[FRIAM] Ψ

[glen]

Right. This seems to be part of Mouffe's framing. A given hegemony need not pull out all the stops to *stay* the hegemony. Even if one hegemony considers itself the Best hegemony (as the rationalists do), there's room for dynamism. It's especially egregious if, as in rationalism, you think your system adheres most to reality and will "win out in the long run" because of that, you *still* try to hobble your opponent at every turn.

Those who are actually confident in their skills aren't fragile to the rhetoric of their colleagues.

In some ways, a regime is obligated to give up power just to *test* if it can resume the power later. How powerful/correct/true can you actually be if you can't lose a battle or 2, then return to win the next battle? You'd think libertarian individualists who constantly blather empty words like "competition" and "grit" would understand this.

On 6/6/22 11:16, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> The manosphere thing is annoying not because there isn't such a thing as misandry (there is, of course), but because when you have the power or are in the majority, it is just in poor taste to defend that position.   Show some character and defend the minority or more vulnerable position.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen
> Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:29 AM
> To: friam at redfish.com
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Ψ
> 
> Ha! Well, IDK what "misanthropic" means. The accusation is lobbed at me all the time because I don't enjoy hugs or other sorts of uninvited touching and because I prefer criticism over compliments. But I think the word carries different meanings in different contexts. While I'm not fond of most human organisms, I *am* fond of the structures they create ... their nests (apartments and cities), the fossils from their behaviors (art, books), etc. I'm even fond of their large scale, collective behaviors (like mosh pits and scooter traffic in India). If there's a word for "hates humans but loves humankind", then I'm nearly there.
> 
> On 6/6/22 10:08, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> Why can’t we all just be misanthropic and call it even?
>>
>>> On Jun 6, 2022, at 8:44 AM, glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ya gotta love PZ. I don't know if he's a good biologist. But he's a great critic, especially when he takes on members of the manosphere:
>>>
>>> https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2022/06/04/pz-takes-on-jordan-peterson-and-richard-dawkins/
>>>
>>> I know Dawkins might not be thought of as a member of the manosphere <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manosphere> ... but I think he ranks, not least for his explicit and unnecessary opinions on trans people. [sigh] What are the signs one's cultural homunculus has corrupted one's scientific homunculus? And can the latter be returned to a healthy state after such corruption?
>>>
>>> I'm knee deep in Mouffe's Agonistics: https://bookshop.org/books/agonistics-thinking-the-world-politically/9781781681039 So far, it appeals to my anarcho-syndicalist and postmodern sympathies. I'm at risk of being programmed by the text, though. Luckily, I read so slow and comprehend so little, any programming will be buggy: https://youtu.be/2j3adcbEwSM?t=52
> 
> 

-- 
Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙