Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Quackers is a classical liberal and hardly a borderline fascist: His criticism of feminism - even if his language is troublesome - is a libertarian one, not a conservative one.
Feminism
- Thread starter Quackers
- Start date
Quackers is a classical liberal and hardly a borderline fascist: His criticism of feminism - even if his language is troublesome - is a libertarian one, not a conservative one.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
"Libertarian" and "borderline fascist" are categories with a >90% overlap, in my experience.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
You stress yourself that Fascism is an ideology of sacrifice and militarism, things that cannot be present in Classical Liberalism without severely toning down its major tenets. When Right-Wing liberals like Quackers say they are opposed to multiculturalism, it is more they are opposed to state funding for multicultural projects and affirmative action for ethnic minorities rather than complete French revolutionary style imposition of a national monoculture, of the likes of Le Pen, Mussolini, Robbespierre and Kim Il-Sung, who arguably constitute the true anti-multiculturalists, as opposed to those who embrace the anti-multicultural label in reaction to the misguided appropriation of the term by the new left.
useless
Social Justice Rogue
I'm pretty sure Quackers wouldn't even describe himself as a right-wing liberal.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
States have been funding [...]cultural projects for a long time, though. What's it matter if it's multicultural or not?
If this was really the objection, then they should say "I oppose state funding for multicultural projects," not "I oppose multiculturalism." One is possibly legitimately about cost-cutting, and the other is cross-burning.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Well, the terminology is indeed a bit confusing; In practice, multiculturalism is used in two ways: A matter-of-fact way ("It is a fact that various cultures and subcultures exist in that country") and as a policy ("Let's give affirmative action to ethnic minorities and celebrate diversity for the sake of diversity").
For instance, during the French Revolution, local languages were actively repressed. That is arguably what constitutes opposition to multiculturalism in the matter-of-fact way. You can find such sentiments today among right-wing populists of the likes of Wilders and Le Pen and it was also a common feature of Stalinist and Fascist regimes. However, when a person labels himself as multiculturalist, like Quackers does, and in fact many others do as well, such person will be immediately accused of belonging to the 'cross-burning' 'anti-multiculturalists'.
However, I see no reason why Quackers (and Luiz as well) should be considered opposed to multiculturalism in that way. In fact, I believe they both actually recognised the existence of many cultures in one polity. It is however fairly unfortunate that people self-identify as anti-multiculturalists, because 'multiculturalism' was used by West-European countries to describe several policies in the 1970s with the goal of integrating immigrants, that often turned out to be massive failures.
The damage has been done, however: The word 'multiculturalism' is now been associated with massive societal engineering, with the collary that 'nationalism' (which came to be by suppressing regional identities) falsely came to be perceived as part of the natural order.
Quackers
The Frog
Senethro
Overlord
You put her name into google and you can't actually find what she said, only a bunch of MRA websites apparently really really concerned on her behalf that she wasn't able to say it. Whatever it was.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Right, but I don't think Quackers is a "right-wing liberal". I think he's a reactionary and fascist fellow-traveller. Of a very similar mould to Le Pen, in fact, who you'll note is also fond of superficially "liberal" arguments for their decidedly illiberal politics. Hence my original comment.
Loppan Torkel
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,756
Feminists and fascists are the same kind really. Not all feminists, but many. ..they deserve the same disclaimer religious people get, I guess.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Holocaust/women's suffrage, tom-ay-to/tom-ah-to.
Loppan Torkel
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,756
The comparison obviously works better for communists and fascists if you want to see the historical consequences of ideologies. Sorry. This was more about the type of people and their inability to handle different views.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Well, what about "the type of etc."?
Gary Childress
Student for and of life
Almost every movement seems to have an extreme fringe. It's maybe not always fair to characterize a whole movement or idea by the way a few on the extreme act on the idea.
I think at it's roots feminism makes some good points. Women are not really equal to men in western society. In the US we have yet to have a female president. Very few members of congress are women. Women seem to seldom be in positions of power and leadership. Not saying that power and leadership are good things, just that our society legitimates those things but doesn't share them equally. Would I go to a lecture and stomp my feet and try to disrupt it until the lecturer has to call it quits, no. I'd just ignore the lecture. Some of these "mens rights" lecturers maybe have no greater point to make than that they will be disrupted by some rowdy feminist protestors. Take that away and no one will pay any attention to them because they probably don't have much of any thing else legitimate to say.
Oruc
Reactionary
Of course it's fair, to disparage a movement or an idea you hold up the fringe as the ultimate example, that's how it's done no matter the politics of person doing it or those on the receiving end.
Loppan Torkel
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,756
I've got the notion that feminists and people into gender studies are too concerned about sticking to their political views rather than being open for aspects, which might be scientifically true, that might oppose their agenda.
If a scientific study would show that even as small babies, boys choose toys such as cars and girls prefer dolls - would a feminist accept this as something pointing to that there might be more to gender than it just being a social construct? Too many would not, from what I've seen and heard. They're like religious people when it comes to science that go against their political views. That's probably why they're chanting in that video. They may be fringe, but I'll rather be for normal equality between the sexes than align with this group.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
So, "speaking entirely out of my arse", then"?
Loppan Torkel
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,756
You don't see it this way?
How about when feminists accept the subordination of women in Islam as a cultural trait that we in the west don't get then? Did I get that one wrong in any way?
Oruc
Reactionary
I don't see why you would change tact now.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I do not.
I have no idea what you're talking about. (My frank suspicion? Neither do you.)
Similar threads
