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 <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:29 AM
To: [email protected]
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 <[email protected]> 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˙
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
