Greetings, comrade! Heard the delightful news? Helen Pluckrose--AKA the Mary Wollstonecraft of the 21st century--has just given Western civilization a lifeline. If Critical Race Theory kills us all, at least we'll know our queen did everything she possibly could to stop it. 1/
Ever the philosophical juggernaut, look how she resolves the company's paradoxical commitments.
Not everyone who works with Counterweight is a liberal humanist; they're merely mandated to support the tenets of liberal humanism, though they obviously don't have to. 2/
Pluckrose venerates liberalism, her metanarrative of choice, not as a philosophy grounded in equal rights and freedoms for individuals, but as "a system that allows us to disagree without turning to violence"--as we know, fascists have never risen to power in liberal contexts. 3/
Counterweight is especially concerned to produce a good-faith debate between TERFs and trans rights activists. That's why they brought in such a diverse cast of academic affiliates, including friends of the trans community such as K-Stock, Colin Wright, D-Soh & BenjiBoyce. 4/
Pluckrose has developed a groundbreaking "traffic light" system for people to use to determine whether their workplace is in danger of being totally fucking obliterated by CRT. At the green level, it's not clear whether mind control will be implemented, so don't stress yet. 5/
But Amber means if you don't act quick (by sending Queen Pluck an email), your boss will inevitably haze the living shit out of you and your coworkers in a woke initiation ritual, forcing to you admit Foucault was right about your inability to influence your own behavior. 6/
But let's back up a few steps. What exactly does Counterweight do?
Basically, all the Good Things you could ever ask for. Their "scholarly but accessible books, articles, podcasts, and videos" are certainly their most important gifts to humanity. Who could forget this classic?
Here are three exemplary pages from Cynical Theories, each teeming with rigorous scholarly analysis. As Douglas Murray put it, "I have rarely read such a good summary of how postmodernism evolved from the 1960s onwards." 8/
Finally, the most useful resources of all: the following three videos from expert Obaid Omer. While you might expect original analysis of this Woke scholarship, he somehow does even better: he simply reads entries from New Discourses aloud, verbatim. 9/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This strategy—the “master’s tools” must be abandoned/destroyed—can be applied at will to generate a new radical thesis, e.g. OP’s “black people can’t be healthy.” Mills (2009) gives us compelling reasons for resisting this rhetoric. 1/
Just to address the obvious: Mills technically gets the quote wrong; it should be "the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." The most they can do is "allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game," Lorde writes. Mills' first critiques are clear & direct: 2/
He continues by pointing to the intuitive truth that some of the master's philosophical/conceptual tools will be irredeemably racist or otherwise oppressive--such as, e.g., essentialist racial hierarchies--but some have only been used for evil contingently. 3/
Another excellent, incredibly prescient quote from the 1996 book, The Opening of the American Mind, by UC Berkeley professor of history, Lawrence Levine: “It is exactly this understanding of how things do *not* happen that the leading critics of the contemporary university lack…
Thus they freely spin their facile theories of how the survivors of the New Left lost the political wars but won their ultimate triumph by capturing the university and transforming it from an institution of culture and learning to a high-handed and inflexible purveyor of...
Political Correctness. The problem with such notions––aside from the fact that they are promulgated, to borrow Carl Becker's memorable phrase, without fear and without research––is that they are telling examples of how things do not happen. Universities in the United States...
Reading about the history of reactionary criticisms of the left a la Pluckrose & Lindsay, Douglas Murray, etc. A mentor from undergrad recommended a book responding to Allan Bloom, “The Opening of the American Mind,” by his PhD supervisor, Lawrence Levine.
Sub “woke” for “PC.”
@mccormick_ted you history folks are always lurking with your prescience.
Bloom’s “The Closing of the American Mind” (1987) seems to be the Bible of this anti-woke movement. The force of his central argument seems to rely on an analogy between rising PC culture and the Nazis. Jordan Peterson has clearly devoured this one.
Here goes another one of my signature threads on the incredibly bulletproof #AntiWoke online echo chambers can be, focusing again on @wokal_distance. And before you remind me I have better things to do, remind yourself I am fully aware of this fact; I simply have no self-respect.
Tweet 3 is on the right track but misses the point. A metanarrative, as conceptualized by Lyotard, is a grand, totalizing, theory of everything: a theory that ends the infinite regress of epistemic justification. Lyotard's examples include Hegelian and Marxist theories of history
Re 4: Rather, postmodernism does not believe in the truth of any metanarrative.
And no, no, no, rejecting metanarratives does NOT mean denying the existence of absolute truth, and it does not necessarily lead to relativism, though it can suggest a banal sort of constructivism.
Alrighty folxxx, you asked for it. Here’s my thread on @Hpluckrose’s instant classic, “How French ‘Intellectuals’ Ruined the West: Postmodernism & Its Impact.” Originally published at Areo, lucky enough to get the coveted @NewDiscourses placement. [1/n]
Right off the bat, opening paragraph suggests any worldview “which denies a stable reality or reliable knowledge to exist” is thereby inconsistent. Why? No explanation. Moving on! [2/n]
Postmodernism involves a “rejection of the concept of the unified and coherent individual” as well as “philosophy which valued ethics, reason and clarity”—these are parochial (western, middle-class, male). How does one do philosophy without reason? No answer, no citations. [3/n]