DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 9172--------------------------------------------------
True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 2, 2021, 11:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00031224211041094
[quote]Our results indicate that higher education liberalizes
moral concerns for most students, but it also departs from the
standard liberal profile by promoting moral absolutism rather
than relativism.[/quote]
Leftists are becoming moral absolutists. Thus by definition,
leftists are ceasing to be liberals. This is also known as
wokeness.
[quote]Some contemporary accounts depict universities as
puritanically committed to a liberal “culture of victimhood”
(Campbell and Manning 2018; Lukianoff and Haidt 2018; Pluckrose
and Lindsay 2020), a fact seemingly at odds with previous
critiques of “permissive” moral relativism (Hunter 1991; Wuthnow
1989).[/quote]
A relativist can never be sure who is the victim in any
encounter, whereas a culture of victimhood demands certainty
among the victims that they are victims. Thus it is logically
necessary that wokeness is anti-relativist.
[quote]Orthodoxy sees moral truth as coming from an “external,
definable, and transcendent authority” that provides fixed
standards for behavior (Hunter 1991:44). Progressivism, on the
other hand, regards moral truth as relative and subject to
revision according to the evolving needs of humans and
societies. Orthodoxy is generally associated with political
conservatism, and progressivism is tied to liberalism.[/quote]
This is why I keep saying we are not progressives. True Leftism
is better labelled as heterodoxy: we still believe in fixed
standards of behaviour, just not the standards rightists believe
in! An even better description is to say, as was said in ancient
times: we and they worship different gods. (They of course
worship Yahweh, whereas we worship the true God. But those who
revise morality "according to the evolving needs of humans" in
fact also worship Yahweh by prioritizing human interests. This
is why we say False Leftists are closer to rightists than to
True Leftists.
[quote]Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) posits five innate
psychological foundations that trigger automatic gut-reactions
and motivate judgments of right and wrong (Haidt 2012). These
include the “individualizing” foundations of care and
justice—individualizing in that they privilege the well-being of
individuals—and the “binding” foundations of loyalty, authority,
and sanctity that serve to uphold social order. Conservatives in
the United States endorse individualizing and binding
foundations about equally. Liberals emphasize individualizing
foundations somewhat more strongly than conservatives and place
much less weight on binding foundations (Graham et al. 2009;
Koleva et al. 2012).[/quote]
This is misleading. Leftists are trying to destroy the Western
social order, so at present must undermine binding foundations
as a matter of strategy. This does not imply that, should a time
one day come when we have built a social order based on leftist
values, we would be similarly nonchalant about binding
foundations then. While there may exist genuine liberals who
will always try to undermine binding foundations (irrespective
of what kind of social order they hold together), they are to be
distinguished from True Leftists who are merely opposed to the
binding foundations of the currently predominant social order,
not to binding foundations in general. We are not against
loyalty, just against loyalty to Western civilization! We are
not against authority, just against the authority of Westerners.
We are not against sanctity, just against the sanctity of
Eurocentrism.
[quote]Egalitarian values concerned with minority group rights
became a hallmark of the growing college-educated class,
distinguishing them from the “outmoded” or “bigoted”
traditionalism of the less educated.[/quote]
These are not necessarily egalitarian values. It is perfectly
possible to be concerned with a minority not because you believe
the minority to be equal to the majority, but because you
believe the minority to be superior to the majority.
[quote]Recent accounts indicate that trends toward
identity-based morality may have evolved into a “culture of
victimhood” on college campuses (Campbell and Manning 2018;
Lukianoff and Haidt 2018; Pluckrose and Lindsay 2020). According
to Campbell and Manning (2018), victimhood culture grants moral
status to those who suffer, valorizes those who vigilantly
monitor conduct for signs of oppression, and treats opposition
to its ideals as severe offenses.[/quote]
This is poorly described. Those (victims) who suffer as a
consequence of violence initiated by others are not the same as
those (oppressors) who suffer as a consequence of retaliatory
violence to the violence they initiated. The latter receive no
status no matter how much they suffer.
[quote]these developments raise the intriguing possibility that
higher education encourages a modified liberal morality:
although the college-educated share a high level of concern for
others and relatively low concern for traditional social order,
they depart from the common liberal profile by infusing their
beliefs with a sense of moral certainty, which is seemingly at
odds with an emphasis on moral relativism.[/quote]
So why still call it liberal? Just call it woke or True Leftist!
[quote]Smith (2014) advances similar conclusions in his
reflection on American sociology, arguing that sociologists are
engaged in a “sacred project” aimed at achieving individual
emancipation, self-determination, and personal affirmation for
all people (cf. Martin 2016).[/quote]
If the idea of a sacred project is possible in leftist minds,
this proves that sanctity remains a leftist value, and hence
that such leftists are indeed not liberals (who have been
defined as disbelievers in sanctity).
With that said, the woke obviously do not want individual
emancipation, self-determination and personal affirmation for
oppressors, so the idea that we want these for all people is
nonsense. In fact, we want all oppressors burning in hell for
eternity.
#Post#: 13548--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 22, 2022, 8:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Keep fat-shaming in order to accentuate our divergence from
False Leftism!
HTML https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/university-of-illinois-chicago-wants-to-cancel-racist-word-obesity/
[quote]The University of Illinois Chicago’s school of public
health published an article by a dietitian claiming the medical
term is “racist” and should be replaced with the wordy term
“people with larger bodies.”[/quote]
How about "people with larger carbon footprints because of their
larger bodies"?
[quote]Author Amanda Montgomery, RN, argued that race scientists
used “fatness and differing body characteristics” to classify
black people as “less civilized” and “as a way to justify
slavery, racism and classism, and control women,” according to
her health brief, entitled “Addressing weight stigma and
fatphobia in public health.”[/quote]
In reality, of course:
[img width=1280
height=656]
HTML https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Body-mass-index.jpg[/img]
Fat is a cold winter adaptation, you False Leftist idiot:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/temperature-effects/
(Note that Montgomery herself is "white". She is stereotyping
"blacks" as fat, but merely trying to claim that this is not a
negative thing.)
[quote]Montgomery also contends that losing weight “has
detrimental effects on our physiology” and many people can’t
become thinner because of “uncontrollable genetic or
environmental factors.”[/quote]
But they can voluntarily refrain from reproducing. Imagine how
much better the world would be if the next generation were
populated solely by the offspring of people in the green areas!
[quote]Obesity is defined by the World Health Organization as
having a body mass index over 30. The organization says the
condition is “preventable” by eating healthy food and engaging
in regular exercise.
A person’s BMI is calculated by dividing their body weight in
kilograms by their height in meters squared. The medical
community considers a “healthy” BMI to be between 20 and 25.
Montgomery argues that the BMI is a flawed measurement that is
“not representative of the entire human population,” because it
does not consider health behaviors or body composition.[/quote]
This is true. Non-ectomorphs can become low-BMI via dieting.
They are still not ectomorphs. Therefore ectomorph supremacism
makes more sense than low-BMI supremacism.
Recall:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/msg13049/#msg13049
#Post#: 13654--------------------------------------------------
Re: Psychological decolonization
By: guest55 Date: May 25, 2022, 9:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Your post just reminded me of this: (12 years old now)
Southwest Airlines Boots Skinny Woman Off Plane for Fat
Passenger
[quote]Southwest Airlines recently kicked a skinny woman off a
plane to make room for an oversized 14-year-old girl who needed
two seats, a move that has prompted at least one expert to call
for airlines to start selling a handful of special big seats on
flights for bigger Americans.
Normally, we hear about passengers who are too fat to fly --
people so obese that they can't squeeze into their chair and
never thought to purchase a second ticket. Remember when
Southwest booted Clerk's director and actor Kevin Smith from a
flight in February because of his heft?
But this time it was a 5-foot-4, 110-pound Sacramento,
Calif.-area woman who was forced from the plane.
"It didn't seem right that I should have to leave to accommodate
someone who had only paid for one seat," the anonymous woman
told the Sacramento Bee.
The catch here is that the woman was flying standby and paid
full fare for the last available seat on the flight from Las
Vegas to Sacramento, and the extra-large passenger here happened
to be a 14-year-old girl traveling on her own.[/quote]
HTML https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/fat-fly-southwest-airlines-skinny-woman-booted-off/story?id=11262521
#Post#: 13931--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: June 8, 2022, 12:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://us.yahoo.com/lifestyle/sydney-sweeneys-micro-mini-outfit-body-positivity-213845522.html
[quote]Why Sydney Sweeney’s micromini outfit feels like a threat
to body positivity: 'So coveted yet unachievable'
...
Although Sweeney pulls it off beautifully, reluctance from
onlookers to praise the outfit has less to do with the styling
than it does the messaging about beauty and body
standards.[/quote]
Firstly, no, she does not pull it off beautifully. Here is the
photo:
[img]
HTML https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/ZBm2xtKk1s3yl9ROhO4eng--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtoPTY1MDtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2022-06/81a7a950-e5db-11ec-addb-6b5404e53fb8[/img]
As I have mentioned before, thin body and short/wide face is one
of the worst combinations. On the other hand, I of course
disagree with the False Leftists (who ironically are incapable
of perceiving the ugliness I just described):
[quote]"No shade to beautiful Sydney... but I'm sad we're seeing
more of this ULTRA low rise waist and ULTRA flat tummy look
again," one person commented on the Instagram post. "So coveted
yet unachievable for so many of us with different
builds."[/quote]
Yes, so don't covet it. Just admire those who have it
effortlessly. (Not Sweeney, though, because of her face shape as
already explained.)
[quote]"This set is created with this very thin body in mind.
It's not created for plus and so that in and of itself is
frustrating," Gianluca Russo, co-founder of the Power of Plus,
previously told Yahoo Life. "A lot of it, too, feels very
glorifying of a body type that we've been working against
actively for many years now. The body type is very reminiscent
of the early 2000s, when we had all these big conversations
around anorexia and fashion and bulimia and how these models
were treated back in the day, which is not great. And for a lot
of people it feels kind of triggering."[/quote]
Yes, because you look like this:
HTML https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.thecurvyfashionista.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/05190541/Screen-Shot-2020-10-05-at-7.05.07-PM-e1601989943759.png
[quote]Tyler McCall, editor-in-chief of Fashionista.com, also
analyzed the trend on her social media in early March, writing
that it "reminds me of the thin-at-any-cost mentality of the
aughts."[/quote]
And you look like this:
[img width=914
height=1280]
HTML https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5e8f7f8f04cb93182519518f/1586476247710-VZBVKWL42XT8LRN7RR83/tyler+mccall.jpg[/img]
[quote]"It's still operating on the same model, which is to let
trends be dictated by people who are thin and then let it
trickle down until it reaches size inclusivity rather than
letting a plus-size body like Paloma or Precious [Lee] and
Ashley [Graham] and all of them help to lead the trends," he
explained, noting that microminis aren't only styled on slim
bodies, but also remain exclusively accessible for that body
type. "You would hope it would come back in a new inventive way
and I think the way it came back was so reminiscent of the way
it started, and that's kind of on this exclusionary
model."[/quote]
Thin people waste less cloth per garment, you moron. Why should
cloth-wasters (ie. you) be the ones allowed to set trends for
clothes?
(I never even understood why larger-sized versions of the same
garment cost the same as the smaller-sized versions, given that
the former require more cloth to make. This is measurably unfair
to those who purchase the latter. If I was in charge of pricing,
I would scale up the price of all garments in proportion to
size. Similarly, in a fair society, the price of public
transport tickets should be scaled according to each passenger's
weight, and so on.)
[quote]"Millennials currently having a collective panic attack
at the prospect of fitting back into low rise bottoms and crop
tops,[/quote]
I weigh less today than I weighed when 9/11 happened. Anyone
whose weight increases with age after completing height growth
should be prohibited from reproducing.
#Post#: 13934--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: Zhang Caizhi Date: June 8, 2022, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think fat-shaming could be a problem in North Korea
considering the leader and his grandfather and father.
[img]
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/QxcKvCrP/ss-170307-kim-family-tree-05.webp[/img]
HTML https://postimages.org/
[img]
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/kgW7PQ5Q/gd5i743-kim-jong-un-625x300-23-May-22.webp[/img]
HTML https://postimages.org/
#Post#: 15080--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: August 10, 2022, 9:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Subhuman unintentionally lists ways in which plus-size is
inferior:
HTML https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/woman-shared-her-plus-size-015833575.html
Read the list (and look at the digusting photos) over there. I
will jump straight to:
[quote]"The industry needs to realize that the average woman is
no longer a size 14. They are now a size 18 and beyond. Yet as
we’ve gotten bigger, things like airplane seats, clothing, and
everything else has gotten smaller or stayed the exact
same."[/quote]
Yes, because reducing carbon footprint is more important than
catering to subhumans.
[quote]"To see a true change, the industry needs to stop
ignoring the needs of plus-size individuals and start expanding
to meet our needs and become truly inclusive,"[/quote]
No.
Many comments agree:
[quote]Well, it's also not fair if you have to share space with
her because she overflows the seats.[/quote]
[quote]Looks like a you problem not a they problem,
fatty.[/quote]
[quote]This woman needs to buy two seats on a plane. She is way
too fat and my rights as a normal sized person are being
infringed having to be squeezed next to this sweaty tub of lard.
I am completely sick of these entitled gluttons.[/quote]
[quote]If you "can't" lose weight please tell the thousands that
die daily of starvation your secret.[/quote]
[quote]One thing I hate about travelling is being seated next to
plus-size travelers.[/quote]
[quote]Why should the world change to accomodate a large person?
Perhaps she should make some changes. Fat entitlement is getting
annoying. For real.[/quote]
[quote]This is a disgusting story. Look at that woman. People
like her drive health care costs up every year. She should be
ashamed of being such a greedy little pig. And yes, I am body
shaming this whale.[/quote]
[quote]Airline flights are a commodity. You are paying for the
space you occupy on the plane. It’s literally just like sending
a package through the mail. Most domestic flights offer seats
with sufficient space for a plus size person to sit comfortably
and lower their tray table. It’s called First Class.[/quote]
I still stand by my longtime proposition that all public
transport tickets should be scaled in price according to
passenger weight.
#Post#: 15145--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: guest30 Date: August 14, 2022, 10:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The liberals also behave like this. If they told to solve the
conflicts and quarrel between two peoples or two groups. They
rather being neutral rather than struggle to know who are the
really victim of the quarrels and conflicts. Because according
to them, side with the one of a people or person is "biased".
And the category of victim and oppressors is relative according
to them. They don't know what the exact category of oppression
and the victim of oppression. Or they know, but not want to
acknowledge that it's the true category...
That is really insulting to the every victim who attempt to ask
help to them and hope their assistance...
So, the neutral people mean they still have possibility to side
with the oppressors. But they not openly declare it to the
victim. So they are also can be considered a target of the
resistance and counter-offensive. For example, history of
Operation Weserübung and Operation Fall Gelb.
#Post#: 15519--------------------------------------------------
The Five Universal Laws of Human Stupidity
By: guest78 Date: September 7, 2022, 7:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As this article mentions, stupid people do actually cause harm
to other's through their stupidity. In that regard, stupidity is
not funny at all!
The Five Universal Laws of Human Stupidity
[quote]We underestimate the stupid, and we do so at our own
peril.[/quote]
[img width=1280
height=592]
HTML https://pocket-syndicated-images.s3.amazonaws.com/6063e446475af.png[/img]
[quote]Stupid people, Carlo M. Cipolla explained, share several
identifying traits: they are abundant, they are irrational, and
they cause problems for others without apparent benefit to
themselves, thereby lowering society’s total well-being. There
are no defenses against stupidity, argued the Italian-born
professor, who died in 2000. The only way a society can avoid
being crushed by the burden of its idiots is if the non-stupid
work even harder to offset the losses of their stupid brethren.
[/quote]
This forum is a great example of how much work people have to
put in an attempt to cut through all the stupid and get at the
truth.
[quote]Law 1: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the
number of stupid individuals in circulation.
No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by,
Cipolla wrote, you are invariably lowballing the total. This
problem is compounded by biased assumptions that certain people
are intelligent based on superficial factors like their job,
education level, or other traits we believe to be exclusive of
stupidity. They aren’t.[/quote]
[quote]Law 2: The probability that a certain person be stupid is
independent of any other characteristic of that person.
[quote]Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to
another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving
no gain and even possibly incurring losses.[/quote]
Cipolla called this one the Golden Law of stupidity. A stupid
person, according to the economist, is one who causes problems
for others without any clear benefit to himself.
The uncle unable to stop himself from posting fake news articles
to Facebook? Stupid. The customer service representative who
keeps you on the phone for an hour, hangs up on you twice, and
somehow still manages to screw up your account? Stupid.
This law also introduces three other phenotypes that Cipolla
says co-exist alongside stupidity. First there is the
intelligent person, whose actions benefit both himself and
others. Then there is the bandit, who benefits himself at
others’ expense. And lastly there is the helpless person, whose
actions enrich others at his own expense. Cipolla imagined the
four types along a graph, like this:[/quote]
HTML https://pocket-syndicated-images.s3.amazonaws.com/6063eb240f187.png
[quote]The non-stupid are a flawed and inconsistent bunch.
Sometimes we act intelligently, sometimes we are selfish
bandits, sometimes we act helplessly and are taken advantage of
by others, and sometimes we’re a bit of both. The stupid, in
comparison, are paragons of consistency, acting at all times
with unyielding idiocy. However, consistent stupidity is the
only consistent thing about the stupid. This is what makes
stupid people so dangerous.[/quote]
[quote]Law 4: Non-stupid people always underestimate the
damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid
people constantly forget that at all times and places and under
any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people
always turns out to be a costly mistake.[/quote]
[quote]Law 5: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of
person.[/quote]
I think we would argue that those that initiate violence are the
most dangerous...
An interesting parallel:
[quote] This will to sacrifice, to devote personal labor and,
if necessary, life itself to others, is most highly developed in
the Aryan. The Aryan’s greatest power is not in his mental
qualities necessarily, but in the extent of his readiness to
devote all his abilities to the service of the community. In
him, the instinct of self-preservation can reach its noblest
form because he willingly subordinates his own ego for the
prosperity of the community and is even willing to sacrifice his
own life for it, if necessary.
The reason for the Aryan’s constructive ability and
especially his ability to create civilizations does not lie in
his intellectual gifts. If he only had intellectual abilities,
they might easily be destructive and he would never be able to
organize and build. The essential character of the individual
depends on his ability to forfeit his personal opinions and
interests and to offer them instead for the service of the
community. Only by serving his community and assuring its
prosperity does he receive his own rewards. He no longer works
only for himself, but takes his place within the structure of
the community, not only for his own benefit, but for the benefit
of all. The most wonderful demonstration of this spirit is
through Work. He understands that his labor is not just for his
livelihood, but his labor serves the interests of the community
without conflicting with community’s interests. Otherwise, the
goal of his work is only self-preservation without consideration
for the welfare of the community. — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf,
pg. 196[/quote]
#Post#: 15520--------------------------------------------------
Re: The Five Universal Laws of Human Stupidity
By: 90sRetroFan Date: September 7, 2022, 8:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to
another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving
no gain and even possibly incurring losses.[/quote]
A person who causes losses to others who deserve to be caused
loss while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring
losses is a hero.
[quote]A stupid person, according to the economist, is one who
causes problems for others without any clear benefit to
himself.[/quote]
Most stupid people are not heroes, but "stupidity" (as defined
according to economics) is logically a prerequisite for heroism.
In other words, the problem with worldviews based on economics
instead of ethics/aesthetics is that it has no concept of
desert.
#Post#: 15821--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: anti-relativism
By: christianbethel Date: September 26, 2022, 6:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
By your logic, helplessness would also be a prerequisite for
heroism also, as the person might be helping, say, the LGBT
community whilst gaining nothing for himself.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page