28 thoughts on “The Regressive Left, pt. 6: The Ideology of Social Justice

  1. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only video that breaks down this ideology. I think its one of your best political videos, and is certainly one of my favorites.

  2. Man, I love your videos. 😀
    While many people regurgitate the same talking points over and over again it seems that with pretty much every of your videos I can learn valuable things.

  3. "The debate on whether trans women are women or men seems pointless, but a lot IS HANGING in the balance"
    You cracked me up 🙂

  4. Hello there,
    Thank you for your content I enjoy it a lot.
    However… I have a question? If people define what they see as the "Enemy" , and they become active. (Just like SJWs are active in the political field) … isn't there a chance that this new counter culture that argues against SJW-mentality bears with it the risk to spawn an even more "active" counter culture? And these people that take it to the next level aren't they themselves at risk to radicalise?

    I've posted this to a Sargon of Akkad video at some point… where (and this is my opinion) his sometimes unnuanced vieuws that largely come forth from emotion (not ratio) pushes him to become just like the person he criticises. As I said before, where Anita Sarkeesian once said: "Cause, like, when you start learning about systems, everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic, and you have to point it all out to everyone all the time.", part of the radical wing of the countermovement will just go: "Cause, like, when you start learning about SJWs, everything is social justice, everything is political, everything is anti-white-males, and you have to point it all out to everyone all the time.".

    Also the quest of these people to get more "likes" , "vieuws" and "patreon money" not only bolsters their own ego making them feel more "right" in the process. It also compells them to spit out more content every day. The more volume you produce, the less quality it will have. Like you say about your own videos: "I need to do more reading"… This is seriously lacking with a lot of these figures, making them (for me at least) just as ridiculous as the people they attack. These rants online also become more and more emotional every time… because emotions sell.

    The fact that you take time to figure things out, and make your ideas ripe before you put them out their for debate… is one of the biggest things that I appreciate about people like you. Also… your ideas are open for debate, which in my opinion, doesn't make you a radical. Radicals are so confined in their own logic that they lost the ability to listen to annything but the sounds that already resonate in their heads.

  5. 22:25, Well, that and the fact that if they follow Gender constructivism to it's logical conclusion, you get a paradigm in which feminists can't claim EXCLUSIVE victimhood because gender wouldn't exist.

  6. Great work, thank you. So, it's not accurate to call them Marxists, but given that this has been cobbled together from pieces of various philosophies and ideologies including borrowing heavily from Marx, would you say it is accurate to call it neoMarxism?

  7. I enjoy your "outside the box" angle on things, but I have a more boring "occams razor" response. It's just female nature manifesting itself in a technological, resource abundant, place and time. I'd be curious of your counter to this as I always enjoy hearing your take and our positions aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but my explanation is why I think people like Sargon can't explain social justice. Either Sargon is genuinely clueless, or he knows fully that he can't just say "a lot of women are irrational and they're controlling the discourse". I know some people will write me off as a misogynist for saying that. That couldn't be further from the truth. I'm just a man of reason and honesty. I'm willing to hear out counter arguments.

  8. "Capitalism in the west has reached a point where it produces enough wealth to provide for everyone's needs."

    Are you really this historically illiterate? There were thousands of labour movements across Europe and America working to secure more rights for workers after the industrial revolution. Every labour law about safety, pay, hours, company store bullshit, etc. were won by labour movements. Even right-wingers couldn't pretend that "capitalism is working" which is why fascism as a movement started. Instead of leftists making the problems of capitalism about how bosses and governments treated workers, fascists sought to unite poor, working, and rich classes under nationalistic sentiment which ended up being best done by othering another group of people and blaming them for all the problems. That's why Germany used Jewish people as scape goats and the only reason these sentiments waned was because the recent memory of WWII drew everyone away from fascism and a post war boom in America made leftists seem unnecessary. And guess what happened when the war memory faded and the boom ended?

  9. I disagree somewhat with your definition of pomo.
    Postmodernism has left a lasting and damaging legacy on epistemology.

    Pomo epistemology is skeptical, and it claims to refute epistemologies that posit objective reality and truth.
    Pomo is critical of modernist epistemologies like science and reason, claiming that these areas only offer a narrative and not any real glimpse of reality or truths.

    The reason pomo gets brought when people criticize the regressive left is because it is pomo epistemology that is at the foundation of the regressive ideals. The idea that everything is a narrative or a social construct can be traced directly back to pomo.

  10. I am one of those people that is getting tired of hearing about it.

    The fight against SJWs has created culture warriors, it would be fine except much like the SJWs culture warriors also view everything through the lens of politics.
    Culture warriors see a battle of politics where there is none, and they project their politics into all pop media.

    They are just as bad as the SJWs in that regard.

  11. at 26:25 you show a little cartoon of a monkey doing some sort of of yogistic exercise, suggesting that the text on the cartoon expresses some weird eastern idea. Yet the text is a paraphrase of Epictetus, Enchiridion 1.

    (for my part I've realized that one of things that is not within my power is to get you to make videos attacking the Israeli government over their fascists oppression of the Palestinians; I won't even mention it, no matter how many innocents they murder).

  12. I think the dialectic theory thing is pretty true, except I don't think the progressions are necessarily always for the 'better' in any one-dimensional way. It's an effective and sophisticated mechanism, but not foolproof, and as always, careful awareness and the phenomenon of free will are crucial.

  13. This is all good and well but Carrier told me that he and 5 other guys are working on better access to abortions and therefore SocJus is great.

    /s

  14. One person on a deserted island is free, there are no ethics or morality beyond that person's objectives.

    Add one more person, and in order for them to co-habit the space, each will be necessarily imposing chains on the other. For instance they will be likely denied the "freedom" to kill the other or destroy their property.

    For anyone to have rights, all others must be perpetually denied the freedoms to infringe such rights.

  15. One of your best videos Zarathustra! This is why I’ve been a long time subscriber and why I keep coming back. I really wish you would get out on more of the channels to promote your material. More people need to hear it takes like this because they’re so well done. Keep up the good work.

  16. That was a fast click 🙂 Great stuff, it's good to hear a take from someone who's clearly well-versed in Left-wing academic jargon and still thinks there's some value to it, but wants to steer it away from the errors that have beset it. (Where we would disagree is probably that I don't think there were many errors, and that there's probably a lot more deliberate dishonesty in academia than one might wish.)

  17. False Framing

    1. Dialectic (Proletariat vs. Bourgeois) vs. Harmonization (Heart & Lungs both needed for greater being)

    2. Patriarchy, Antisemitism, Racism. Words that are taboo and evil. They blind people to underlying reality, necessity and goodness of these words sometimes point to. Like violence is sometimes good. These taboo evil words are sometimes good for a social / tribal animal such as us.

    3. There is no "evil" so I cannot be evil. "Because I am not a Marxist your critique is invalid." Slippery word games to avoid being pinned down to reality. Solution: "We are BOTH playing word games and have our own languages, therefore we both need to define and agree to use a third language that we both agree to for this discussion." Language is a psychological weapon we need to first define rules of engagement.

  18. Oh shit thanks. Foucauldian feminism confused the shit out of me and I was like "All the no. Not even going to try to understand." Of course it's inconsistent nonsense. Great presentation overall. Really great condensation of a lot of complicated ideas!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *