equate the survival of Western Civilization with “dominance of the hierarchy”
This exposes the architects of CSJ for what they are
Subversive sociopaths who developed CSJ as an effective means to corrode and collapse Western Liberal Society from within.
It’s brilliant actually. It’s also diabolical, an expression of pure malevolence towards human prosperity masquerading as benevolent Social Justice.
The duplicitous benevolence that defines Communist ideology
James
“Parents are notoriously awful to teachers.” Really? Which parents? Where and when? A US college recently declared that parental rights ended at the door of the school. In reality parents are the primary guardians of their children and are rightly protective of them for reasons which the rest of this podcast outlines.
so what are the alternative theories to approach social justice?
Can you have “social justice” if only one side plays the game?
If one group does social justice for all people regardless of group, but another group only does social justice for their own in-group or ideology or identity clade, is the first group really doing social “justice” or are they in fact doing group suicide/surrender to the other group? Some ideologies have now, always had and always will have as their prime directive their own in-group “social justice” mission to force-convert/ dominate-enslave/ torture-exterminate all outsiders, infidels, unclean, bourgeois, deplorables, revanchist descendents, etc.
“Social justice” in the West is a one-sided response by individual members a collapsing society to try not to get killed off by the enemies they see advancing to plunder and pillage their dying society. An anonymous anthropologist recently remarked that the famous online photo meme of “Soy Mouth” seen on so many modern Western “social justice” millennial males is the same facial gesture used by many primates who offer their rectums to be raped by predator simians to avoid being killed and eaten.
Germane anecdote: When ancient Rome finally collapsed, only two groups from the original old Roman civilization survived to join the barbarians who conquered Rome: 1) the very very rich who ignored their fellow Romans being slaughtered/enslaved while the rich Romans weasel bartered their wealth for survival in the new order; and 2) the bureaucratic elites who used their innate traitor’s treachery and natural cruelty to willingly join and serve the new conquerors as a bureaucratic para-elite of informers, torturers, executioners, slave overseers, etc. of their own people. Both surviving groups practiced their own special version of Soy Mouth “social justice”.
There are no “alternative theories to approach social justice” because there is no such thing as “social justice”. There is only power. Conquerors or the conquered. Human nature is not a pretty thing. There it is.
very interesting! I am also very thankful for also providing video/audio/podcast articles in this site, this way i can follow the content while doing chores or hobbies at home.
Actually, now i would find it really interesting to see said content of these teachers, what in detail are their methods of teaching under a bias of critical social justice.
It reminds me also of the behaviour of Evergreen college to reluctantly provide the video recordings of their meetings, but Benjamin Boyce is fighting for disclosure. Let’s see what he’s getting out of that…