Groupthink. That was the first thing, that the very first words spoken, said to me. Not that he himself is involved in it just that seemed to be his very first observation using the word homogenization.
Grant money from governments drives intellectual discourse. There is a lot of this money for universities. Professors and students apply for this money, and it is awarded on the basis of a proposal. There is a strong current towards the cause of the day. Moreover, additional grants are influenced greatly by how well the “cause” is supported.
No wonder there always a feeding frenzy around these topics that drives the culture in a particular direction.
Since universities have become money-harvesting machines, the only topics that are considered worthy of investigation are those that happen to be well-funded from external sources.
A lot of good ideas are not being examined because there’s little money for it. But don’t think that being able to pay for such research out of one’s own pocket is allowed. Part of the way the system works is that the institution, or, at least, the department one works in, gets a cut. (One department head I knew of insisted that all grant money went into a common funding pool.) Whether that goes against the terms under which that grant is awarded is another matter.
Gave up on this very quickly. The two guys sounded like they are on an infomercial.
And that is why you will lose your freedom. You haven’t the patience or the discipline to do the hard work required to remain free.
History is indeed written by the victors. The end of history will not be written in Chinese characters. It will be written in Hebrew, as when it began.
Bereishit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz.
“What’s the opposite of “Diversity”?”
University?
I would like to draw attention to an excerpt from the interview that Dave Rubin did with Niall Ferguson. The excerpt is about the change in liberal orthodoxy.
“Remember part of what we’re dealing here with is a kind of quasi religious phenomena. The dogmas of the left have become more and more religious in their quality as they have been unmoored from that fundamental economic rationality which was at the heart of Marxism. When that all went down in flames in 1989 the left decamped to the realm of culture and as it did that it increasingly took on the form of a cult.
Let me illustrate what I mean. Cults define themselves partly by a belief in a lot of things that are slightly weird. In order to be in a cult you have to have some weird beliefs. And one good example of a weird belief is that sexually is entirely constructed socially and it is not biologically rooted. And you can actually have any gender you like. And there are actually multiple genders. Now that is absurd. But to believe it has become a kind of test of your orthodoxy.” Niall Ferguson
▶︎ Clearly, Niall Ferguson articulated the phenomena we are seeing today. There are aspects of liberal orthodoxy that like a cult or a religion have become articles of faith and cannot be questioned. Examples include climate change, global warming, sexuality as a construct, globalism, open borders, multiculturalism, diversity and so on. Further, those who choose to question today’s liberal orthodoxy are treated not just as wrong but as blasphemers of the truth worthy of contempt.
▶︎ Maybe it is time to stop trying to frame the debate differently in order to be heard. Maybe it is time to frame the debater differently.
▶︎ Let’s begin to openly talk about the orthodoxy of the liberal left as that of a cult. Let’s begin to show people the similarities between the characteristics of cults and the characteristics of liberal orthodoxy. We have seen cults before, many times. Cults share many of the same characteristics. They adhere to a rigid set of beliefs that are unchallengeable. Their followers must accept the beliefs of the cult, not as possible or plausible truths, but as the only truths. Those followers who criticize or challenge the cults beliefs are shunned or excommunicated. Outsiders who challenge the cult’s beliefs are to be treated as blasphemers with contempt and scorn. But most troubling of all is that a cult follower must accept whatever teachings their leaders provides without question, even if those teachings ultimately lead to harm to the follower.
▶︎ So, go on the offensive. Stop letting the liberal left define us. Take the fight directly to them. Define them for what they are – a cult.
Groupthink. That was the first thing, that the very first words spoken, said to me. Not that he himself is involved in it just that seemed to be his very first observation using the word homogenization.
Grant money from governments drives intellectual discourse. There is a lot of this money for universities. Professors and students apply for this money, and it is awarded on the basis of a proposal. There is a strong current towards the cause of the day. Moreover, additional grants are influenced greatly by how well the “cause” is supported.
No wonder there always a feeding frenzy around these topics that drives the culture in a particular direction.
Since universities have become money-harvesting machines, the only topics that are considered worthy of investigation are those that happen to be well-funded from external sources.
A lot of good ideas are not being examined because there’s little money for it. But don’t think that being able to pay for such research out of one’s own pocket is allowed. Part of the way the system works is that the institution, or, at least, the department one works in, gets a cut. (One department head I knew of insisted that all grant money went into a common funding pool.) Whether that goes against the terms under which that grant is awarded is another matter.
Gave up on this very quickly. The two guys sounded like they are on an infomercial.
And that is why you will lose your freedom. You haven’t the patience or the discipline to do the hard work required to remain free.
History is indeed written by the victors. The end of history will not be written in Chinese characters. It will be written in Hebrew, as when it began.
Bereishit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz.
“What’s the opposite of “Diversity”?”
University?
I would like to draw attention to an excerpt from the interview that Dave Rubin did with Niall Ferguson. The excerpt is about the change in liberal orthodoxy.
“Remember part of what we’re dealing here with is a kind of quasi religious phenomena. The dogmas of the left have become more and more religious in their quality as they have been unmoored from that fundamental economic rationality which was at the heart of Marxism. When that all went down in flames in 1989 the left decamped to the realm of culture and as it did that it increasingly took on the form of a cult.
Let me illustrate what I mean. Cults define themselves partly by a belief in a lot of things that are slightly weird. In order to be in a cult you have to have some weird beliefs. And one good example of a weird belief is that sexually is entirely constructed socially and it is not biologically rooted. And you can actually have any gender you like. And there are actually multiple genders. Now that is absurd. But to believe it has become a kind of test of your orthodoxy.” Niall Ferguson
Niall Ferguson on the Intellectual Dark Web and Culture Wars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdeFJ4WCqhk
Time mark 33:24 – 34:24
▶︎ Clearly, Niall Ferguson articulated the phenomena we are seeing today. There are aspects of liberal orthodoxy that like a cult or a religion have become articles of faith and cannot be questioned. Examples include climate change, global warming, sexuality as a construct, globalism, open borders, multiculturalism, diversity and so on. Further, those who choose to question today’s liberal orthodoxy are treated not just as wrong but as blasphemers of the truth worthy of contempt.
▶︎ Maybe it is time to stop trying to frame the debate differently in order to be heard. Maybe it is time to frame the debater differently.
▶︎ Let’s begin to openly talk about the orthodoxy of the liberal left as that of a cult. Let’s begin to show people the similarities between the characteristics of cults and the characteristics of liberal orthodoxy. We have seen cults before, many times. Cults share many of the same characteristics. They adhere to a rigid set of beliefs that are unchallengeable. Their followers must accept the beliefs of the cult, not as possible or plausible truths, but as the only truths. Those followers who criticize or challenge the cults beliefs are shunned or excommunicated. Outsiders who challenge the cult’s beliefs are to be treated as blasphemers with contempt and scorn. But most troubling of all is that a cult follower must accept whatever teachings their leaders provides without question, even if those teachings ultimately lead to harm to the follower.
▶︎ So, go on the offensive. Stop letting the liberal left define us. Take the fight directly to them. Define them for what they are – a cult.