Tag: critical theory

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. An Open Letter to the Woke Left

 

To my “woke” fellow Americans:

As a forty-something conservative woman, I think you are leading the country to disaster with your rigid codes of conduct, your rejection of the US and its values, and the divisions you inflame among American citizens. Why should you listen to me? For what it’s worth, I have a perspective broadened by living overseas. I’ve witnessed the contrasts in living conditions between the US and other parts of the world. I know something of the gulf in worldviews that results, outside the West, in truly culturally acceptable favoritism and inequality.

Helen Pluckrose, one of the three authors of the Grievance Studies and editor-in-chief of Aero magazine, sits with Bridget to discuss the much richer role for women in history than the lenses by which we’re viewing them today, the contradictions in feminism and social justice activism, the argument against post-modernism, and the inherent problems with intersectionality. Helen talks about her own journey from a care assistant in hospitals, to getting a Masters in Early Modern Literature with a focus on religious writing by and about women, her conversion from a Christian to an atheist, and how she met James Lindsay and became involved in the Grievance Studies. It’s a fascinating conversation covering complex topics with a true master of critical theory. Helen helps breakdown the fundamental contradictions within intersectionality and offers Bridget a way to formulate a compassionate and rational response to the intersectional argument.

Full transcript available here: WiW50-HelenPluckrose-Transcript

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Losing the ‘Narrative’ Narrative?

 

Foucault mis readerIn the process of critically assessing the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” an author at The Spectator managed to misread Foucault. Please hang in there! I promise this is worth your while. I offer some helpful context for the “1619 Project,” and show that it is very vulnerable to attack from a post-modern icon. You need not trot out conservative arguments that fall on deaf ears. You can turn Foucault on the New York Times.

John Hinderaker, of Power Line Blog, offered a commonsense analysis of the NYT “racism” narrative:

A normal person might wonder why the Democratic Party, in the person of the New York Times, is so obsessed with slavery, which was abolished 154 years ago. Isn’t it time to move on? Forty or fifty years ago, that is what just about everyone thought. But the Times, on behalf of the Democratic Party, is trying to stir up race hatred. Democrats think racial hostility is essential to defeating President Trump in 2020–their paramount goal, next to which everything else is an afterthought. They face a problem, in that Trump has been the best president for blacks, certainly since Reagan, maybe forever. So, they say, let’s focus on 1619. And then go out and vote for Democrats, the party of slavery and Jim Crow.

Member Post

 

One muggy August day, three friends stood atop the brow of a hill overlooking the Aegean coast. Together, they cast their glances past the shoreline to the open sea beyond. Sunlight, almost caustic in its intensity, baked the crags and inlets and myriad tiny islands, all of which seemed to hover above the blinding, glistening […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Language and Reality: How the Left Uses Ambiguity to Frame Issues

 

A couple of weeks ago, I had an in-class discussion with one of my students regarding the limits of language. I asked the student, point blank, if language merely described reality or if language could create reality. It’s a slippery subject, and the young man in question took considerable time before answering that he believed that language could only describe reality, not create it.

I pressed him further. “Suppose, young man, I said something about you that was truly hurtful, something that wounded you to your very core. Would those words not create a chemical state of being in your mind? Would these words not create a series of endorphins pulsing through your brain that we colloquially refer to as anger? Would I not, in some way, have created a reality in your mind?”