I made a video regarding the definition of ‘The Regressive Left’ but I only really touched on the moral relativism that many on the left have embraced in the name of ‘tolerance’ and ‘cosmopolitanism’ but unfortunately it ends up devolving into excusing some of the most barbaric practices under the banner of being tolerant, cosmopolitan, anti-imperialist etc. but there is also an undertone of racism that comes with such view points where they’re implying that not all humans are worthy of human rights and that they would arbitrate whether someone is worthy of having their human rights defended. Such a stance does have an impact as we’ve seen when has come to the Jewish community within Germany ( link ) where the denial over the origins of antisemitism has resulted in this conclusion being drawn: “A local court sentenced the Palestinians to probation and stated that the act of arson was not anti-Semitic because the men sought to draw attention to the Gaza war”. Lets call a spade a spade, it is antisemitism plain and simple – a hatred baked into the minds of the individuals concerned because of a culture for 60 years has looked for a scapegoat as to why nothing has budged an inch – economically or socially, but apparently a small group of Jews on a plot of land granted by the UN 60+ years ago is the root of all things bad in the Arab world. If you look outside of your country to blame someone for the decisions that you have made then you’re doomed to keep making the same mistakes because you flat our refuse to address that the society and culture which is at the source of what is wrong in your country. Side note: dictators still need to placate to populist demands so it isn’t as though Mubarak just dreamed up ideas on his own when it came to treating Coptic Christians as second class citizens or the appalling treatment of LGBT people – he listened to the sweaty masses and gave them what they wanted as so long as it didn’t undermine his own power.
Unfortunately I only touched on one particular aspect to the whole regressive left thesis which meant I failed to address the other side which is the attempt to silence alternative opinions, passing laws under the guise of ‘hate speech’, the rise of so-called ‘safe space’ and ‘language police’ on campus where – rather than universities being a place where ideas are challenged and debated the institutions are being turned into little more than glorified baby sitting agencies that are more concerned about feelings rather than encouraging the formation of not only new ideas but ensuring that these ideas are built on a solid foundation. Debates and discussions at university should be a full contact sport – it shouldn’t be for shrinking violets who want to hide and speak softly and never have their ideas challenged in the name of ‘diversity’ and ‘tolerance’. That doesn’t even go into the ‘trigger warnings’ and the tumblrisation that is taking place where, rather than these precious snow flakes thrown into the deep end and told “swim” their thin skin is catered for and thus brings down the quality of academic discourse over all. Take what is happening at University of California over language policing ( link) with the usual caveat that:
UC’s response has been that the list doesn’t reflect university policy and that no one is actually being forbidden to use such language.
But has I’ve said on another forum, guidelines, even informal guidelines can and do have a chilling effect on freedom of speech in much the same way the your mother will ask you whether you can do something for her and she’ll say “oh, but if you’re busy that is ok” but we all know what that means – she’ll be disappointed in you if you don’t do it so effectively there is really only one choice. A good analogy of how informal guidelines end up becoming guidelines in all but name:
And yes, some of those examples of ‘micro-aggressions’ ( link ) are cringe worthy and possibly make the person sound like a dickhead but lets not try to make out that these are a major problem. The only thing that the University of California has successfully done is take something that was a non-issue and now created an issue out of something that was never a problem in the first place and fed into the narrative that college campuses are turning into a giant hug box. Heck, there was Christina Hoff Sommers who was going to speak on a campus and the hysteria of wanting ‘safe spaces’ and a giant group hug because she might say something that conflicts with what they believe:
Heck, that doesn’t even go into the issue regarding the rent a mob that came along and disrupted a lecture put on by Warren Farrell at the University of Toronto because god forbid a contrary opinion is heard so instead we see these ‘crusaders’ take it upon themselves to ensure that an alternative view point isn’t heard by pulling on a fire alarm, assaulting and harassing people trying to get into the lecture and so on:
Personally I have no interest in what Warren Farrell was going to speak about so to put it bluntly in that I don’t have a dog in this fight but what I do find aberrant is the fact that rather than engage and debate Warren regarding his view point we see the regressive left take it upon themselves to silence alternative view points because once again special snow flakes apparently need protecting from alternative view points. Rather than the left being the voice of progress, debate, and academic discourse what we’re seeing is almost a cementing of the mind akin to what we see in some religious circles where “I have the truth and I’ll make fucking sure that you in no way can threaten the truth that I believe in” – they’re turning into the very intolerant people they routinely straw man as the enemy of ‘freedom’.