have you guys heard about something called "The Paradox of Tolerance?" It's a brilliant explanation of how, if you want a tolerant society, centrist thinkers must be executed if they offend a twentysomething dumbass who goes to Evergreen or something. Rick & Morty taught me
-
-
Replying to @PereGrimmer @Aelkus
Reminds me. Laclau-Mouffe post-struct Gramsci, Schmitt-lite politics of agonism struck me a decade or more ago as the organic ideology of the academe, with appeal to the boardroom and media too - a collegial ideology for the class fractions of our postmodern polises.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @paul_hundred @Aelkus
My model of academic ideologies = the ideologies that assist people in winning academic political battles (re who gets more cash, more grad students, etc.) will tend to prevail, all else equal.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @paul_hundred @Aelkus
1/Interesting. IT seems to provide rhetorical cover such that you can "attack" from any position, which could certainly be useful in ongoing political fighting. I should note that, w.r.t. my model, I'm not saying people in bad faith adopt ideologies for advantage; rather, while
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
2/of course there is opportunism, "true believers" will tend to be the best proponents of whatever ideology they espouse (if only because, all else equal, less cognitive load if you actually believe it) -- rather, someone like an evolutionary mechanism (w/ institutional
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
3/incentives as the environment & test of 'fitness') do the sorting.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
This seems right to me - I tend to think of “base & superstructure” as linked in a sort of naturally selective dialectic - but I’m not in academia so have less direct feel for how it works.
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.