"When demands for consensus are intense, people may clam up or falsify their own beliefs. When truth-seeking can get you fired, some people stop seeking the truth." writes
Thoughtful deliberation is never so difficult as in moments of national trauma––and never so important. I learned that lesson after 9/11, during a necessary but flawed response to evil. It should inform our thinking in this moment of national trauma.
In the stifling, anti-intellectual cultural climate of 2020, where solidarity is preferred to dissent, I hear echoes of a familiar Manichaean logic: Choose a side. You are either an antiracist or an ally of white supremacy. Are you with us or against us?
Magnificent thoughtful essay by ⁦⁩ ⁦:⁩ The Perils of 'With Us or Against Us'. “as if a failure to quickly publish something that conforms absolutely to highly contested interpretations of anti-racism deserves opprobrium”
I wanted to compare and contrast this moment of national trauma w/ the aughts partly bc we needn't harken back to (say) Maoism to describe excesses in this moment--we can see similar errors other Americans w different politics made in the recent past
"With hindsight, though, I can see that thoughtful deliberation is never so vital as in the aftermath of national traumas." Solid stuff from
Excellent article on illiberalism, . I’ve been shouting to the rooftops about thos since I encountered PC in college in the 1990s. But today, illiberalism has made its way from college campuses to activists who are driving the Left’s agenda.
We can achieve more good and harm fewer people with more frank debate, less aversion to dissent, fewer appeals to moral clarity at the expense of analytic rigor, not the Manichaean logic in the stifling, anti-intellectual cultural climate now By
"Absolutely, Black lives matter, which is part of why everyone should encourage constructive dissent, even when it seems frustratingly out of touch with the trauma and emotion of the moment," writes
“We are horrified at having violated your trust. We deserve your outrage and disappointment," stated the bookstore. "[We] will no longer stand by while human rights are being violated. To be silent is to be complicit....”
The Perils of 'With Us or Against Us' "Unanimity is neither possible nor necessary to fight racism. On the contrary, attempts to secure unanimity can undermine the fight."
"[O]ne member of the listserv wrote, 'try not to overanalyze the statistical validity of the research paper and think about the broader impact it will have if people perceive it to be true.' That standard demands that people self-censor the truth."
Well-argued piece from ⁦
I can give you some deeply considered views and recent examples of things I object to
This: "When truth-seeking can get you fired, some people stop seeking the truth."
As writes, we have reached a point where we are supposed to (as one person exhorted) ignore “the statistical validity” of research and “think about the broader impact it will have if people perceive it to be true” instead. ie DON’T SPEAK THE TRUTH
As many embrace policing reforms, a distinct, separable struggle is unfolding in the realm of ideas: a many-front crusade aimed at vanquishing white supremacy, hazily defined. It is as vulnerable to excesses as any struggle against abstract evils.
They removed an educator from her leadership role for speech that is clearly protected by the First Amendment, engaging in viewpoint discrimination. That is an unlawful violation of her civil rights.
Side-note: I flag two examples in my latest of clear violations of the civil rights of educators at public institutions. There are others. At any moment that should be a warning sign, given historical antecedents.
Liberal deliberation is not sufficient to solve problems as difficult as reining in police abuses or ending systemic racism. But it is necessary no matter how just or urgent the cause. If you haven't read it before, I highly recommend *Kindly Inquisitors*
Absolutely, Black lives matter, which is part of why everyone should encourage constructive dissent, even when it seems frustratingly out of touch with the trauma and emotion of the moment
Identifying changes that will achieve equality is hard. Avoiding unintended consequences is harder. Without a healthy deliberative process, avoidable catastrophes are more likely.
Yet again, says what needs sayin', "The Perils of ‘With Us or Against Us’" Whoever you are, I must be against you because there's no way you get to dictate what I think or do.
Here's a feature of the campus that has fully transitioned to the mainstream: the expectation that institutions explicitly take the side of the aggrieved and that they're perpetuating violence against them if they don't do it sufficiently (via ).
The Perils of ‘With Us or Against Us’
'The Perils of "With Us or Against Us"' - thought-provoking article from
Important piece by . I also want to say: Hat's off to the graphic designer who made the image below.
Sometimes, the best really do lack all conviction.
"Absolutely, Black lives matter, which is part of why everyone should encourage constructive dissent, even when it seems frustratingly out of touch with the trauma and emotion of the moment," writes