Known too many real life bad people hiding behind smiles, crosses and church attendance, sorry.
You may be right about the left but not about the right.
I’m a Mister Rogers Fan Club kind of guy. He speaks to left and right about acceptance and respect and love.
The powerful who hide behind a cloak of respectability is a great evil. What can I say?
Anything that loosens inhibitions is a danger, whether a high school Kavanaugh chugging beers or a Tindr hookup at a dive bar.
I spent 6 yrs Eastern Orthodox Christian. Stayed at a monastary for a bit.
Read the Philokalia cover-to-cover from desert monks on controlling the passions, the risings and fallings of inner bad things and how to cope.
Major convertitis. Drove everybody nuts. Stayed out of the politics of that set of churches (which was generally, boringly conservative) but the self medicinal value was in there.
Right after that? Osho. Total free love kind of guy. Ultimate hippie type.
So I explore my extremes to see where I stand.
Bingo my friend. I’m probably closer to a deep environmentalism kind of guy, although politically I support conservationism over environmentalism as I like public parks managed by a state in order for future generations to be able to hunt/fish/whatever.
I do what I can from where I am. I try to avoid being a hypocrite but I’m also human and give others leeway, unless they’re in a position of power over others, in which case they get due scrutiny.
I expect most humans to fail to the passions, whatever their upbringing as it’s constant work. But some things are clearly avoidable.
I don’t like big govt solutions that shut down clubs and bars, or eliminate dating, as you end up with Pakistan, which forbids sex outside of marriage — but THEN has no marriage age limit, which leads into OTHER problems.
“denying out animal nature ” is what civilization is about though. Controlling the passions (which is anything excitable in you).
Yes, I expect a basic self control out of everybody and those that lack it should receive rightful separation from society or other solutions that allow them to function.
But not in all things. Restricting violence though, is very BASIC aspect of a civilization.
Actually, no. Denying animal nature is not what civilization does. Civilization ADDRESSES animal nature and finds ways to channel it.
(I said a few questionable things in there that I already regret without proper cavaets but I’ll get what I deserve in response )
The left you mostly complain about seems to be the women’s groups that 100 yrs ago pushed to stop alcohol as it led to excessive stirring of the passions in men which led to greater violence against women, who also pushed to get the vote.
I’d say that the free love 60s were NOT so much the left but rather the right who felt their privilege to do anything should extend to EVERYTHING, as it was spearheaded by children of wealthy, conservative parents.
The progressive angle I’m focused with is pro-science, rational, rule-making yet not authoritarian. Diplomatic, appealing to “be reasonable” (pragmatism). Stoic yet allowing for freedom of association and subculture, so long as it stays out of denying basic human rights.
Oh, most of the tumblrites are positively virginal. “cosplay” (costume play) is their thing, playing with words and labels.
I’m fine with militias but in the public square, if you shout, “I will oppress your children if I have power” expect a punch in the nose.
I don’t condone all of antifa but I do some. Jordan himself is a harmless enough wacko that is clueless about what he speaks most about while using slight-of-hand with words to lead people down a garden path. (trained clinical psychologist using priming to its full advantage, so maybe not entirely harmless).
Political rhetoric masked as an AA self help book with Campbellian themes isn’t even all that bad.
But its the people he allows stick with him that he doesn’t disavow that’s trouble.
Sorry but I’m not impressed by him. I did my Campbellian study as a teenager and was all up on Power of Myth for a long time and even dabbled in Jung.
But his strict hierachy is bunk and tying it into popularist evolutionary psychology is even worse as a supposed antidote, puffing men up with ideas of mythological, DNA infused greatness that the world has forgotten but now shall return to to reclaim its rightful order stuff is wacko.
Either/or isn’t necessary here. Hierarchies can be a useful stop-gap in human societies but they are ever fluctuating, branches breaking off and reforming, organic, merging and changing.
Crystallizing its form into something from a book is a recipe for “Why is my Utopia not happening” disaster.
Most women are teachers because the pay is crap. Used to be all men.
I’m not arguing against specialization but against excess beuracracy and also against excess “efficiency”.
80/20 is powerful Dead weight is necessary for brains and organizations alike to function as its not totally dead.
But if you ever work in a large corp, you must know that the actual work rarely falls down hierarchical lines but sideways.
Overselling hierachy and overselling “flat” are both incorrect. Organisms have structure but even cell walls are gas permeable.
You know about NO right? Little bubbles in the body? Good for boners, heart beat and brains?
Medical science thought it was bad. Useless. Get rid of it. What does it do? Until within our very lifetimes did they start to figure it out.
So: Take a study in 2012.
Throw it back in time to pre-history.
Invent a new myth.
Tell everybody that’s the REAL reason for the study results.
EvoPsych is popular trash.
How many generations long is Sweden’s experiment?
How many generations between pre-history (evolution) and today?
What % is Sweden’s experiment, which takes place in a society that is open to a world that is NOT running that experiment, of the total time from pre-history to now?
Talk to me in 4 or 5 generations about failure.
Look at today: Did abolishing slavery in the USA “work”? Are there still new generations of people who say getting rid of slavery was a mistake?
How long is that compared to Sweden’s experiment?
Better off distinguishing personality difference than gender.
You know “manly women” and “womenly men” and all steps inbetween.
This “True Scotsman” fallacy required to make a men vs women thing work is disenginuous.
I think the American experiment is mostly a success, so long as we don’t stray too far.
The current coup attempt underestimated not only the power of the “other side” but also misses one crucial fact:
It’s only the coup side that believes in an inevitable civil war.