Comments by "RiC David" (@RiC_David) on "Does the 'Regressive Left' Exist?" video.

  1. "Why won't they criticise Islam?" is the new "Why won't Muslims denounce terrorism?" Well with the latter example, the claim that "Muslims won't denounce terrorism" could be easily refuted by pointing to Muslims denouncing terrorism. Naturally that didn't stop it being made but it's easy enough to dismiss. "Why won't they criticise Islam?" either has no actual target, in which case it can be asked forever or it's being asked of a specific person. What specific person? Sam Seder? Michael Brooks from this video? Cenk Uyger of TYT? Myself? I've heard Cenk criticise Islam so many times yet the claims that "he'd never criticise Islam" just keep on coming. What I see is if people give a shit about innocent people both non-Muslim AND Muslim then they're accused of being pro-terrorism and affixed with whatever the latest magic word label is (regressive left, SJW, PC etc.). Myself, Cenk etc. are opposed to religious violence and not pro-religion in general - we just also oppose innocent people being shunned, hated or mistreated because of the actions of other people. These aren't in opposition, I do not need to have contempt for Muslims who don't support terrorism. Now maybe some people will read that and say "Oh okay then, you're not one of these people we're talking about" but people who share my perspective are routinely slapped with these stupid boxes people insist on believing in. I don't get the impression that most who believe in these "regressive left" stereotypes will be okay with me simply being opposed to individuals who carry out/support terrorism and not wanting to target individuals who do not carry out or support terrorism but are merely Muslim.
    2
  2. I hate being misrepresented and dismissed as being a [label], let's create a label for people who do that and then innevitably so many people will apply it so liberally without knowing the target well enough that it will be used to misrepresent and dismiss people. Anyone here think 'racist' is applied too liberally? That it misrepresents people who actually aren't racist? That it's used to dismiss and discredit people? Maybe you like your hyperbole and might say it's used to "silence" people? Replace 'racist' with your label of choice then. Anyone here think 'regressive left/social justice warrior' is applied too liberally? That it misrepresents people who don't fit the negative template and don't hold the views they're accused of having? That it's used to dismiss and discredit people? Maybe you're less prone to hyperbole and might say it's used to smear people? If one of the things that bothers you is people using concepts and terms to dismiss, misrepresent or discredit people then don't in turn make your own label that looks like the equivalent of "Give 10 kids some pens and a big sheet of paper and have them collaborate to draw a picture of a teacher they can't stand". Don't pass it off as a photograph. Labels are present on both sides but the labels most commonly used against "the right" (another label but a necessary one right now) are specific accusations. The labels most commonly used against "the left" are these collaboration efforts - vaguely and subjectively defined character portraits like "social justice warrior" "regressive left" and "PC brigade".
    1
  3. In as few words as possible: It's another self confirming label/stereotype It's a self written narrative on why you think other people think what you think they think. Elaboration: Just as "racist" can be an accurate statement or it can be a label applied based on pure speculation (and per the cynical, overstated scenario: be applied to discredit and dismiss people), "regressive left" "social justice warriors" "PC liberals" can all also be accurate statements or they can be labels applied based on pure speculation - this can be used to discredit and dismiss people on the othe side of the fictitious aisle. This is tribal polarisation, distant estranged brother against distant estranged brother based around the ideas one brother has about the other. Every label you believe in will be true if you apply it liberally enough. If this label exists, how many left wing people are "regressive left"? How are you able to determine this? The scandal is not that 'boogeyman template person' exists (that can be "racist", if you want to flip polarity) - of course any given person exists. The scandal is if a large percentage of people are boogeymen. That's why they're never ending and self confirming: most people aren't boogeymen but enough boogeymen exist to think "Well I've seen a bunch of them and I'm not afraid to use hyperbole - they're everywhere!".
    1