LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Duvniask]

The work, I'm not sure if it's actually a book or not, is literally called How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them. The title alone reeks of sophistry.

Well, Shapiro is himself a sophist, but that alone does not discredit his intellect, his political science degree, or his ability to compose a rhetorically and logically convincing argument. I feel like a lot of the recently popular right-wing pundits have emerged as a response to the feigned outrage of leftists and "that's offensive/problematic" being a commonly evoked phrase in argument without any further elaboration. It's a human refutation of what is essentially a non sequitur and serves to reveal the vacuity of that tactic and mindset. People shrieking and burning things when Milo Yiannopolous or Ben Shapiro come to speak more reinforces their point than not. Ideally, no one would be an ass in debate, but, equally ideally, being offended by a sincerely held opinion wouldn't close down debate.

>Be Milo Yiannopolous
>Have sincirely held opinions
Pick one.

The dude is a self-described professional troll who seeks out controversy like a moth seeks out a light in the dark. And whether or not his beliefs are sincere or not, it hardly matters when he mingles with/solicits feedback from Neo-Nazis and White supremacists, plus all the harassment and other shit he's been involved in. Don't act like, for one single second, as if the outrage against people like him is "feigned". Giving people like him a platform to speak is a disgrace.

Now, for Ben Shapiro to mingle with Neo-Nazis would obviously be contradictory to, well, his identity as a Jew, and I do not know of any harassment he has been involved in, so props for not being 100% as bad as Milo, I guess. However, that does not mean he isn't a hack or a racist (against Arabs in particular) or that the ideas he espouses aren't abominable.

Viewing it in such a way is also entirely consistent with how Shapiro conducts himself: in bad faith, because it's not about reaching any sort of truth or more enlightened understanding through debate and argument - it's only about victory, it's about coming out ahead of the opposition and DESTROYING THEM WITH FACTS AND LOGIC.

I don't really disagree with any of that, though I think a lot of arguments across the political spectrum are made in bad faith at the moment. Hence why calling Trump a Nazi has become a popular pastime among people who aren't likely to suffer any deleterious effects or hardships as a result of his leadership.

I wouldn't necessarily say the man himself is a Neo-Nazi, but I think he undoubtedly sympathizes with them, especially after the whole "both sides" thing. I mean, ffs, his announcement speech for the presidential run was him literally calling Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers. The guy is a racist.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Not really? Keep in mind that a vast number of professions with instrumental value within capitalism are not in STEM, starting with, y'know, lawyers. And there's a point to be made that even within STEM, the S (science) isn't looking very hot right now either in terms of employment, growth opportunities and appreciation by the "free market".

What I meant by "he has a point" is that certain parts of non-STEM are "junk degrees". Stuff you won't be getting anywhere with.
Much of non-STEM is good. Not all of it. That's where his point lies, even if only partially.

This ^^ While plenty of non-STEM degrees have merit, over the years, lots of junk degrees in the social sciences have been popping up. Look no further then the degrees that constitute the "grievance studies."

[Ostroeuropa]

The work, I'm not sure if it's actually a book or not, is literally called How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them. The title alone reeks of sophistry.

Well, Shapiro is himself a sophist, but that alone does not discredit his intellect, his political science degree, or his ability to compose a rhetorically and logically convincing argument. I feel like a lot of the recently popular right-wing pundits have emerged as a response to the feigned outrage of leftists and "that's offensive/problematic" being a commonly evoked phrase in argument without any further elaboration. It's a human refutation of what is essentially a non sequitur and serves to reveal the vacuity of that tactic and mindset. People shrieking and burning things when Milo Yiannopolous or Ben Shapiro come to speak more reinforces their point than not. Ideally, no one would be an ass in debate, but, equally ideally, being offended by a sincerely held opinion wouldn't close down debate.

Viewing it in such a way is also entirely consistent with how Shapiro conducts himself: in bad faith, because it's not about reaching any sort of truth or more enlightened understanding through debate and argument - it's only about victory, it's about coming out ahead of the opposition and DESTROYING THEM WITH FACTS AND LOGIC.

I don't really disagree with any of that, though I think a lot of arguments across the political spectrum are made in bad faith at the moment. Hence why calling Trump a Nazi has become a popular pastime among people who aren't likely to suffer any deleterious effects or hardships as a result of his leadership.

I agree with you here. The left wing has created the environment for bad faith on these issues. Careful nuanced argument isn't effective against hysterical accusations, outright lies, and demands of censorship, and so the counter-progressive reaction has ranged from attempting nuanced argument all the way through to similar bad faith and spectacle based nonsense, with spectacle being what appears to work best unfortunately. You could feasibly blame capitalist media for that dynamic in general.

[United Muscovite Nations]

And now, for our right-wing self-own of the day: Ben Shapiro, political science major, shitting on non-STEM college education.

He's not the one who should be saying it, but he has a point.

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

[Proctopeo]

He's not the one who should be saying it, but he has a point.

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

A lot of junk degrees don't teach you anything of value either, like, for example, the "grievance studies".
If it's one that won't get you anywhere, but it's at least somewhat worth knowing (medieval French literature could at least be grounds for interesting conversation, for example), that's why you either minor in it, or take a double major with something else that will.

Also, nice condescension, UMN. Really classy...

[United Muscovite Nations]

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

A lot of junk degrees don't teach you anything of value either, like, for example, the "grievance studies".
If it's one that won't get you anywhere, but it's at least somewhat worth knowing (medieval French literature could at least be grounds for interesting conversation, for example), that's why you either minor in it, or take a double major with something else that will.

Also, nice condescension, UMN. Really classy...

Most non-STEM degrees give you value, like degrees in history, literature, linguistics, etc.

[Liriena]

"grievance studies".

I'm sure you've thoroughly examined the curricula of a representative sample of those to assess their worth.

[Aellex]

He's not the one who should be saying it, but he has a point.

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

[Liriena]

He's not the one who should be saying it, but he has a point.

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Remember when people studied stuff just because they liked learning and discovering stuff and sharing it with friends and now we live in a society where we idolize those people and their contributions but also condescend to those who want to do the same today because it doesn't turn a quick profit?

I mean, imagine if some STEM-lord had come up to Rousseau or Locke and told him "yeah, daug, all that philosophy stuff sounds really cute but I can't, like, build a car with it so maybe get an engineering degree and get a real job".

[United Muscovite Nations]

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

>thinking learning for the sake of learning is valuable is just being privileged
lol

[Liriena]

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

This has been true throughout human history, unfortunately: a small minority of wealthy people with lots of leisure time have kinda always been the ones who could take the luxury of dedicating their lives to science in general and the social sciences in particular. But that's more of the fault of a shitty economic system that punishes non-instrumentally valuable curiosity among the working class.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

This has been true throughout human history, unfortunately: a small minority of wealthy people with lots of leisure time have kinda always been the ones who could take the luxury of dedicating their lives to science in general and the social sciences in particular. But that's more of the fault of a shitty economic system that punishes non-instrumentally valuable curiosity among the working class.

^

[Conserative Morality]

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

Cannot confirm; educated individual from a working class family in a poor area currently eating oatmeal for the next week until I get paid from a job that my education did not help me get and does not help me perform. My only regrets are debt.

[Aellex]

Not for most of us that hadn't had the chance to be born in a bourgeois family, no.
Viewing education as more than making money is truly the privilege of those that have and will never be concerned by it.

>thinking learning for the sake of learning is valuable is just being privileged
lol

Yeah, it definitely is. I'm not doing stem because I like it. I'm doing it because I don't want to be unemployed nor a menial role.
Again, it's cool you have daddy and mommy to give you pocket money and finance your "leisurely" studies but your case is a rare and privileged one.
For anyone not in the upper class, studies are for finding a job and that's it.

[Conserative Morality]

>thinking learning for the sake of learning is valuable is just being privileged
lol

Yeah, it definitely is. I'm not doing stem because I like it. I'm doing it because I don't want to be unemployed nor a menial role.
Again, it's cool you have daddy and mommy to give you pocket money and finance your "leisurely" studies but your case is a rare and privileged one.
For anyone not in the upper class, studies are for finding a job and that's it.

>> when you come from Appalachia, literally the poorest region in America, and even here people don't think like that

Fucking lol.

[Fahran]

>Be Milo Yiannopolous
>Have sincirely held opinions
Pick one.

The dude is a self-described professional troll who seeks out controversy like a moth seeks out a light in the dark. And whether or not his beliefs are sincere or not, it hardly matters when he mingles with/solicits feedback from Neo-Nazis and White supremacists, plus all the harassment and other shit he's been involved in. Don't act like, for one single second, as if the outrage against people like him is "feigned". Giving people like him a platform to speak is a disgrace.

I'm well aware that he's a professional troll. That doesn't change the fact that he represents a concrete right-wing reaction to left-wing gate-keeping and emotionally-infused, grievance-fueled argumentation. When people call him a racist, they can very seldom pull up concrete examples of racist comments or behaviors exhibited by him because they're so used to the word being used as an argument's ending. The political left was in this place well before Milo Yiannopolous came along. I'd probably call him an anti-feminist and an Islamophobe based on the rather little I've seen, but howling when he makes a point isn't a rebuttal. It's a loss. It's not enough to call someone racist. You have to explain why the point is wrong.

Now, for Ben Shapiro to mingle with Neo-Nazis would obviously be contradictory to, well, his identity as a Jew, and I do not know of any harassment he has been involved in, so props for not being 100% as bad as Milo, I guess. However, that does not mean he isn't a hack or a racist (against Arabs in particular) or that the ideas he espouses aren't abominable.

His ideas are about as controversial as those of mainstream Palestinian and anti-Israel Muslim activists in private in all honesty if the recent rhetoric and Antisemitic Twitter/Instagram pages are anything to go by. Not really commendable, but a lot of people rushed to defend, rationalize, or explain away those sentiments going the other way on the grounds that Jews possess systemic power and privilege. Never mind that the opposite is true in most Arab-majority countries and that about 800,000 of us were ethnically cleansed without garnering additional sympathy or any compensation in the form of land in places where we might settle. And I don't think Breitbart is actually a Neo-Nazi outlet. A lot of stuff they parrot is standard right-wing populist nonsense.

I wouldn't necessarily say the man himself is a Neo-Nazi, but I think he undoubtedly sympathizes with them, especially after the whole "both sides" thing. I mean, ffs, his announcement speech for the presidential run was him literally calling Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers. The guy is a racist.

I highly doubt the man with a Jewish daughter, Jewish grandchildren, and a Jewish son-in-law has a large overlap in opinion or overt sympathies for Nazis. He actually seems to have quite a high opinion of ethnic and racial minorities when he gains something from it or people like him. With regard to the "both sides" thing, he was being unnecessarily tentative to people who, frankly, didn't deserve anyone's sympathy. It's about what I'd expect from a narcissist who doesn't understand politics. I'd call Trump a racist, but I'm convinced every politician over the age of sixty is a closet racist by our standards. I wouldn't really call him a white supremacist or a Neo-Nazi.

[Kubra]

I mean tbf if formal education is meant it's pretty true, schooling means paycheque chasing.
That said, assuming none of us is being paid for our shitposring on obscure history, it's fair to say that informal (or in some cases formal, thx student debt) education has some value to us that is not monetary

[United Muscovite Nations]

>thinking learning for the sake of learning is valuable is just being privileged
lol

Yeah, it definitely is. I'm not doing stem because I like it. I'm doing it because I don't want to be unemployed nor a menial role.
Again, it's cool you have daddy and mommy to give you pocket money and finance your "leisurely" studies but your case is a rare and privileged one.
For anyone not in the upper class, studies are for finding a job and that's it.

Even if that were true, it's no reason to dismiss non-STEM fields. History, philosophy, linguistics, etc. do provide an invaluable service. And, believe it or not, I can actually get a job with a history degree, especially if I continue my studies.

[Fahran]

I tend to view education more as a way of producing better people/citizens as opposed to a way of producing better human resources. I think too many on the political right tend to be dismissive of the liberal arts and humanities. That said, it was still hilarious when several European leaders cut out departments perceived as being less rigorous and more akin to ideological echo chambers. Really, it happens everywhere, but I got pretty tired of hearing everything vaguely cylindrical or rectangular being described as a phallus in a few of the classes I took.

[Hanafuridake]

I highly doubt the man with a Jewish daughter, Jewish grandchildren, and a Jewish son-in-law has a large overlap in opinion or overt sympathies for Nazis. He actually seems to have quite a high opinion of ethnic and racial minorities when he gains something from it or people like him. With regard to the "both sides" thing, he was being unnecessarily tentative to people who, frankly, didn't deserve anyone's sympathy. It's about what I'd expect from a narcissist who doesn't understand politics. I'd call Trump a racist, but I'm convinced every politician over the age of sixty is a closet racist by our standards. I wouldn't really call him a white supremacist or a Neo-Nazi.

Trump comes across as a racist grandpa more than anything. Not an ideological racist but someone who undoubtedly subscribes to ethnic stereotypes (whether positive or negative) with a tendency to blurt out uncomfortable statements at the dinner table. From my experience, it seems quite common among older people, and explains why Trump isn't the most politically correct person while not being an outright 14/88er.

[Aellex]

Amazingly, education is about more than just making money.

Remember when people studied stuff just because they liked learning and discovering stuff and sharing it with friends and now we live in a society where we idolize those people and their contributions but also condescend to those who want to do the same today because it doesn't turn a quick profit?

I mean, imagine if some STEM-lord had come up to Rousseau or Locke and told him "yeah, daug, all that philosophy stuff sounds really cute but I can't, like, build a car with it so maybe get an engineering degree and get a real job".

Tbh, Rousseau really should have gotten a job rather than abandoning all of his children and leeching off other people's money and goodwill.
It's really hard to have sympathy for the man when you learn about him.

Pascal is the best exemple that picking STEM to earn one's bread and only doing philosophy and humanities for one's leisure is the best way to go.

[Aellex]

Yeah, it definitely is. I'm not doing stem because I like it. I'm doing it because I don't want to be unemployed nor a menial role.
Again, it's cool you have daddy and mommy to give you pocket money and finance your "leisurely" studies but your case is a rare and privileged one.
For anyone not in the upper class, studies are for finding a job and that's it.

>> when you come from Appalachia, literally the poorest region in America, and even here people don't think like that

Fucking lol.

Maybe you've got the reason why they're so poor. :^)

[Conserative Morality]

Maybe you've got the reason why they're so poor. :^)

Yep, we're just swimming in degrees out here.

Or illiteracy. I can never remember which one.

People who take education for granted are generally those with a mediocre education, not a good one, nor an absent one.

[Aellex]

Yeah, it definitely is. I'm not doing stem because I like it. I'm doing it because I don't want to be unemployed nor a menial role.
Again, it's cool you have daddy and mommy to give you pocket money and finance your "leisurely" studies but your case is a rare and privileged one.
For anyone not in the upper class, studies are for finding a job and that's it.

Even if that were true, it's no reason to dismiss non-STEM fields. History, philosophy, linguistics, etc. do provide an invaluable service. And, believe it or not, I can actually get a job with a history degree, especially if I continue my studies.

Never said that they don't provide an invaluable service.
Just that the whole "education should be for the sack of knowledge!" shtick is as self-grandizing/righteous and bourgeois as it gets.

[Fahran]

Trump comes across as a racist grandpa more than anything. Not an ideological racist but someone who undoubtedly subscribes to ethnic stereotypes (whether positive or negative) with a tendency to blurt out uncomfortable statements at the dinner table. From my experience, it seems quite common among older people, and explains why Trump isn't the most politically correct person while not being an outright 14/88er.

That was my rough estimation of him as well. I actually would call him vaguely Antisemitic and racist, just not in the ways that a lot of people have in mind. I thought Clinton had essentially the same beliefs as well. They were just concealed a lot better - in part because the media didn't really dig into a lot of the things she'd allegedly said in the past.