More from the Cato Unbound symposium

I write,

Unfortunately, we are seeing on campus a form of reductionist progressivism that actually does take the oppressor-oppressed axis as the sole basis for framing issues. The campus justice activists are not only subject to the psychology that inclines us away from Persuasion Mode and toward Demonization Mode. Their very ideology justifies Demonization of dead (and living) white males while treating the values of free speech and open inquiry as tools of oppression.

Jonathan Rauch writes,

Pace Kling, I don’t think “centralized curation of content” and content restrictions are most of what will happen as digital media grapple with antisocial behavior, though we’ll certainly see some of those (and have, and should). More important, and more successful, will be human-machine partnerships and platform redesigns which identify toxic behavior and content and help users avoid them.

There is more at both links. But again, I don’t think that bad actors and factually incorrect posts are the core problem. The core problem is the way otherwise good people behave on social media.

2 thoughts on “More from the Cato Unbound symposium

  1. Again, there is tacit assumptions here of some superior, ideal, or objective standard for what constitutes Real vs Fake claims, Good vs. ‘Toxic’ behavior,, and when demonization or persuasion is the more appropriate response to particular matters. What should lie inside or outside the Overton Window? What is tolerable vs beyond the pale?

    Here’s an example. Gospel means “the good news”. Is the Good News also Fake News? Are, for example, Christian metaphysical claims both false, and ethical claims – for instance the immorality of homosexual behaviors – offensive and intolerable and worthy of excommunication / “Social BDS”.

    It seems to me that counter-polarizers aren’t really arguing against polarization – they are arguing for Old School Liberal tolerant and open social norms and attitudes with regards to ideas and expression.

    It is tempting to attribute the collapse in those attitudes to something brought about by Social Media, since it emerged at around the same time. But that’s not the right mechanism. Just like there was Modern and Post-Modern, there was once Liberal Leftism which called for tolerance of non-mainstream eccentricity, and now Post-Liberal Progressivism, which calls for intolerance for heresy from orthodoxy.

    That’s the major change and social evolution which results from the successful arrival of all those Gramscian Marches to the top tiers of high status society of the past several generations, combined with the electoral invulnerability made inevitable by the demographic Great Replacement. Out of power, one takes on a liberal pose, and pleads for mercy and tolerance. In power, one crushes one’s enemies and spreads the booty to one’s supporters, troops, and clients.

    A bull won’t get very far by charging at the Matador’s Cape instead of at the Matador.

  2. Handle said most of it – the Gramscian Marches: thru ed accreditation, college ed, K-12 ed, journalism, media; and now hi-tech business and much of both Wall Street and Main Street business.

    The top elite in most of society are college indoctrinated to demonize Republicans – and Trump’s tweets give them an excuse for Trump Derangement Syndrome even worse than prior Bush DS.

    Arnold points out a HUGE key: ” inability of colleges to make African-Americans and women feel secure and confident there.”

    It’s called genetics, it’s science, and IQ science “truth” is very much NOT politically correct, similarly sex-brain differences. Therefore it is treated as false — but treating the truth as false doesn’t make for better Real Results.

    Harvard fired L. Summers for speaking the physics sex truth years before Trump, and before the “social media” distraction from the problem. Men and Women want different things, with different abilities, and this causes different results.
    Blacks, Whites, and Asians have different IQs, and this results in different SAT scores, and different results in colleges.
    The PC liars deny these differences and instead, falsely, blame “oppressors”.

    The PC liars dominate colleges and mostly hire only those who are PC liars.
    Using trillions of tax dollars to subsidize the US system of elite “indoctrination” centers is terrible. Organizations that discriminate against hiring Reps should be sued, and lose, based on Equal Employment laws with respect to people’s “creed”.

    It should be legal for a private employer to hire only Democrats or only Republicans — but they shouldn’t be getting tax exemptions and their student customers be getting tax-funded loans which become subsidies.

Comments are closed.