29 avsnitt

Pursuing the light of objective truth in subjective darkness.

New Discourse‪s‬ New Discourses

    • Utbildning
    • 4.8 • 13 betyg

Pursuing the light of objective truth in subjective darkness.

    Aufheben der Dr. Seuss

    Aufheben der Dr. Seuss

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 23

    Aufheben is a German word that, in Critical Theory, means to "abolish" or to "negate" in the way that Critical Theorists do. It's a somewhat complicated term in that it means both to abolish and to keep or to keep safe, and the Critical Theory use taps into the so-called dialectical process to attempt to use aufheben to tear apart and, as the Marxists translated it, "sublate" whatever cultural artifact they are targeting onto a "higher" level of understanding, namely the one that empowers Critical Theorists and induces misery in everyone else. This process was widely pushed by the Critical Theorists of the Frankfurt School under a doctrine of Aufheben der Kultur, abolishment of culture, and it continues in the Woke movement today.

    One of the latest big targets of Aufheben der Kultur is Dr. Seuss and his wide body of popular children's literature. Why? Because of its success. Seuss becomes a cultural anchor point for hundreds of millions of children and adults, and by tainting Seuss, his legacy, and your own memories of him with accusations of racism and "harm," they can abolish that shared cultural anchor and make more room to advance their own agenda, in which every text is "decolonized" and geared to indoctrinate you and your children into Critical Theory, especially Critical Race Theory. Join James Lindsay in this episode of the New Discourses Podcast to dig into the Critical Dr Seuss academic literature to see where this Aufheben der Dr Seuss comes from and how it works.

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com/support
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 1 tim. 42 min
    NO! Critical Race Theory Does NOT Continue the Civil Rights Movement

    NO! Critical Race Theory Does NOT Continue the Civil Rights Movement

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 22

    Critical Race Theorists like to claim that they have inherited and continue the noble legacy and justice work of the Civil Rights Movement, but this is an abject lie. In this episode of James Lindsay OnlySubs, my subscribers-only podcast, I take about half an hour to make the case definitively that, while they are content to portray this illusion, it is a grotesque distortion of reality, using their own words. By exploring the book Critical Race Theory: An Introduction (https://amzn.to/3rzYANN), by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic (Delgado is something of a founder of Critical Race Theory) and the paper "Mapping the Margins" (https://sites.oxy.edu/ron/csp19/readings/mappingmargins-crenshawwilliams.pdf) by Kimberlé Crenshaw, who is regarded as one of the true founders of CRT and the founder of intersectionality, the case against the Woke claim on the Civil Rights Movement is easily and definitively made. Join me to hear the details and the argument! -James

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com/support
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 29 min
    How the Woke Fail the Paradox of Tolerance

    How the Woke Fail the Paradox of Tolerance

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 21

    In 1945, even as the Nazis fell from power, Karl Popper told us how to find the line where free, liberal societies are in imminent danger in his book The Open Society and Its Enemies, most simply summarizing a crucial part of the argument in a short footnote about "The Paradox of Tolerance." There, Popper lays out a short summary of when a free society should and must not tolerate intolerant movements if it is to survive. It is not only when they espouse and preach intolerance but when they also cease to be amenable to reason and rational debate, forbid their followers from listening to reason and rational debate, cannot be held in check by public opinion, and encourage their followers to respond to arguments with "fists or pistols," i.e., violence of some form or another. I contend that the Woke, uniquely, have crossed this line in this episode of the New Discourses Podcast. They are absolutely intolerant, will not debate or listen to alternative perspectives, and, unlike all other hate movements that fail those two criteria, have grown to be completely unchecked and uncheckable by public opinion. This places them outside of the range to which tolerance should be extended in free, open societies, and it identifies them uniquely as a threat to their continuance. Join me to hear my argument for how Karl Popper warned us in 1945 so that we might see this situation when it arose.

    Infographic: http://bit.ly/ParadoxToleranceInfographic

    For more on the idea of tolerance, check out the entry on "tolerance" (https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-tolerance/) in my Critical Social Justice Encyclopedia and check out the four-part series on Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" on the New Discourses podcast, part 1 here: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/how-not-to-resolve-the-paradox-of-tolerance/

    -James

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com/support
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 34 min
    Critical Theorists as Grand Inquisitors: The Logic of "Repressive Tolerance"

    Critical Theorists as Grand Inquisitors: The Logic of "Repressive Tolerance"

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 20
    Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 4 of 4

    In this fourth and final part of his four-part lecture series about "Repressive Tolerance," James Lindsay takes the reader from the darkest point of the essay, which was the exciting climax of Part 3, through the end of Marcuse's argument. In this part, Marcuse dedicates the rest of the original 1965 essay to explaining why it is him and people like him (that is, Critical Theorists) who get to decide what constitutes good violence and bad violence, truth and falsity, liberating tolerance from the kind that must not be tolerated and must be suppressed. In our own time, it is the Woke and the high-powered elites in government, media, education, and law who have taken up this mantle of being able to decide, in the spirit of Herbert Marcuse, what must be tolerated, no matter how bad it is, and what must be suppressed, no matter how legitimate it is. The parallels to our own time are undeniable, and, as Lindsay has claimed throughout, the unavoidable conclusion is that we live in the asymmetric and totalitarian logic of "Repressive Tolerance" today.

    The second half of this episode leaves the essay itself and dives into a postscript to the original essay that Marcuse added three years later, in 1968, after the logic of his essay had already caused innumerable riots and episodes of civil unrest at the end of that tumultuous and transformational decade. In exploring this postscript, we see Marcuse sticking to his guns, but we also see just how blatantly obvious it is that his repressive tolerance has become the monster it sought to slay, which sheds considerable light upon what some people are now calling "the Great Realignment" in our societies, cultures, and politics.

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com/support
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    newdiscourses.locals.com
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 1 tim. 4 min
    Repressive Tolerance: Left Good, Right Bad, What Could Go Wrong?

    Repressive Tolerance: Left Good, Right Bad, What Could Go Wrong?

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 19
    Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 3 of 4

    In this third part of James Lindsay's lecture series on Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance," we see how the essay takes a particularly dark turn. Having set up the framing of the essay in the first part and explaining the condition of the "administered society" in the second, Marcuse now turns to answering the question of what a Repressive Tolerance should look like, including what it must suppress and what it must tolerate, including the sorts of violence and extralegal behaviors it must tolerate. The statement, which we arrive at near the end of this part, is simple, in Marcuse's own words: "Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left." In this part of the lecture series, Lindsay walks the listener through the darker part of Marcuse's argument to show how he arrives at this blatantly biased and ridiculous conclusion that has set the stage for the totalitarianism we see today in Wokeness and from Big Tech.

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses/
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 1 tim. 9 min
    One Pill, Two Pill, Red Pill, Blue Pill: Herbert Marcuse and the Administered Society

    One Pill, Two Pill, Red Pill, Blue Pill: Herbert Marcuse and the Administered Society

    The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 18
    Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 2 of 4

    In this second part of his annotated reading of Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance," James Lindsay reads and explains the portion of the essay where Marcuse defines the "administered society" that he claims we live in. The listener will find striking parallels to today's world, which certainly qualifies as the type of "administered society" far more accurately than the world that Marcuse inhabited in the 1960s when he wrote the essay, but paradoxically, or ironically, because it adopts the logic of this very essay as justification for its administration! This part of the series, then, raises particularly interesting questions about whether or not Marcuse would support the fruits of his own work and thus sheds interesting light on the problem we currently find ourselves in. It sets the stage for answering at the end of the series how we might go about solving this problem while avoiding the mistake Marcuse plainly made.

    Support New Discourses:
    paypal.me/newdiscourses
    patreon.com/newdiscourses
    subscribestar.com/newdiscourses
    youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join

    Website:
    newdiscourses.com

    Follow:
    facebook.com/newdiscourses
    twitter.com/NewDiscourses
    instagram.com/newdiscourses
    pinterest.com/newdiscourses/
    linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses
    minds.com/newdiscourses
    reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses

    Podcast:
    @newdiscourses
    podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546
    bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts
    open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp
    stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses

    © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

    • 1 tim. 8 min

Kundrecensioner

4.8 av 5
13 betyg

13 betyg

Mest populära podcaster inom Utbildning

Andra som lyssnade prenumererar på