constant escape
winter withered, warm
But do you believe they actually alter their beliefs in accordance with Trump? Or do they just change what they express, rolling with the punches?
True, in terms of the effect you have on the world. I suppose the key difference, in theory at least, is that if they don't believe this stuff, there is still a chance you can appeal to what they do believe in, which may be easier to negotiate with. That gets at my central hope regarding dialogue and reconciliation here.Yeah, I'd probably say the latter too. I dunno that there's much functional difference after a while though. If you live your life as though you believe something then eventually it doesn't matter whether you actually do or not because you're behaving as though you do anyway. It's like the people who "ironically" post racist stuff online all the time. They may think they're being ironic and don't really mean it, but ultimately they're just making racist comments.
I do not think American intellectual thought has ever really recovered from this. The SDS and the constellation of social movements that it was a part of created the "New Left." These students, and those they influenced, would go on to take control of university departments, editorial chairs, and other positions in the 'commanding heights of American culture. Though most are now passing from the scene, the American imagination still refracts politics through the cultural lens these boomer rebels created.[4] Most of the intellectual sloppiness that you find in modern activism comes from this source (not from Foucault et. al., who was brighter than conservatives give him credit for, and has largely been appropriated as intellectual cover for shoddy thinking that had been entrenched before Foucault was published in English).The new radicals were more in a libertarian, anarchist, anti-elitist tradition, desperate for authenticity even at the expense of lucidity... Instead of the rigorous analysis of classic texts, the new radicals were suspicious of theory. Political acts had to be genuine expressions of values and sentiments. Convictions took priority over the calculation of consequences, reflecting a wariness of expediency and a refusal to compromise for the sake of political effects. At times it seemed as if deliberate and systematic thought was suspect and only a spontaneous stream of consciousness, however inarticulate and unintelligible, could be trusted. Todd Gitlin, an early activist and later analyst of the New Left, observed how actions were undertaken to “dramatize” convictions. They were “judged according to how they made the participants feel,” as if they were drugs offering highs and lows. If it was the immediate experience which counted for most, then there was little scope for thinking about the long term.[3]
There was a chapter in Pyschopolitics about this, that neoliberal production is the cause for institutional switch in favor of emotion:I do not think American intellectual thought has ever really recovered from this. The SDS and the constellation of social movements that it was a part of created the "New Left." These students, and those they influenced, would go on to take control of university departments, editorial chairs, and other positions in the 'commanding heights of American culture. Though most are now passing from the scene, the American imagination still refracts politics through the cultural lens these boomer rebels created.[4] Most of the intellectual sloppiness that you find in modern activism comes from this source (not from Foucault et. al., who was brighter than conservatives give him credit for, and has largely been appropriated as intellectual cover for shoddy thinking that had been entrenched before Foucault was published in English).
sure - w/obv caveat that only in that portion of the world with a high enough standard of living. that's how you get the weirdness of Peter Thiel (or a friendlier, less actively evil version like Andrew Yang) overlapping with fully automated luxury communism types in UBI advocacy. the former is an acknowledgment that the proles are going to lose their jobs to robots etc and/or be forced into remaining labor conditions so bad/precarious that they have to be pacified to stave off revolt. it's exactly the same impulse - as plenty of folk have noted - as that behind the Roman grain dole, just replace "cheap slave labor" (in, unsurprisingly, often horrific conditions) with "robots etc".that classic socialist problem where work for many is unnecessary and wealth is comparatively endless and the state can forever stave off the collapse point that would motivate counter action
only the latteryes but are you talking about ontological universals within the world of forms/world spirit/whatever, or moral 'universals?'
As to how one navigates: yes, it's obviously true that there can't be a global map of maps (or "map of meaning", arf)