Comments by "Mesolithic Man" (@mesolithicman164) on "David Starkey: I'm Guilty of Heresy Against the Religion of Woke" video.

Dr Starkey. Pomposity personified. Quite rude and overbearing. Peter Whittle was spoken to like a school child. I don't mind seeing less of this type of conservative however 'brilliant' he thinks he is.
3
R Tim No. What we have is Peter Whittle being unfailingly polite as a rather self important individual talks at him. Starkey talks over Mr Whittle every time he tries to make a point. That's just boorishness.
3
In a comments section people make comments. Or are comments only allowed if they reflect your opinions?
3
R Tim Well I think you just touched on it there. Peter kept trying to draw the conversation on to an analysis of 'cancel culture' but Starkey persisted in talking about his feelings, his reaction, his analysis of what happened. Not only that but he is then extraordinarily rude about "Peterson" and his "cack handed" attempt to diagnose events. I just found him, personally, bordering on the insufferable. Very little graciousness and entirely centred round his ego. Perhaps Peter is the forgiving type or perhaps he realises Starkey is a significant presence on our side of the argument and so feels the need to defer to him and indulge his solipsism. To sum up, I agree with a lot of Starkey's positions but don't find excessive vanity an attractive fate in the great and the good. But each to their own in this regard.
2
R Tim I'd agree with most of that. I've heard your argument about offence "being taken" before and I'm not entirely convinced. If I said your ideas were puerile and showed a lack of insight, you'd have good reason to be annoyed. You're blaming the recipient of the insult for feeling insulted. But really it's the insulter who is the one to blame. That argument essentially gives a person carte blanche to be rude. That can't be logical. And as I said previously I agree with Starkey's main thrust about cancel culture and earlier comments about diversity and BLM, I just find him a bit too pleased with himself. I also don't think the intellectual class appreciate their arguments being described as cack handed especially as in his interview with Darren Grimes, Starkey made his major faux pas, the one that lost him academic posts, writing commissions etc. He will say his comments were "misinterpreted" but I'd argue that they really were cack handed and ill judged.
1
R Tim Nearly but not quite. One of the people might intuit that the dog was barking in pain, the other might interpret it as aggressive barking. So I don't think that point stands scrutiny. And when it's two human beings talking you can actually hear their words, so you're not relying on intuition or guesswork. And if I hear one speaker saying mildly offensive stuff, I can hear that with my own ears. I can tell he's being overbearing. Starkey didn't say "Dr Peterson", or "Jordan Peterson" if he was being informal, he just says "Peterson". That sounds a bit disrespectful to these ears. And in closing, you can't get away with saying "damn blacks" these days. I agree with the point about universities but I don't think that was the 'secret reason' for his cancellation.
1
R Tim I think I may have an early draft of your message here. Actually, I think you have it back to front. The interpretation of a dog barking is far more subjective than two people talking. As I said, I might hear a frightened dog you might hear the same sound and interpret it as aggressive. Those are subjective because the dog can't explain himself. In a debate we hear the words, we hear the tone of voice we are much more able to make an objective judgement about what's being said. You suggested that Starkey had been shut down 'by persons unknown' for his views on Universities. I find that unlikely, the hyper fixation on all things perceived as 'racist' seems far more likely to be the cause of his cancellation. But I do agree that universities are handling everything badly these days. I wonder if part of the problem is to do with students being 'customers', paying for an education and assuming they have a customer's right to call the shots on campus. I think as civilised human beings we are required to not be out and out rude to people. A little decorum goes a long way, I think you can be a bit salty, a bit edgy but I really don't think we should be too potty mouthed....although some people can be exasperating.
1
R Tim When students become customers I suppose it's to be expected that the faculty/ student relationship will change. The thing is I agree with much of what Starkey says, there's a saying that all men love the sound of their own voice, in Starkey's case I think that is unquestionable and in the Grimes interview I think he was so carried away by the opportunity to 'wax lyrical' on his favourite topics that he over stepped the mark. And I'm pretty sure he admitted that later. But anyway, we've exchanged our views, maybe found some areas of agreement and perhaps agree to differ on matters relating to the Prof. Live long and prosper, as they say somewhere in the universe.
1
R Tim "Too far" in the current climate of extreme racial sensitivity. He achieved nothing with that slip of the tongue and did himself a great deal of harm as a result.
1
R Tim Anything that deviates from 'normal' lasts a little while then people get bored, the media gets bored and things move on. IMO this Woke thing is about a small group using social media to intimidate big organisations with the threat of bad publicity. As it becomes clear that those people have no real power, they will have less and less influence. And then all the race baiters will be denuded of their armour and eventually replaced. Order always reasserts itself. It's just a nuisance while it lasts.
1
Tim Powell 100%. You can debate all day long about the perceived unfairness of it all but we are where we are. Starkey lost sight of that. Maybe off camera he gets away with that kind of phraseology, slightly intemperate imo, but I think in some ways he's like an overeducated child prodigy who suddenly bumps into someone who says 'no'. And now he's rationalising. A street smart person knows the parameters and stays one step ahead of the thought police. Getting himself cancelled takes one more useful voice out of the debate. You need to keep all 11 players on the pitch, to coin a phrase.
1
R Tim Yes, "the Left will eat itself" has become something of a meme because it's true.
1
R Tim Rowling and Linehan were cancelled over a specific issue, what designates a 'woman'? They have the traditional, correct opinion, but not the politically correct opinion. And never the twain etc. Starkey got himself cancelled for his language 'a slip of the tongue', it was a mistake on his part, but one he should have seen coming. My analogy was based on the idea that the prodigy runs into the world of hard reality. And stares uncomprehendingly at a world rejecting his genius. When you're driving on ice you drive with extra care. You can say 'the ice shouldn't be there', but it is and it's your responsibility to deal with it. So, in summation, two very different cases.
1
R Tim Come on, I appreciate the fact that you're trying to defend him but you have to stay real. I'd agree if he'd used a wrong pronoun but "damn blacks" isn't a slight misinterpretation, is it?
1
R Tim You keep doing this. You keep making this "But what about" argument. It's getting very tiring.
1
R Tim How can I tell you when it finishes, all that I know is that it's here now and you have to work within the limitations. A lot of this looks like the 60s, Black Panthers, 68 riots etc. That moved on. The English Court spoke French for 100 years, that stopped. The prudish Victorians covered piano legs while frequenting prostitutes, that hypocrisy moved on. The social mores and fashions eventually become dated/ boring and society moves on. Who knows? the world is taking a darker turn, maybe we'll be so fearful of WW3 that we start to think about different things.
1