Conversation

Replying to

I understand localized activism and that some of these issues are quite egregious, in context. But making a huge societal problem out of an issue that is academic, both literally and figuratively, if you don't live in Sweden? It's fatuous and self-aggrandizing nonsense.

Replying to

It's punching down. Calling up the spectre of ressentiment to silence all callouts of abuse of privilege.

Replying to

and

The hilarious absurdity of the enemies they're willing to admit to opposing just points to the unspeakability of the full range of their downward punching antipathy.

Replying to

See, I always feel like this explanation is missing something. Punching down is certainly occuring when established professors take political shots at students, but...

Replying to

... it's always accidental to the cause. The thought-policing neo-Marxist professors that *do* exist, harass students for ideological reasons. I suspect for JBP et al., it's also an ideological reason that drives the same behavior. It's something to do with purity, methinks.

Replying to

I meant the idw punches down at historically unprivileged people who are trying to make a space for themselves within a hostile culture, and whose representatives occasionally overstep and give an excuse to the beneficiaries of privilege to cry oppression.

Replying to

and

I agree with JBP's critique of the dangers of ideology, I just think he's shockingly limited?/selective? in his ability?/willingness? to perceive the ideology in 'classical liberalism'.

Replying to

I'd say "predictably", rather than "shockingly", but yes. There is also the excessive reliance on postmodern arguments in his debates, which is just sort of funny. I'm not a huge fan of the privilege debate for all kinds of complicated reasons, but that's neither here nor there.