The reason the trans-movement is so nihilistic, violent, and unhinged is because it is postmodern, and the postmodern intellectual solvent it uses to dissolve the distinction between male and female also dissolves the distinction between good and evil.
The postmodern ideology of the transgender activists believes all values of any kind (moral, social, scientific, and epistemic) are just social constructs that have been constructed in alignment with the interests of the dominant ideology or ruling class.
so...
On this view the legitimacy of a given set of values is not a matter of fact, it depends on the interests of the people evaluating those values. As such the values of a society are a determined by which group has the power to embed it's interests in the social value structure...
meaning that all values are really expressions of the only interests of the dominant ideology of the ruling class.
At the bottom of postmodern philosophy is the conclusion that moral, religious, social, and scientific values are little more than masks for the interests of...
the ruling class which exists to legitimize the exercise of power in pursuit of interests.
The result is a view in which all social relationships are mediated by power and interests, values and justifications are merely a mask for the exercise of that power for those interests.
The result is one of complete and total relativism with respect to meaning, purpose, knowledge, and morality because those things are all seen as social constructs. There are no "correct" values when it comes to truth, morality, etc, there are only *dominant* values...
and which values are dominant is a matter of power.
If one accepts this view the result is a total collapse into nihilism, and cynicism.
Nihilism because all values are views as being completely made up, and cynicism because values are seen as masks for the exercise of power.
If one accepts that all values are little more than made up fiction then the only motive left is the pursuit of ones own interests and the power necessary to satisfy them.
Everything is about interests, will, dominance, and power.
This is where the trans-movement is at.
They adopted postmodernism because they thought it gave them the ability to dissolve the truths about reality that stood in their way, only to watch it dissolve meaning, truth, and morality as well.
And now the trans-movement has adopted a mindset there are no objective...
moral values which can serve as constraints on their behavior; the only thing which can constrains their behavior is their own interests, a lack of power, and a society which is oppressing them. And since the moral rules and social norms which constrain behavior...
are illegitimate the only reason they have to constrain their own behavior is the consequences. And so questions like "should we kill people to advance our agenda" cease to be moral questions and become purely tactical questions.
Also, questions about how to live and what to value stop being moral questions, they become questions about interests and desires. With no objective values to constrain those interests and desires their movement becomes mired in a form of "nothing matters" hedonistic nihilism.
This combination of cynicism, nihilism, and will-to-power is what lies at the bottom of the trans-movement, and it is mixed with a bitter, resentful, caustic and jaded "lol nothing matters" culture.
This ends up with endless layers of self-referential irony that never touches reality because there is no truth and there is no reality: all that exists is the endless house of mirrors of a culture that just reflects other aspects of itself with no objective point of reference.
This is what the online trans-movement is, and in this milieu they are irony-poisoning themselves while radicalizing into political violence based on a relativistic, nihilistic, and cynical worldview.
/fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
People who celebrate the murder of their political opponents are not participating in the marketplace of ideas, they are encouraging deadly political violence by building a permission structure to legitimize and justify the murder of those they disagree with.
My freedom of speech means I get to clearly and succintly explain to the whole world that if you call for the assassination of your rivals this is not free speech, it is a direct incitement to political violence.
John Stewart Mill gave a famous example where he said that if someone claims corn dealers are starvering the poor this can be allowed if circulated through the press, but is not allowed when shouted in front of an excited mob assembled outside the house of a corn dealer....
1/ The Radical Left has used political violence to advance their cause for decades. What's new is the progressive left's professional class building a permission structure to justify the use of political violence
It's called Assassination Culture, and we need to talk about it
🧵
2/ To understand what's happening, you need to understand that the line between progressive-left professional class and radical left has been blurred. The extremist radical left and the socially progressive "bluesky left" are increasingly intertwined both socially and politically
3/ This is because many of the extremist radical from the 60's and 70' who advocated for, and participated in, the use of political violence have been welcomed into the mainstream institutions that are run by the progressive left professional class.
Look at the number of pro-athletes posting condolences about Charlie Kirk, and you'll see what a huge cultural figure he was.
He wasn't just famous in conservative circles, his clips debating college students were a loadbearing pillar of online political pop-culture
His willingness to calmly and politely debate all comers on any issue (at the very moment when cancel culture was strongest and people were afraid to say what they think) made him a sort of lovable internet folkhero.
He was an indelible piece of the online landscape.
Charlie was not quarantined to the "conservative ghetto" of online content; he broke contain and became a mainstream cultural figure.
Charlie became the cultural symbol of free debate, free speech, and settling differences in public with words
What he is describing here is the deconstruction of America as an ideal. The goal is to destroy America by subverting the conception of America as a force for good which sustains American confidence, and attacking the founding narrative from which America derives it's legitimacy.
They will try to redefine America in a way which subverts the legitimacy of America as a national project. They want to erase the current American narrative, and replace it with a new one which grants them the right to inherit America's wealth, power, prestige, and influence.
They will attack America the same way they attacked Universities: by undermining legitimacy, authority, and self-confidence by asserting that the whole project is just racism, colonialism, and oppression in disguise.
2/ on racist resentment against white people and racialist identity politics, complete with the racist stereotyping.
This shows a continuity of thinking over a period of a decade, and there has been no take back, or explanation for the disgustingly racist tweets she made.
3/ Chris said he didn't care if she was fired, the point was to use her posts to force the New Yorker to choose between equal enforcement of bans on hiring racists who make racist content, or to be explicit that racism against Jews and whites is allowed...