SJW, their Politically Correct (PC) game explained - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All sociological topics not appropriate or suited to other areas of the board.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14740709
How the politically correct act/game society.


Jump to 4 minutes and 22 seconds.

If you let it run for a while he later start talking about PC authoritarians and PC liberals and how they are different.


The person in the video is a politically incorrect professor at the University of Toronto. He might get fired in the near future for his views on free speech and how they conflict with the law in Canada regarding gender pronouns. The first four minutes of his video is about that recent past, you can skip past that.


He has the standard Professor kookiness IMO. That aside, what do you think about his ideas on the PC game and Authoritarians/liberals?
Would you guys view his break down of PC authoritarians and PC liberal as correct? A useful tool?
Do you think his "the PC game" is a correct description of Social Justice Warriors?
Is he non-ideologue (as he claims) and insightful, or is it eloquent bull?
Last edited by Thunderhawk on 22 Nov 2016 00:54, edited 1 time in total.
#14740741
mikema63 wrote:The label SJW is a recently invented slur against anyone who disagrees with some right wing social value or another.
The label SJW is for people who racially, sexually, etc. audit a profession or group and chalk up disparities to systemic oppression, typically the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy, and with support from institutions (who lord over increasingly diverse and therefore fragile western societies and need to reinvent themselves) use illiberal methods to 'right' this 'wrong'. At best they are radical left liberals seeking to atone for historical wrongs, at worst they are cranks pushing guilt over things that cannot be changed and selling snake oil to alleviate that guilt, like speeches and books on safe spaces. You get SJWs when it makes money to be somewhat left wing.
#14740742
Right, Conscript, and this is why using it is derogatory. It's rare that people are what you describe as a SJW. Recognizing racism and systemic oppression does not make one a SJW.

You get racist cunts when you are the opposite of a SJW, Conscript.
#14740748
Please, white people are some of the least ethnically conscious and bound people on the planet (I mean you're a liberal that married an Asian, fine example, most cultures don't have people like you), and have given birth to the liberal enlightenment that champions individual agency and equality of opportunity.

Jordan Peterson is a true intellectual born from that legacy, he's committed to liberal values and therefore hates both the alt right and the SJW left. He's a manifestation of campus as a safe space for intellect and nothing more. That is enough to make him an enemy of political correctness, which reflects on how much of a problem this shit is.

This is way beyond simple anti racism.
Last edited by Conscript on 22 Nov 2016 02:33, edited 1 time in total.
#14740758
"...each strata..."

Strata is the plural for stratum. I just had to get that off my chest. He's a professor, for Pete's sake.

As for what I think: he's overgeneralizes, he overstates, and he oversimplifies.

His PC game oversimplifies complex issues.

He ascribes moral superiority and shallow self-absorbed idealism to the entirety of those who champion for the oppressed.

Injustice is often the result of inequality, he seems to imply it's never the result of inequality.
#14740781
Igor Antunov wrote:See video above. That self described SJW wants to teach your kids history. Gets his ass torn apart by lowly journalist.


Actually, no he didn't. He's a student, not a professional journalist with a lot of experience doing live interviews, and agree with him or not (I don't agree with him re: the flag) I think he came off very well. He was articulate, he was civil, he didn't take Carlson's bait.

They're a destructive breed, and need to be eliminated from academia unless you want your kids to become mediocre.
A very good thing to do for one's kids before sending them off to college is to teach them to think for themselves, to evaluate and test their sources of information, and to remind them that their professors aren't gods, they're mere mortals like the rest of us.
#14740786
anna wrote:Actually, no he didn't. He's a student, not a professional journalist with a lot of experience doing live interviews, and agree with him or not (I don't agree with him re: the flag) I think he came off very well. He was articulate, he was civil, he didn't take Carlson's bait.


He says 'um' at least twenty times, and quickly responds to Carlson's questions with broad generalizations. However, when asked to provide specifics, he stammers and deflects to another topic. Yes, he was civil, but articulate he was not.
#14740790
Blondie wrote:He says 'um' at least twenty times, and quickly responds to Carlson's questions with broad generalizations. However, when asked to provide specifics, he stammers and deflects to another topic. Yes, he was civil, but articulate he was not.


You counted? Seriously, did you count the "ums?" :)

Again - he's a student, not a professional journalist with experience doing live interviews on national TV. Who among us wouldn't stammer or say "um" when on live TV? For an average person he did just fine, and yes, he was articulate.
#14740793
anna wrote:You counted? Seriously, did you count the "ums?" :)

Again - he's a student, not a professional journalist with experience doing live interviews on national TV. Who among us wouldn't stammer or say "um" when on live TV? For an average person he did just fine, and yes, he was articulate.


As a former high school speech and debate coach, the word 'um' is incredibly grating on me. I know eighth graders with better interview diction.

For a history teacher and college student (especially at a school such as Hampshire), he was not articulate, especially given that he had time to prepare. This wasn't joe blow picked up from the street, from whom stammers and awkward pauses would be forgivable.
#14740794
Blondie wrote:As a former high school speech and debate coach, the word 'um' is incredibly grating on me. I know eighth graders with better interview diction.



He was Joe Blow. Maybe you just don't want to allow him to be Joe Blow.

I understand about things like "um" being grating, I think the same about people using "loose" for lose. However I think you're being unreasonably hard on someone who's most likely unused to being interviewed on live TV, and unless they gave him the questions ahead of time, he didn't have time to prepare.

You can have the last word, this isn't the hill I plan to die on. (And if you're going to jump on my ending that last sentence with a preposition, save your energy. I'll claim artistic license. ;) )

And if he had been an Israeli citizen, the usual […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Trump is an extraordinarily dangerous narcissist[…]

@Scamp Bombing Mexico is the STUPIDIEST idea I[…]

No one is more manly than me. We know there is […]