Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John's avatar

My initial thought is that the left has never been ideologically married to anything but power and control. It is always about dismantling the current social order to place itself in its stead, and once in the seat of power, abusing that power and embracing all the worst totalitarian instincts.

They only care about freedoms in any capacity when it is their desires being limited. They do not wish to honor your freedoms, they do not care about others in any capacity that outside their own benefit.

Expand full comment
CanadiaNerd's avatar

I think the left is fracturing, to be sure, into camps, some of which are aligned with the dissident right, because they're fellow dissidents, but it's really tricky. I find Graeber frustrating for similar reasons that I find Chomsky frustrating - when they're actually engaging their own theory, they're more solid than most on either side, in the pursuit of human freedom, but they bail on it in various degrees, when they get outcomes that challenge their moral intuitions. But I agree with you on Graeber maybe being a stronger voice than Greenwald. But then, the empowered left has sidelined and innoculated the herd against Greenwald, so who knows. They're getting pretty good at, not so much "information control" as much as "standpoint control." They're getting folks to censor their own eyes pretty well. Had someone refuse to watch Lex Fridman's interview of Jay Battacharya on lockdowns, despite the latter having sat on NIH funding panels and having been involved in virology research for decades, and not at all being a "fringe" player. That sort of "I won't look at your bad source" is shades of "huh, this thing you just said is also what this Koch funded person said" which is the same sort of social herd immunity against ideas.

That said, as I mentioned elsewhere, there are some nice whitepills among the dissident strain, and I hope that continues.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts