It also depends on the merit of the case itself - as, for example, gun control in the USA is something totally different than gun control for instance in Germany. There is a reality behind the debate that has totally different starting points in different countries.
I am not getting any of this from the far-right. There's no scholarship being produced now that I can find and in conversation, I usually just hear assertions about racial superiority and conspiracy theories and the death of western civilisation which I can't probe too far into.
-
-
Regarding populism, I would definitely agree with you; the literature I'm aware of is predominantly of a liberal bent. Regarding the "death of Western civilisation"/"Western cultural values", it's certainly taken as a dogwhistle by the far left.
-
It was right-wing populism I was criticised for not criticising enough. I was asked to justify why I don't criticise the far-right, Trump & rightwing populism but focus almost exclusively on problems on the left. The answer is that it's more interesting. That is all.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is what I mean about there being little substance or depth. I am making this point in response to the suggestion that ppl who criticise the left more are motivated by tribalism. I am saying, for me, it's about what's more interesting.
-
I'd certainly agree re the intellectual buzz when you can *really* dig into the scholarship surrounding the issue. And most of the ethno-nationalism scholarship I know of deals with post-conflict national identities; not exactly the UK/US far-right's focus.
-
Yes! Thank you! That is exactly what I mean by substance and complexity. This is my motivation for looking at extremist, irrational & illiberal thinking on the left rather than the right. So, defining the far-left & far-right is kind of beside the point for this purpose.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's true, but that's because the academic sector is run by the far-left currently. but even there, stuff like critical race theory is actually a lot of times more right extreme then you would believe. As for feminist epistemology, I find it so weak that common sense is enough.
-
Yes. It doesn't matter why there is more of it. And I;m certainly not claiming it;s less extreme or that it has worth! I am saying that it is why I am more interested in studying it in depth than anything happening on the right. I have been asked to justify this.
-
I still feel we are at cross-purposes. Do you get that my point is the reason I criticise left-wing ideology much more than right-wing ideology is because there is a load of scholarship and complicated and ever-evolving ideology on the left to hold my interest?
-
I feel like you think I am saying more than this very simple point that 'interest' is what motivates me to look at one side of the political spectrum more than the other, not tribalism (ie a secret bias to the right)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If you're interested in some "intellectual fodder" of the (newish, emerging, American) far-right, i'd point you at this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin … And/or (tho i despise them), the http://Vdare.com set. Steve Sailer, et al.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.