By recognizing that our scientific understanding of the world is as close to objective as we can currently manage, but no matters in science are ever settled. “PC theory(?)” has 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 to do with postmodernism. And why should I care what nature “thinks” about fairness?
-
-
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
PC culture, SJW behavior and intersectionality are all derived from Post-modernism, itself, derived from Marxism, which claimed to be a scientific political philosophy but abhors the fundamental tenets of science, when I am wrong, I change my mind.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
You say that, but how? How are any of those first three things related to Postmodernism in anyway? None of them have anything to do with skepticism or recognizing narrative constructs. Especially not “SJW behavior,” which I would think is *extremely* narrative-driven.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
So where does the SJW narrative come from? Intersectionality is an outcome of the internal contradictions of post-modernism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
Depends what you mean by “SJW.” Intersectionality is the natural progression of feminism and its synthesis with anti-racist and pro-LGBTQ thought. It also comes largely from political Critical Theory, which is derived DIRECTLY from Marxism— no need for postmodernist middlemen.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
1. I will take your word on that. No doubt you are right. But isn't this based on a low opinion of humanity? You don't strike me as wanting to dominate anyone. So why do you think everyone else is so different?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
I don’t want to dominate anybody, and I don’t want to be dominated by anybody. I believe the powerful do what they can to hold onto their power mainly because they unconsciously condition each other to do so, not because they’re necessarily malicious or unusually greedy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
I never doubted it, but some do want to dominate. They need to be constrained by law, culture and religion. None of these forces function in a socialist or communist state if that person obtains power. That is reason enough to abandon this doctrine.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
How is capitalism more amenable to law, culture or religion functioning? And nobody should ever have power over an entire nation. Sort of a technicality, but “communist state” is an oxymoron. Capital-C Communists run states. But communism describes a stateless mode of society.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
Capitalism needs law and order otherwise the guys who control the guys with guns will take our shit!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ok, I agree that capitalism requires state backing, but obviously “the guys who control the guys with guns” need law and order too, right? That’s kind of like, what dictators are, be they left-wing or right They’re big ol’ lawmen, usually they leverage culture and religion too.
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.