Jargoeauxgne

I'm not defining parts of modern philosophy as social engineering, I'm merely pointing to the social engineering itself: internationalism, sexual liberation, civilizational relativism, atheism, etc. Philosophical lineages are beside the point completely. 1/

The reason it isn't well-defined in intellectual lineages is precisely the point. These movements aren't motivated by the quest for truth but as instruments in a struggle of weltanschauung and, as such, well-defined in ethnic lineages. They're cnncted by their negative character.

The use of the word "gerrymandering" however leads me to believe that there is no case that can be presented sufficient to meet the burden of proof, which is here abnormally higher. One wouldn't dispute the somberness of nordics or childishness of africans with near so much vigor

Lol what?

Maybe read Dr. Jones' book on the topic, since you've had him on your show. Methodologies et. al are not needed: Freud, Reich, Boas, Moskowitz, Friedan, Nathanson, countless others, at the front of their respective movements for solvent ideas. How many for fortifying ones?

How would also object to your false characterization that these things are negative, which again is not supported by reading the philosophies.

I dont think it matters if thats what you do, just prejudicially concoct a web of negative associstions around philosophies youve preemptively dismissed. It has nothing to do with the philosophies. Its just your feelings. But theres no basis for argument then

I haven't concocted, felt or dismissed anything. All I've done is count and categorize, which I apparently need a methodology for.