Jim, I think the takeaway from this is that our notions/language of political categorizing urgently need to be revisited.
My view is that 'left' and 'right', 'progressive' and 'conservative' and 'radical' and 'traditional' are now tools of euphemistic obfuscation and negative stereotyping rather than keyword summaries of settled ideas about political positioning or social governance. Fundamentally they are eighteenth to twentieth century artifacts that reflected the struggles that went on between the ideas of 'The Enlightenment' v 'The Ancien Regime' and then later, between 'The Working Class' and 'The Bourgeoisie'.
In other words, we are talking initially about the move from faith to reason, and then the class politics of capitalism, which embodied the move from philosophical idealism to 'scientific' (nice try) materialism.
I think your article above is a good example of how turbulent and bizarre some of the political lineups are becoming, as events start to outstrip our capacity to properly comprehend them, as political adventurism and ideological infantilism drive us into unknown territory, and it becomes impossible to tell who are really friends, rather than my enemy's enemy, or who are really enemies rather than being once-friends who just disagree.
One of the strangest things I have seen was a lesbian Womens' Liberation Front activist speaking on a Heritage Foundation platform to a 'Sons and Daughters of the Revolution' (War of Independence) audience, because her 'friends' had deplatformed her anywhere else. Ho hum.
So, until we can get up some plausible looking/sounding analysis that can inform the way we categorize the people, forces and situations around us, one just has to treat traditional political language as the diversionary Klutzspeech of ideological poseurs who wouldn't know if their arses were on fire; i.e., with the derision and contempt it and they so richly deserve.
" ... how turbulent and bizarre some of the political lineups are becoming, as events start to outstrip our capacity to properly comprehend them ... " Thanks for this, Christopher. Sometimes I start to think it's just me who can't properly comprehend what's going on. I bury myself in books to self-medicate. Usually history books, or books written decades ago. Of course many bad, bad, horrible things happened in the past, but the events of history are behind us, I can't change them, only learn from them ... Unlike contemporary events (and ideologies), which leave me feeling that I must DO something, or somehow I'm complicit in the impending implosion ...
Well that is bizarre. So where do these gender-reassignment surgeons train? Or did they develop their own techniques in Iran? And what happens after that--are these reassigned people (say, gay men turned into women) accepted as their new sex? That seems unlikely (not that women have a lot of rights anyway in Iran). This article opens up a lot of questions.
while its interesting to delve into the similarities btn homophobia in iran and gender ideology, i do tend to give iran a pass on most things, including this. i mean, iran did have a democracy in the 1950s and their society looked almost like france and our CIA toppled their elected leader. the iran ppl were so pissed they OKd the strong man leaders still in place today. we strong armed them and they hired leaders to protect themselves from us. in 1988 we shot down an iranian passenger jet killing 300 innocent iranian civilians. and now theyre being squeezed with an economic blockade which gives them no choice but to side with russia - they are starving via a blockade the US enacted. some of these countries are living like ppl did 600 years ago. that doesnt make what happens there right. but i dont think its fair to judge them by our standards. and since our country is keeping them in their present state, in a way we are to blame for the strong man leaders in iran.
but i dont forgive leaders in the US who fell for the fraud of gender ideology, which violates the rights of a half a doz groups and harms the very ppl it claims to help
A very well written and informative article. Should by chance our own indigenous Taliban read this the horrific acts of violence portrayed may well provide inspiration for a whole new round of imaginary atrocities experienced at the genocidal Indian Residential Schools.
Kemosabe, regarding your words “indigenous Taliban”, I respectfully offer this caution: While some may find the coinage fresh and sassy, I worry that it shifts us from the realm of reasoned argument into one of name-calling – a tactic we should probably leave to the activists who so frequently rely on it.
Jim, I think the takeaway from this is that our notions/language of political categorizing urgently need to be revisited.
My view is that 'left' and 'right', 'progressive' and 'conservative' and 'radical' and 'traditional' are now tools of euphemistic obfuscation and negative stereotyping rather than keyword summaries of settled ideas about political positioning or social governance. Fundamentally they are eighteenth to twentieth century artifacts that reflected the struggles that went on between the ideas of 'The Enlightenment' v 'The Ancien Regime' and then later, between 'The Working Class' and 'The Bourgeoisie'.
In other words, we are talking initially about the move from faith to reason, and then the class politics of capitalism, which embodied the move from philosophical idealism to 'scientific' (nice try) materialism.
I think your article above is a good example of how turbulent and bizarre some of the political lineups are becoming, as events start to outstrip our capacity to properly comprehend them, as political adventurism and ideological infantilism drive us into unknown territory, and it becomes impossible to tell who are really friends, rather than my enemy's enemy, or who are really enemies rather than being once-friends who just disagree.
One of the strangest things I have seen was a lesbian Womens' Liberation Front activist speaking on a Heritage Foundation platform to a 'Sons and Daughters of the Revolution' (War of Independence) audience, because her 'friends' had deplatformed her anywhere else. Ho hum.
So, until we can get up some plausible looking/sounding analysis that can inform the way we categorize the people, forces and situations around us, one just has to treat traditional political language as the diversionary Klutzspeech of ideological poseurs who wouldn't know if their arses were on fire; i.e., with the derision and contempt it and they so richly deserve.
" ... how turbulent and bizarre some of the political lineups are becoming, as events start to outstrip our capacity to properly comprehend them ... " Thanks for this, Christopher. Sometimes I start to think it's just me who can't properly comprehend what's going on. I bury myself in books to self-medicate. Usually history books, or books written decades ago. Of course many bad, bad, horrible things happened in the past, but the events of history are behind us, I can't change them, only learn from them ... Unlike contemporary events (and ideologies), which leave me feeling that I must DO something, or somehow I'm complicit in the impending implosion ...
https://www.writing.com/main/books/item_id/2064958-The-Secular-Fundamentalist
Joan, see how you cope with this lot. Regards, Christopher N
Hi Joan !
Mea maxima culpa! I actually thought it was a pretty accurate moniker but I will take your caution to heart. Nice to see you posting again.
Well that is bizarre. So where do these gender-reassignment surgeons train? Or did they develop their own techniques in Iran? And what happens after that--are these reassigned people (say, gay men turned into women) accepted as their new sex? That seems unlikely (not that women have a lot of rights anyway in Iran). This article opens up a lot of questions.
It's because transgenderism isn't at all "progressive" but precisely the opposite - it's profoundly regressive.
while its interesting to delve into the similarities btn homophobia in iran and gender ideology, i do tend to give iran a pass on most things, including this. i mean, iran did have a democracy in the 1950s and their society looked almost like france and our CIA toppled their elected leader. the iran ppl were so pissed they OKd the strong man leaders still in place today. we strong armed them and they hired leaders to protect themselves from us. in 1988 we shot down an iranian passenger jet killing 300 innocent iranian civilians. and now theyre being squeezed with an economic blockade which gives them no choice but to side with russia - they are starving via a blockade the US enacted. some of these countries are living like ppl did 600 years ago. that doesnt make what happens there right. but i dont think its fair to judge them by our standards. and since our country is keeping them in their present state, in a way we are to blame for the strong man leaders in iran.
but i dont forgive leaders in the US who fell for the fraud of gender ideology, which violates the rights of a half a doz groups and harms the very ppl it claims to help
Very insightful thank you for writing this
A very well written and informative article. Should by chance our own indigenous Taliban read this the horrific acts of violence portrayed may well provide inspiration for a whole new round of imaginary atrocities experienced at the genocidal Indian Residential Schools.
Kemosabe, regarding your words “indigenous Taliban”, I respectfully offer this caution: While some may find the coinage fresh and sassy, I worry that it shifts us from the realm of reasoned argument into one of name-calling – a tactic we should probably leave to the activists who so frequently rely on it.