SJW's, Identity politics, Alt-Left and Alt-Right

[Eric the Green]

(09-18-2018, 05:59 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: I don't believe there is such a thing as neo-liberalism. It was just classical liberalism in 1980s setting. Thatcher and Reagan are dead, and few people would like to see their policies back. So I'm not worrying about that. But today's "classical liberals" like Sargon of Akkad are more sinister, even if they don't have influence comparable to the 1980s market fundamentalists. Types like Sargon seem to operate with the same "mental map" the alt-right uses. They believe leftist elites are the greatest threats to freedom. Also, they appeal to the same demographic: socially awkward millennials whose worldview was shaped by video games and internet porn. Sargon, for example, called Weinstein's victims whores. I don't think Reagan or GW Bush would ever resort to that.

Well, I would agree, but I think Trump's policies are neo-liberalism on steroids. It's true though that neo-liberalism is basically classical liberalism, but without anything liberal in it.

Quote:What I dislike about PC and SJWs is that they can recognize evil only when it's done by white men. For example, they defend Islam despite its violent nature. They claim that tribal societies lived in "peaceful anarchy", even if the reality was incessant tribal warfare. They also deny innate differences between men's and women's brains. To some extent, this is well-meant, because women were subjugated in traditional societies and this was rationalized by "natural law" (like in Thomistic Christianity, but also in Judaism, Islam, and many indigenous societies)
But progress can only be pursued by those who see the world as it is.

While there was some tribal warfare, war as we know it was invented by the original Sargon of Akkad (I've never heard of the new one). I agree about Islam, and SJW's should be able to see its bad expressions, although many Moslems are not violent and tout its peaceful aspects and denounce terrorism.

Quote:Because of Internet porn, many young men all over the world struggle with porn addiction and compulsive masturbation. They have problems to achieve erection during normal sex. I'm not a puritan, but Internet porn is a real problem:
https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/

You are probably more well-informed on that score. There certainly is a lot of internet porn.

Quote:To the extent it was about ridding the world of monstrous criminals like Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, it was noble. Iraq was in a rather good state around 2010, until Obama pulled the troops out, which caused the rise of ISIS.

I didn't mind getting Osama, because he was likely the 9-11 villain. But we had no business deposing Saddam, as evil as he was. He was on the road to reform. We had no business "spreading democracy around the world" through war to create a "new American century." Neo-con imperialism caused untold needless deaths and debilitating injuries in Iraq and the USA. ISIS was the direct result of US intervention in Iraq, not of our pullout. We don't need neo-cons at all. We do need a well-conceived foreign policy that is not isolationist, because American power can be a useful check on rogue nations and tyranny, and defending our own freedom from attack is needed. An alliance system is needed, with multi-lateralism and the UN. But rampant preventive intervention and imperialism causes many more problems than it solves. We need the 2T ideal of a world without war; I stand by it.

Quote:I would say science and technology need philosophy above all. To the extent New Age philosophy was "cosmic humanism", it WAS a good thing,

Good

Quote:but I'm against its superstitious and anti-technology parts, as well as against hippies' sexual licentiousness.

My favourite philosopher is Missionary generation Briton, Olaf Stapledon, known as the author of "Last and First Men" and "Star Maker", considered by many as classics of science fiction. Stapledon believed that the goal of life is to advance in intelligence and creativity so that we could advance harmony and complexity in the universe. This is the cornerstone of philosophy called extropianism, invented by Max Moore in the 1980s (probably under the influence of Stapledon). Transhumanism is a logical result of it, since there are limitations of the natural human mind.

(Thank, Eric. You've made me write a description of my worldview)

Of course I am very much in favor of much of what materialists and techies call "superstition" nowadays, such as psychic abilities and occult and esoteric studies, but there is a dangerous trend among some supposed "new agers" to discard reason and common sense in order to believe in lots of conspiracy theories without adequate facts, as well as not question some new age exaggerations. When spiritual ideas are applied to the material world, empirical checks are wise, and this may lead to new knowledge of consciousness extension beyond the body and this life. Science and Spirit can be allies. Millennials and late wave Xers probably love sci-fi much more than I do. To me, worship of tech is a 1T throwback.

I am not familiar with Stapledon or Max Moore. It sounds fine, but I am very skeptical of humans becoming machines. I want instead an extension of the organic. Tech solutions should be subordinate to our original gifts of spirit and body. On that level, I am in favor. Also note that the tech revolution started in the 2T, and partly as a result of hippie influence. I am much less against "hippies' sexual licentiousness" than you. Obviously there are dangers though, when anything is taken to excess and without care for basic ethics and consideration.