The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Thoughts on Ideology

Posted on | September 21, 2014 | 10 Comments

Readers will pardon my long blog silence today, which is likely to continue a while as I am (of course) knee-deep into the radical feminist craziness as I prepare the next installment of the “Sex Trouble” series. (Hit the Freaking Tip Jar!) Because feminist ideologues propose theoretical conceptions that are so contrary to basic common-sense understanding of human nature, reading this stuff could easily cause a person to question their own sanity. Either we’re crazy or they’re crazy, but there is simply no way to reconcile the claims made by feminists with what most normal people believe about human life.

It is helpful, then, for me occasionally to set aside this stuff and emerge into the real world, communicate with normal people and double-check to make sure I haven’t completely lost my mind. Anyway, during a break from my research, I sent out a few thoughts on Twitter.

You don’t know what kind of craziness inspired those observations, but with any luck, by this time tomorrow I will have published another 5,000 words that will help explain it. In the meantime, remember me in your prayers and please, Hit the Freaking Tip Jar!




 

 

Category: Intellectuals

Comments

10 Responses to “Thoughts on Ideology”

  1. RS
    September 21st, 2014 @ 6:17 pm

    It’s worth pondering how we have reached a point philosophically where assertions which are patently absurd can gain so much traction and seduce countless dupes. I suppose we have to reach back to the Enlightenment to get to the point where Truth ceased to be a set unto itself, but rather became a series of Venn Diagrams encompassing the Physical, the Philosophical, the Social, the Psychological, etc. Some well intentioned philosophers of the time thought that such a division was necessary to preserve Faith in the face of Scientific discovery. Unfortunately, what that division did in reality was to enable what see in Radical Feminism: the argument that heterosexuality is not the natural state of things for women, but a social construct imposed by some nefarious plot by males. That someone can make such an assertion in all seriousness and that it can be accepted and taught as gospel to others is an indicator of a civilization on the brink of destruction.

  2. kilo6
    September 21st, 2014 @ 6:56 pm

    Don’t forget Rev. Thomas R. Malthus, these “ladies” are definitely under his spell. The “eschew fecundity” song has just been updated with bonus Marxist content.

  3. Adobe_Walls
    September 21st, 2014 @ 7:26 pm

    Loons gotta be loony tuney. In large part that is the answer the rest is merely the will to power.

  4. OldSchoolLibertarian
    September 21st, 2014 @ 8:16 pm

    Feminist Logic?

  5. RS
    September 21st, 2014 @ 9:36 pm

    I see Malthus as more the Father of Environmentalism, with its Marxist tinged view of the evils of excess Humanity. And, of course, the fact that he’s been proved wrong is no impediment to the continued invocation of his name for all things “green.” Their occasional references to Mother Gaia notwithstanding, the RadFems’ focus seems to be more social than environmental.

  6. K-Bob
    September 22nd, 2014 @ 2:39 am

    Liberal Science (with a capital ‘S’) is the method of wishing things were a certain way, and then torturing data, cherry-picking facts, and threatening to fire a few “peer reviewers” until your opinion can be shoved through a publication, like crap through a goose, so you can present it at a UN panel (held at some exotic location), where no one in the room will understand a word of it, nor care to, but will demand loudly into a microphone that your paper proves that Capitalism must be abolished.

    Somewhere in that chain of events, white lab coats may be worn. But it’s optional. You can show up dressed like a vajajay, if you want, because Science!

  7. Peter B
    September 22nd, 2014 @ 3:22 am

    Race is a social construct that determines many beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors – including political.

    Sexual preference(s) is biologically immutable, gender is genetically determined except where somebody doesn’t want it to be, and gender’s influences on behavior are a social construct.

    See how easy it is?

  8. Ilion
    September 23rd, 2014 @ 12:44 pm

    “Self-described adherents of Science (with a capital “S”) …”
    I call it ‘Science!‘ (always with the italics and the !bang!)

  9. Andy Fox
    September 23rd, 2014 @ 10:58 pm

    “Strange how people react — laughing or angry — when you speak of women in terms of their obstetric capacity. As if this were “anti-woman.”

    Proverbs 29:9 When a wise man argues with a fool, the fool either rages or laughs, and there is no peace. (slightly modified from NASB)

  10. FMJRA 2.0: Fire Escape : The Other McCain
    September 27th, 2014 @ 7:59 pm

    […] Thoughts on Ideology […]