When It Comes To Free Speech And Tolerance, Progressivism, Increasingly, Is A Pretty Name For Totalitarianism
Tolerance means tolerating other people's views. Letting them be heard -- and maybe listening because you might learn something or just improve your arguments by hearing holes in somebody else's.
Fredrik deBoer writes at QZ.com:
I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 19-year-old white woman--smart, well-meaning, passionate--literally run crying from a classroom because she was so ruthlessly brow-beaten for using the word "disabled." Not repeatedly. Not with malice. Not because of privilege. She used the word once and was excoriated for it. She never came back. I watched that happen.I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 20-year-old black man, a track athlete who tried to fit organizing meetings around classes and his ridiculous practice schedule (for which he received a scholarship worth a quarter of tuition), be told not to return to those meetings because he said he thought there were such a thing as innate gender differences. He wasn't a homophobe, or transphobic, or a misogynist. It turns out that 20-year-olds from rural South Carolina aren't born with an innate understanding of the intersectionality playbook. But those were the terms deployed against him, those and worse. So that was it; he was gone.
I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 33-year-old Hispanic man, an Iraq war veteran who had served three tours and had become an outspoken critic of our presence there, be lectured about patriarchy by an affluent 22-year-old white liberal arts college student, because he had said that other vets have to "man up" and speak out about the war. Because apparently we have to pretend that we don't know how metaphorical language works or else we're bad people. I watched his eyes glaze over as this woman with $300 shoes berated him. I saw that. Myself.
These things aren't hypothetical. This isn't some thought experiment. This is where I live, where I have lived. These and many, many more depressing stories of good people pushed out and marginalized in left-wing circles because they didn't use the proper set of social and class signals to satisfy the world of intersectional politics.
I mentioned in a blog post that we recently went to hear UC Riverside law dean Erwin Chemerinsky speak, and a guy we know sneered about what a lefty he is (as if this made him unworthy of hearing). I don't agree with all of his positions -- I'm a libertarian and a fiscal conservative. But the man has argued before the Supreme Court and we have a meeting of the minds in how we both care deeply about civil liberties and the sort of society Martin Luther King called for, where people are judged by "the content of their character" instead of by skin color.
That's right -- even people you disagree with can have things of value to say.
And if you disagree with them, the way to maybe bring them over to your side isn't to throw them out for "crimes" against your version of what is permissible to say. It's to keep them there and have a dialogue.
This is what I often do when strangers are rude to me by email. I try to "turn" them by not responding in kind. Instead, as I write in "Good Manners for Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck,", I ask whether they think "Fuck you, bitch" will help me understand why they're right and I'm wrong and whether they'd haul off and talk that way to a woman standing in front of them in the grocery store.
It usually takes a couple of emails before they apologize for what jerks they were.
Well, if disabled people are offended by the word "disabled," then obviously, they should refuse all disability payments, and only accept free money from those organizations that uses label more to their liking (whatever those labels happen to be).
Patrick at January 30, 2015 3:22 AM
This reminds me of the other branches of the church I attended growing up. If you were not completely correct in your wording with them, they'd be complete jerks about it forever, especially the other kids about my age. It's completely about power over others, and has nothing to do with not offending people. The only thing I can compliment them for is making me a callous libertarian who doesn't have any respect for PC, and will aggressively use PC to hurt far lefties as much as possible (try it, it's a fun game).
spqr2008 at January 30, 2015 5:41 AM
It's completely about power over others,
Absolutely. There's legitimate power over others -- accomplishment to the point where you have earned the right to be in charge. (But people who have earned their position seem to be less likely to feel the need to be petty despots, in my experience.)
Amy Alkon at January 30, 2015 6:04 AM
spqr is spot on. The mature students need to go "hunting" via complaints to the administration about the 'hurtful' language used by their non-peers. No debate just stalk and blindside 'em via the college's own rules.
It's a useful way to try and cope w/the stupidity around them.
Bob in Texas at January 30, 2015 7:02 AM
Progressivism has always been about totalitarianism. The modern day variants are the descendents of the folks that brought us Prohibition, and admired the dictators of the era because they were able to make the trains run on time.
They think we are idiot children who shouldn't be permitted to make choices for ourselves because we might not make the right choices. And by right, I mean choices they approve.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 30, 2015 7:10 AM
"spqr is spot on. The mature students need to go "hunting" via complaints to the administration about the 'hurtful' language used by their non-peers. No debate just stalk and blindside 'em via the college's own rules."
That will not go well. Those rules were never intended to be applied fairly.
dee nile at January 30, 2015 8:52 AM
Tolerance means accepting that you don't have the only valid viewpoint. It doesn't mean the other guy automatically has a valid viewpoint, just that he might.
And that means accepting that you're not the arbiter of right and wrong; that you might be wrong; that you might be offended; and that the world might be more complex and diverse than the diorama-worldview you've constructed for yourself.
Also, it means accepting that your parents may have been right about a few things and that it's time to let go of whatever adolescent rebellion against them that you're still playing out in your forties.
Conan the Grammarian at January 30, 2015 9:33 AM
Progressivism has always been about totalitarianism.
So has conservatism. They just wish to control us through different venues.
Patrick at January 30, 2015 9:38 AM
In a grad seminar one afternoon, I told an anecdote that involved a man I described as "Oriental." The students were deeply offended by this term, except - of course - the student from Japan who did not regard the Orient as something to be ashamed of. Anyway, the white students told me I should say "Asian."
A few weeks later at a conference I listened carefully to my colleagues. The term "Oriental" came up twice over the course of 5 days. Each time, it was said by someone of my vintage (I was born in the early 1950's). In neither case was the term used in a pejorative way.
These young, white Social Justice Warriors are the most intolerant people I've met. I do my best to treat them gently. They, like other students, are works in progress and have a lot to learn.
DrPinWV at January 30, 2015 11:39 AM
Because these "young, white Social Justice Warriors" are convinced that anyone older than themselves is an intolerant bigot and/or unenlightened rube. Only they are bringing the light of tolerance and wisdom to the world.
In other words, they're just like most people were at their age throughout history - eager but dumb; naive zealots who are convinced they've found the answer (despite not knowing the question) that was ignored or overlooked by all prior generations.
They only difference between them and past generations of activists is that they've got an instantaneous worldwide distribution network for their self-righteousness.
Conan the Grammarian at January 30, 2015 1:05 PM
deBoer isn't generally an advocate of free speech. He believes that any 'conversation' about social issues must be dictated by the oppressed party. So he's perfectly willing to censor other's views.
The reason he's gotten some attention is that he's been willing to criticize the smash mouth tactics of the social justice community online. But the only reason he does that is because he's concerned that it's turning people off of his brand of hard left politics. Otherwise he's a big advocate of 'rage' and likes to belittle anyone an inch to his right as an evil subhuman idiot.
pierre at January 31, 2015 10:58 AM
http://youtu.be/IFRM4oJwLdc
Paleo Retiree at January 31, 2015 8:57 PM
Leave a comment