Socialism & Postmodernism For Dummies | Stephen Hicks | Modern Wisdom Podcast 171

[@JaredJohnston]

Stephen Hicks is a great guest. This is episode is criminally under watched!

[@iankclark]

He's kind of boring to listen to. He sounds like he's giving a rote lecture to a freshman class.

[@zeenuf00]

@@iankclark do you have any real arguments?

[@TadValente]

No, it's not, because Stephen Hicks is dishonest when discussing postmodernism. He's preying on Americans that already fear socialism and view it as 'totalitarian,' and shows how postmodernism can fit into that Bogeyman.

[@ChromaToneMusic]

8 months later, he is amazingly thoughtful.

[@johnowen1867]

@tad valente Dishonest, preying fearful, these are descriptive adjrctives, they are NOT decisive arguments

[@Traderbear]

Your daggers of truth hit so hard, Stephen. You are one of the key voices in the Death Star of this ideology.

[@matthewgillam149]

Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity. D.E.I *Divide Et Impera* (Divide and Conquer) Postmodernism's real world application as philosophy

[@ChrisWillx]

Interesting

[@TheEdge92]

@abso wep Sick! Thanks for the tip bro!

[@sidhuggins9387]

Accountability is the breaking point of socialist communities.

[@georger64]

“We will give a lot of power to the state, and the state will then run everything and distribute everything evenly.“ 19:15 Sounds quite totalitarian, doesn’t it? Hannah Arendt and others have pointed out that totalitarianism must be socialist, because no other way can the government get control over all the institutions.

[@ORLY911]

In a way it's the same thing. Unchecked power results in totalitarian rule, doesn't matter if it's from a monarchic, socialist or oligarchic cause. The elite are more or less a governing body they're so powerful, and many in fact are pushing for socialism. Funny how things come full circle. Great reset and the push to make everything a service/rent, with no owned property. I will take my chances with a free market that's under the eye of a democratic system, rather than a total shift to socialism.

[@Ubu987]

@skutch Blobaum Priatized? The elite corporations and the state are so enmeshed at this stage that it is impossible to tell where one begins and the other ends. What we have is 'Third Way' socialism, the economic regime adopted by Fascism and National Socialism.

[@raffacasting]

My answer is always Follow the Money. For the power hungry dosent matter ideology per se but money. Of course a big group that have media influence can be powerfull but well, with money you can estabilish media channels and promote your agenda, so follow the money.

[@raffacasting]

And plus. If you ever thing that Capitalism dont survive with Fascism, remember that in The 2WWar there was factories producing guns,food,gas to the gas chambers. So a new specie of Facism can always arise. Maybe a Techo-Totalitarian-Oligarchy

[@jessemontano762]

Dr Hicks is one of Dr Peterson's mentors. I can see why

[@diogenes9524]

Most interesting and illuminating conversation. I had always assumed that modernism arrived with abstract art, nuclear physics, emancipation, mass production, and consumerism. The post moderns take it back to the Enlightenment, so it is interesting to hear Hicks take it back to the Renaissance, which explains the rejection of imperialism, but even that does not address the ancient empires and hierarchies.

[@ChrisWillx]

Thanks for dropping by!

[@what.if.youre.wrong...]

agreed

[@pierrelabounty9917]

Let's address where we are today. That's what Hicks is doing, and how we got here. And the driving force behind it is not to celebrate individualism, but to use it against it.

[@matth419]

We can support social programs like welfare and health care without being ‘socialist’ And we can cherish National identity and traditions without being ‘far right’ We can also value the benefits of individualism and free markets without being Global Corporatists or Neo Libs But we can’t do any of it whilst being ‘Post Modern’ relativists as none of these terms have meaning - unless being used as a slur !

[@ChrisWillx]

Big problem of collective terms combined with general low attention I guess. It leaves people adhering to labels they never chose

[@ddemaine]

"We can support social programs like welfare and health care without being ‘socialist’". Spot on. Social democracy and socialism are not the same thing.

[@dabeveryday9991]

individualism and the 'free market' are a disease. You don't benefit from it unless you're wealthy or powerful. The working class families all over the world get fucked over by a select few who brainwash you into thinking it helps you too. It doesnt. There is no benefit, unless youre privileged enough. If the NHS wasnt a thing now, the Tories would oppose it and most of Labour would too. That is the gross state of the geopolitical landscape that makes us believe that better isnt possible and we should be cucks for the 'economy' and be told lies about deficits and debt.

[@matth419]

Dab Every Day I have the absolutely opposite view - individualism and the free market encourage entrepreneurial ambition. The UK is a nation of small businesses and the self employed; construction, catering, manufacturing . These are working people free to exchange labour as they wish and charge for their time. This is what creates an economy that can pay for social programs. The excesses of Corporatists are another matter all together.

[@dabeveryday9991]

@@matth419 ''These are working people free to exchange labour as they wish and charge for their time'' - no they are not free to pick and choose how they work. They are forced to taking a pathetic wage in disgraceful working conditions for too many hours because they have no power and will starve to death if they dont. Unions and the workers need more power. Wages are stagnant and have been since the financial crisis - which was caused by wealthy capitalists trying to make more money, yet the working class had to pay for their errors while the bankers raked in bonuses. We have astronomical levels of in-work poverty for this exact reason, terrible wages and working conditions, and costs like childcare and transport increasing at a rate greater than inflation while wages barely increase in comparison. The workers are the source of all value in an economy which has been highlighted by the shock the economy has faced during the Coronavirus crisis - without workers the economy would fail to flow and exist. Capitalists see the firm owners as wealth creators, they are not. An economy can still thrive without them. This is the fault of the gov, the media and the world we live in, not small business owners - to make that clear.

[@timotej292]

Watching this today. What a level of consistency in quality of podcasts even in this early stage. You inspire me daily to never lose my sight on the bullseye.

[@loremipsum99]

Great video. Thank you!! 👍

[@ChrisWillx]

Thank you!

[@skwest]

This episode may be criminally underwatched, but this channel is criminally undersubscribed. I feel fortunate, being mindful not to throw too much praise at KZbin, that The Algorithm has pushed Chris Williamson into my field of view.

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

1.15 million subscribers as of today, 27 August 2023

[@NoFeckingNamesLeft]

@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 2.55 million almost exactly a year later

[@55tranquility]

This is an excellent video and a highly informative and clear description of the two subjects from Prof Hicks - thankyou

[@MarioGonzalez-mx3mk]

Agree...There seems too be little interest in most people to learn history, economy's, psychology or just about anything else that is serious in nature...frivolous issues are dominating the majority...I wish I was wrong in this assessment...

[@matthewgillam149]

This is the second video presentation from Prof. Stephen Hicks that has had complications that I have seen. I wonder if there has and/or will be more. Coincidence? probably. Best dude ever

[@ChrisWillx]

He’s just got bad internet 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@matthewgillam149]

@@ChrisWillx wrong kind of internet perhaps

[@milesshelbourne394]

Without individualism, we would have no modern world...

[@JD-od6tw]

Both you guys are great

[@cathylucas3653]

I’m glad he mentioned the gulf between Catholics and Protestants.

[@NoobishFool1]

You mentioned you didn't know the origin of the word Tory, the word is just the name of the "Right-wing/Conservative" political party that predates the Conservative Party, you may also occasionally hear Liberals (maybe Lib Dems) calling themselves Whigs, this is the party that predates the Liberal Party, although I'm not sure if I'd call them left-wing

[@ChrisWillx]

Jack! You legend. Thank you

[@ddemaine]

@@ChrisWillx Further to Jack's excellent post above, "Conversative" was the rebrand of the Tories by Sir Robert Peel.

[@ChrisWillx]

Love learning stuff like this

[@ddemaine]

@@ChrisWillx His other claim to fame, is that he invented the police force. Oh, and tower in his honour, overlooking Bury, G Manc. Well worth the walk up to Holcombe Moor, if you're in the area.

[@jerrygreene1493]

Apparently Hicks is a libertarian. Curiously he labels himself and his fans as the smart ones. Self deluded much? Also I am not sure that these alleged socialists and post modernists as Hicks defines them actually exist. It seems like he props up this fictitious bogey man so he can take it down, to the glee of his limited intellect fan base.

[@deejaychi1987]

Absolutely love you channel brother! ✊🏿

[@Wise101]

The 10 dislikes were angry socialists / post-modernists😂

[@jerrygreene1493]

Actually they are from those who see through Hicks flimsy straw man argument about his non existent bogey men called post modernists.

[@bulletbill5977]

@@jerrygreene1493 Cope harder

[@Romulan64]

@@jerrygreene1493 Social justice is just applied and weaponized postmodernism, dumbass. Go ask Patricia Hill Collins, creator of intersectionality. Classical postmodernism died quickly, sure, but the early social justice progressives picked it up and weaponized it against the supposed oppressor groups they wanted to take on. Go read some James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, or Peter Boghossian on the matter. All liberals, all atheists, all academics. All is not well in the political left or the western world. There is a metastasizing cancer in its cultural fabric and collective unconscious, and it is postmodern and neo-Marxist in origin and flavor. Whether you believe in it or not, it will come for us all in a day of reckoning if it is not stopped. And if you can't tell the difference between actual liberalism and leftism, then you've got problems. PS: I'm not a liberal. I'm a paleocon, with liberals as my allies. And this is war. Total, undeclared war on us all. Join or die.

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@Romulan64 Here are Hicks bogeymen: POST-MODERNISM 'The revolution has come to an end, the modern world has been a mistake, negative disastrous pathological results, democratic republican politics are mistaken, anti democracy, authoritarian, increase adversarial authoritarianism, anti free market, the world is a disaster. Science and technology the results are negative, science is a white male way of thinking, disagree with individualism, individual choices don't make you who you are, reject freedom and democratic politics.' SOCIALISM: 'We make families to nurture children, we form businesses to work together, we join sports as individuals... socialism disagrees and says the group is more important than the individuals, in religion Catholics are socialists, socialists think institutions should decide what is going to be made, who gets what, how much, individuals should not make their own decisions. Socialism wants to control your mind, your actions, your church, your love life, your organizations.'

[@zeenuf00]

@@jerrygreene1493 'There was never a postmodernist movement' Lacan, Derrida, Foucault and Rorty: 'uhhhhhh . . . '

[@zeenuf00]

The Frankfurt Schoolers saw that classical Marxism wasn't going to convert the masses, so they turned from their bad socio-economic arguments to cultural warfare. Adorno, Lukács, Benjamin, Horkheimer, Marcuse . . , they all came right out and said it. It's not a mystery. The 'pomo' movement was just an extension of that, with new language. A perfect contemporary example is INTERSECTIONAL THEORY - which is just re-packaged Critical Theory.

[@TheEdge92]

Frankfurt Schoolers? Where can I read more about that?

[@zeenuf00]

@@TheEdge92 uhm, their books. lol!!

[@pierrelabounty9917]

That's exactly it.

[@TheWhitehiker]

The term 'post-modernism' has always sounded a bit obfuscating-- why is it after modernism, which is what that means? Why not its own term?

[@NoFeckingNamesLeft]

Because it’s a direct reaction to and deconstruction of modernism

[@kimshaw-williams]

Brilliant.

[@arthur131313]

"Workers of the world! I'm sorry" - graffitti in East Berlin after Wall came down

[@deathofkings5633]

Excellent!

[@michaeltrillium]

Socialists affected by the track record find a collectivist mentality in postmodernism? Isn’t postmodernism just a reformulation of the collectivist mentality of socialism, where the best at collectivism - hopefully you - get to take from those actually useful and give to loyalists?

[@aescubed]

“Community is no larger than a 100 people or so.” - Dunbar’s number!

[@louiseparker1915]

Some people can't make it on their own. We need to think about them too.

[@pierrelabounty9917]

Sure their ability to communicate is eroded.

[@docmemphis]

It's kind of ironic we call them postmodernists.

[@jakelemay7913]

I find much to agree with but, @ 22.15 - people that do not vote are described as apathetic. Some of us do not want to vote due to the fact that we do not want to be a party to future crimes by politicians.

[@47bricklayer]

I don't agree with everything I've ever said. I don't condone everything I've ever done. I don't believe everything I've ever believed. So I don't hold others to that standard.

[@knailstheman]

In large scale societies reputation loses punitive power

[@zmo1ndone502]

Dude's the Neil Degrasse Tyson of left-wing thought

[@jerrygreene1493]

At 48:00 'Am I really paying attention to the evidence, follow trains of logic, willing to say I made a mistake, some things are complicated, are you willing to re-examine your beliefs, on the internet get in a discussion and make a point to say you are right and I am wrong, publicly admit... calmness is the sign of strength, I am not omniscient, the truth is what matters, admit and learn from your mistakes... for intellectuals we think we are smarter.' [Stephen, Can you follow a train of logic to produce these mysterious post modern socialists? Thanks.]

[@LiquidSwan]

SJWs are postmodern socialists

[@LiquidSwan]

Robin DiAngelo is one

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@LiquidSwan OK, quote DiAngelo saying some of the stuff that Hicks attributes to post modern socialists.

[@LiquidSwan]

jerry greene that whites are inherently racist no matter what, from birth and maybe even before. But I’m paraphrasing, as this is effectively what she says in “White Fragility”

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@LiquidSwan Here are Hicks bogeymen, quote DiAngelo saying any of these things: POST-MODERNISM 'The revolution has come to an end, the modern world has been a mistake, negative disastrous pathological results, democratic republican politics are mistaken, anti democracy, authoritarian, increase adversarial authoritarianism, anti free market, the world is a disaster. Science and technology the results are negative, science is a white male way of thinking, disagree with individualism, individual choices don't make you who you are, reject freedom and democratic politics.' SOCIALISM: 'We make families to nurture children, we form businesses to work together, we join sports as individuals... socialism disagrees and says the group is more important than the individuals, in religion Catholics are socialists, socialists think institutions should decide what is going to be made, who gets what, how much, individuals should not make their own decisions. Socialism wants to control your mind, your actions, your church, your love life, your organizations.'

[@billywayne9039]

Well it's about time somebody tried at least.

[@NoWayIsWay86]

In short, solicited structure work grate if implemented by an individual inside a wide free market. I won't say capitalism because I feel that capitalism is based on getting loans at high rates to wage war or to start a business and inflating a soft currency, and that's not good either.

[@Silver_Is_Money]

I can't hear the interviewer. Can this otherwise excellent video be edited to correct this?

[@antiurbanizm]

my relatives in switzerland are assigned their jobs by the government, (something i wouldnt stand for, btw) but maybe this is accepted because they get a modern, orderly society??? it is too optimistic to think that democracy is any more stable than the socialism being discussed in this interview--nazi germany was just a small degree of technology from long term success.

[@joshuarogers1947]

For the algo. This layer 1 messaging needs more eyes and ears on it!

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

two piles of garbage explained. :) 30:00 YES! this is the problem with political communism/communalism! i say this ALL THE TIME. you don't get to force others to live communally if they don't want to (though i personally would part time for project purposes and having company to work beside). no gods, no masters! it's the only way to be liberated. don't agree that it's good to vote, though. see, socialists and other voters think we should vote for leaders because the average individual is not good or moral enough to govern herself... and yet the average individual is good and moral enough to select those who should RULE? jesus christ, the circular logic never ends. :) try anarchism. the water is fine.

[@nicolausgbauman]

This is a very right wing take on postmodernism

[@jasonshapiro9469]

When it comes to people the trash has a way of taking itself out. Postmodernism has allowed some pretty poor politics to surface but this woke movement is going to be hard for them to survive from...though it was the next logical step in that direction after affirmative action so its possible I'm wrong about this and I'll just have to get used to men wearing dresses and women having beards...

[@riethc]

Shoving the post-modernism duck into the socialism turkey is not intellectually coherent. These are two very different strands of thought that don't have much overlap. Even Marx understood capitalism as a NECESSARY historical development to reach his idea of socialism and later communism. Post-modernists are less coherent about their understanding of history or even capitalism, for that matter. Socialism's critiques of things are systematic as an approach. Post-modernism is just about "texts" relating to other "texts". It's just strawmanning to lump these two concepts together.

[@agrameroldoctane_66]

As always when describing various disasters called socialism, Hitler's national socialism is conveniently missed ...

[@zmo1ndone502]

This dude is like Jordan peterson but less crazy more level headed and more to the point. Very similar analysises

[@stevenmeyer8211]

I started listening to this. After about 12 minutes all I'm hearing is straw man arguments. So I gave up.

[@jarvmuse3123]

POSTMODERNISM LEADS DIRECTLY TO POSTHUMANISM../ FINALLY PEOPLE WERE LISTENING TO ME?? NO JUST SOME OTHER BLOKE USED A DICTIONARY FOR ONCE.. AT LEAST DA TALKING ABOUT IT??../

[@magnusprime10]

None of the countries used as examples of socialism were actually socialist or actually implemented the ideas properly.

[@AmericanDreamSeeker]

He's accurate about problems start when socialism gets the power of police. BUT he never mentions WHY socialism, communism started and evolved....they evolved in response to the evils of capitalism. And he prefers when the capitalist plutocracy HAS the power of the police. Which is the current reality. Biden just crushed the railroad workers strike. Throughout history, labor has ALWAYS been at a disadvantage against the leverage of concentrated wealth and if that doesn't work they sent in the federal troops....Hicks leaves a lot out of the picture....on purpose.

[@davidblackwood2477]

So say you. Have you any proof of his purpose to deceive?

[@Leftism_is_opium]

Postmodernists don't believe in evil.

[@pierrelabounty9917]

No. They are the ones behind much of this. They want no risk controlling wealth , resources , and population. Anyone understands the socialist planned economy knows this. You don't understand it yet.

[@StaalBurgher0]

Feed

[@jarvmuse3123]

I KNEW CATHOLISM WOULD BE MORE SOCIALISTIC THAN P/..NON-DOMINATIONAL!!

[@aliensymbiosis7956]

The title of this video contains the level of it’s analysis explicitly; “ . . . For Dummies”. Had to quit at 38 minutes. Simplistic, pro-establishment propaganda fed to a fawning acolyte; a one-sided and shallow conversation.

[@AncientRylanor69]

Soc

[@phillipphil1615]

I identify as a socialist for lack of better term. However I do not subscribe to the postmodern project. This presentation is a very narrow and disingenuous political statement, or if I dare say propaganda.

[@householdone7559]

1 minute into it... "we are a smart species".... oooh... that's a very big statement and one which can be proved both right and wrong. 22:00 Stupidity is greatly enhanced by the media by making it emotional and very one sided. Rupert Murdoch wouldn't have bought up all the media he did unless he could tell a huge number of people what to think - which is counterbalanced by an education system that doesn't really teach you HOW to think - or when to question. Around 27:30 there is a major assumption that anyone who wants to foist communism/extreme socialism onto others is to be considered 'wiser'. Mentally deficient or damaged or deranged would be more appropriate. Curious to see what kind of self image you need (if you're not a psychopath) to feel the need to control others. That's something that might be traced back to a childhood trauma. That's not wisdom, it's lunacy. 28:30ish Small communities - yes - but that's because we have evolved that way. 100 - 200 people max. We did that thousands and thousands of years ago. It's only a new thing to try to bring millions of people together voluntarily without religion. That's not in our DNA - we haven't evolved to do that at the moment. 30:30 That's the same for any authoritarian/oligarch/corporatist. I kill, steal, plunder and the police/army can do my dirty work. That's not just for socialists - look at USA foreign policy. 36:50 Notion of a meritocracy is extremely flawed and basically a myth. It's saying that the people who are at the top deserve to be there and those at the bottom deserve that too. Boris Johnson, Trump, Clinton, well... most 'leaders'. And compare that to homeless/poor people. Is it because they are all bums or lazy? Not in the slightest. There is no actual meritocracy and the economic system we have only permits some people to reach the highest positions.... and very often that has nothing to do with merit. 40:50 "Believer in an ideology but arguments going against you". We are humans. There is a very famous quote that to put simply, "it's easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled." Hence people double down on wrong ideas. And the richest and most powerful people in the world are absolutely NO different from the cave dwelling hermits on that. All are humans with the same frailties and are at the same stage in evolution. 41:40 It's not just young people. Old people are more stuck in their ways... Brexit would never have passed without older affluent people thinking the UK was still a massive power in the world. This could just as easily apply to - ooh i don't know - a guy who wrote a book about postmoderism and goes around giving talks on it from a position of authority. 45:50 You can't talk in absolutes of right and wrong for things like this. You can only try to convince people your opinions are better than someone elses. Or if you have an army/CIA behind you, invade them or overthrow their government under the guise of 'spreading democracy'. Interesting talk.. didn't agree with everything but then again... that's pretty normal.

[@laurentdrozin812]

Either this guy doesn't understand what post modernism is, or he is deliberately framing post modernism in order to sully the word itself and make conversation impossible.

[@jerrygreene1493]

Let's punch in at around 17:00: 'Western nations are committed to Individualism, free market, liberal democracy, socialism is opposed to all that. The major experiments in socialism in USSR. Millions of people killed. It is a bad thing. China had a disaster, millions killed.' [Wisdom and Stephen, can you point to one name in the US or the West that is promoting the kind of socialism you are talking about, or who is opposed to a liberal democracy? And what exactly is a liberal democracy?] 'Socialism has an appeal for those who don't know much. For naïve people it sounds nice. If you are into attacking people on the internet, you are not a serious person. Vote responsibly with a concrete grounded opinion. People are apathetic. The vote of people who care, who are informed. Democracy is better than other options. Post modernism is a high intellect movement. Poor nations are more reality focused....' [So if I am attacking Hicks theories on the internet I am not a serious person? Poor nations are more reality focused? Wouldn't that mean then Stephen that by being modernists as you call them, they would thus succeed? So why are they failing? I get that you preach to a fan base that swallows your black and white us vs. them, good guy bad guy simplifications. But you seem to be suggesting that those gullible enough to swallow your pill shouldn't vote. Am I missing something?]

[@jerrygreene1493]

Let's check into Hicks randomly around 40:00: 'Connecting post modernism to socialism, the major post modernists are socialists, if the data goes against you some people are open minded, some people double down on a failing theory, some young people believe in their religion, some people change their mind, some people will reaffirm their commitment, in socialism the post modernists is a new strategy, the global climate, some far Right are post modernists, it is my national identity that makes me what I am, I am not an individual, different ethnic group can't discuss differences, they are opposed to the free market...' [Let's unpack this. One of Hicks points is that when an idea is clearly failing, the post modern types will double down on it anyway. Would that be like when Libertarian is clearly a failing idea, people that continue to push it are post modernists? Wow, I think Hicks just admitted that he is a post modernist. Whoops. I get Hicks point that there are the good and smart people who are open minded and reject post modernism and socialism, but does anyone have any idea who these post modern socialists are, using Hicks definition? Or is he just straw manning the whole thing with fictitious bogey men who don't like happiness, prosperity, and individuals? Modern Wisdom, do you know who he is talking about?] Here is my suggestion to Hicks. So it doesn't just look like you are punching at clouds, why don't you identify these bad post modern socialists, and also list some political ideas you don't like and you do like. I think the government should keep its hands off our bodies, so in that sense I am libertarian; for death with dignity, against the war on drugs, for legalized sex for hire. How about you?

[@LiquidSwan]

Libertarianism isn’t a failed idea. Perhaps you should read some Mises or sometthing

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@LiquidSwan It is a failed idea. No libertarian will ever attain any dominant position in politics. The government has a job, and that is to maximize happiness among the population. This requires rules that among other things legislate equity and fairness. Libertarians don't want the government to do anything.

[@jerrygreene1493]

@Big Al What is your solution to regulating greed, the wealthy profiting off the work of others via high rents and low wages?

[@jerrygreene1493]

@Big Al My plan to regulate greed; the wealthy profiting off the work of others: 70% marginal tax rate for income above $400k/year, including from capital gains, e.g. real estate investment. The tax revenue generated is used to help fund a guaranteed down payment assistance program, available to anyone with a three year work history and ability to pay an affordable mortgage. You work for three years, even at minimum wage, and you can keep up on a mortgage at 30% of your pay, you get to buy something and get out from under the thumb of wealthy landlord investors. List the benefits.

[@hcmythosandlogos]

This guy gave incredibly biased definitions and explanations of all of those words. Not good faith engagement with the ideas at all I'm personally quite right wing on most issues, but I'd give more credit to post-modernists and socialists than this guy does

[@NoFeckingNamesLeft]

You’d be wrong, then.

[@pierrelabounty9917]

Give examples. That's my request. So we can discern. And maybe your better definitions will be next. Maybe not.

[@hcmythosandlogos]

@@pierrelabounty9917 post modernism is a philosophy that recons with the cultural relativity of language and dismisses the idea that truth can be articulated or reached through linguistic means. For pms Language is a social construct and therefore conceptions of truth articulated in language are also social constructs, they believe that those ideas are therefore not correspondent to "facts" but are descriptions of social phenomena. They then tend to layer on the idea that those structures should be critiqued and deconstructed Some schools don't believe in Truth, some schools critique those structures through a lens of power (some through Marxist lens), some schools reject formalism entirely and with it deconstruction Given I watched the video about a month ago, I can't remember his definition of socialism. But... Most real socialists believe in a collective responsibility to the poor, like the chartists or the levellers. Class is a social construct and all people are fundamentally equal. Early Christian socialism came from the idea that all men are made in the image of God and that the differentiation of aristocrats or kings was an inherent tyranny born of the fallen world, that the kingdom of heaven was a kingdom without classes or arbitrary distinctions. Christian socialists still exist. Most popular schools of socialism are now explicitly atheist, but draw on a similar idea to critique and aim to abolish class distinctions or remove any arbitrary distinctions between people (inherited privileges whether of wealth, race or class in particular). There are also more extreme forms of socialism and more soft forms. Many within socialist communities don't believe those extremes are socialist - Leninits or Trots on the left, which is closer (I think) to what he describes. Or on the other side democratic socialists or capitalist socialists who believe things on a sliding scale between dynamic partial redistribution of unearned resources directly through tax and subsidy to dynamic redistribution through a welfare state or safety net. In short, socialism covers a wide range of doctrines. Some "right wing" politicians would seem radically socialist to the Roundheads, while some self-described "social-ists" (famously said by Tony Blair) would be seen as right wing apologists by modern left wingers. In particular, what he talks about in the video around postmodernism is a hybrid of several positions which sometimes overlap but are in fact different and non-conjoined schools of thought

[@josevlog7776]

This guy is so off point about Marxism. Marxist totalitarianism can also be seen to stem from a monopolization of the individual and a rejection hierarchical social structure. Marx was intellectually indebted to romanticism whose picture of the individual was many times more radical than that of liberalism and could be seen as destructive in many ways. In the German Ideology Engels and Marx continuously cash out communism as the stage when the individual is free to express their needs and desires external of social pressures. This guy is a charlatan who barely reads the people he talks about.

[@ChrisWillx]

Interesting. Who do you regard as an authority on the subject?

[@josevlog7776]

@@ChrisWillx The German Idealism scholar Allen Wood has a good introduction to marx but it's not straight out critical because Wood is first and foremost a historian of philosophy and treats Marx like a philosopher. Second, the liberal Jurgen Habermas is really influenced by Marx but has good critiques of Marxists and post-modernists in his "The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity" and "Theory and Practice". But like even if Wood and Habermas aren't that critical of Marx at least they have good readings of him. I've worked in a few philosophy departments and academia and in general and people like Hicks are ridiculed by leftists for a good reason, he actually doesn't engage the figures he critiques. If we liberals etc. want to win, we actually have to read the people we critique.

[@cowabungadude7408]

@@josevlog7776 Just because Marx and Engels theorized that the communist stage of history would result in maximum individual freedom doesn't mean that, in practice, implementing communism has that outcome. It's just as plausible (in fact, it's far MORE plausible) that Marx and Engels were wrong. Communism leads inexorably to a reduction in individual freedom, as has been shown in the 75+ contemporary and historical countries in which it has been attempted. The key difference between leftists and Hicks is the same as the reason why Thomas Sowell ceased being a socialist (which he was, during his studies at Harvard): he observed the real world and modified his beliefs accordingly.

[@dabeveryday9991]

agreed. this ''professor' is just some hack who uses his title to spout bile. Laughing along talking complete shite with the host agreeing without seeing the otherside. God help anyone who has to learn from he who doesnt have an impartial bone in his body

[@josevlog7776]

@@cowabungadude7408 but that is a wholly separate question from what I was saying. Whether you attack the ideology on tennets of belief, which Hicks was doing when he talks of the individual, contra when you point to a discrepancy between a certain item of an ideology and its practical implementation. The latter can be a greater source of criticism, because if your opponent is interested in coherence citing this incoherence as a source can be powerful. Now if you actually blame people for their ideology being against freedom they'll probably just scoff at you. Similarly as free market liberals would rightly laugh at leftists for calling them "pro-inequality" and blame leftists for confusing equality of outcome and opportunity

[@ijclark]

Bit worried Stephen is suggesting people don’t know their history whilst also outlining some ahistorical talking points that suggests a lack of knowledge of political history. Might be worth sticking to philosophy rather than straying out of his lane tbh.

[@ijclark]

Very pejorative definition of postmodernism, and not a very good one tbh.

[@jerrygreene1493]

According to Hicks, someone thinks the modern world has been a mistake? Strange. Let's check him out. 'We take in information about the world, there are variations in definitions, post modernism, modernism is the last 500 years, art is changing, how the human body works, astronomy, there is a huge amount going on, we do science differently, the modern world, the post moderns argue that we think that has all come to an end, those revolutions have lead to pathological results, we need to go in a different direction, the modern world has capitalism and democracy, the leading post modernists are anti democratic, they are authoritarian, adversarial authoritarian tactics, anti capitalism, the modern world is a disaster. They argue that science and technology are negative, male and white ways of thinking. Modernism pursues happiness and tolerance and individualism. Post modernists don't believe in individuals, modern world freedom and science, post modernism rejects all of that...' [Question to Modern Wisdom: does Hicks identify these alleged post modernists? If not, how do you know he just didn't make it up as some fictitious bogey man that he can just attack with cotton candy punches and win easily? Apparently, some unspecified force or movement argues against science, truth, democracy, happiness, tolerance, and instead they want authoritarian rule and mind control. Wow these post modernists sound really scary and evil. The remaining question is; who are they, or did Hicks just make this all up?] I guess this is For Dummies, meaning that dummies will swallow the whole pill. We all know that society has advanced by realizing the world is round and the earth revolves around the sun etc. But thanks for explaining that to us Stephen. Post modernists think that advances in modern medicine and technology are pathological results? Who the heck are these dorks Stephen? Modern Wisdom calls this fantastic. Now on to socialism. It is an economic and political idea, some people think people can pursue their dreams and careers, socialism says the group is more important for the individual, religion, catholic says you can set aside individuals, protestants say you do your thing, go our separate ways, in economics, you decide your career you can make your own deals and decisions, socialists argue we should not function as individuals, institutions decide what gets made and people should follow those decisions made by the institution...' [Once again Modern Wisdom: Who are these socialists that want people to not choose their careers and dreams and decisions and deals? Let me help you out here to see through Hicks Tricks: He props up an evil force that is against science and people pursuing their dreams, and then he enters the ring to battle with the Sinister Straw Man, and quickly achieves a knockout in the 3rd round, que the theme song to Rocky. Dummies don't see through it, non dummies do.]

[@TheDracutforum]

I like to hear all arguments. I've ordered his book, he presents an opinion (sounds like many).. Do you have one? or can you recommend one or more with alternate views?

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@TheDracutforum You want my opinion on what? Peterson? Here is JP describing himself on his thinkspot: I can think a little bit. I see things the way I see them, I have massive blind spots, I am as ignorant as hell. If I say it stupidly, because of course I do, because what do I know?- Other people will tell me where I am wrong, and then I can learn, and then everybody can think. I am free to be stupid and ignorant and malevolent and bitter. Because that is who I am.

[@shawnashe9710]

@@jerrygreene1493 I'm sorry, I was taking about Hicks (where did peterson come into it?). I'm learning on my own, and trying to find sources from different opinions/points of view, that's all. That Peterson quote is interesting, its obviously his method of being entertaining as he says that he has an opinion, but agrees others will disagree with him. I believe he has an interview with Hicks online I am going to try to find. I don't tend to look at quotes out of context, so will look for that as well. Peterson and Hicks both seem to have large followings because, I think, they are willing to discuss with their students and listeners what they believe and their sources and experience. Its something much more fascinating to put time into than video games and reality tv.

[@jerrygreene1493]

@@shawnashe9710 So you want my opinion on Hicks? Quote one of his statements and I will give you my opinion. Hicks thinks JP is smart, that undermines Hicks credibility for sure.

[@johncrow5552]

The difference is, medicine took steps, small steps, backed it up with research. The left want to start by tearing everything from its foundations and then? they have no real answers for what happens next. Look at the rise of single mothers. This is a direct result of feminism and the wealth fare state but yet its men being blamed for "toxic masculinity". If the left stopped and thought why "toxic masculinity" exists (if it even does) and decided to change their views on families then there would be some similarity between the left and medicine but currently there isn't. Furthermore they are not open to debating ideas, instead they created cancel culture which is totalitarian in nature.

[@antoniolima1068]

Stephen Hicks as no credibility.

[@johncrow5552]

As opposed to you and your comment?

[@trythinking8967]

Hicks is an “academic” for people who don’t know any better. Yes, he’s well read, and yes, he’s a persuasive speaker, and yes, I’m sure he got his PhD in the usual ways. But to say his approach in these talks is unbiased or even scholarly is absurd. He doesn’t define his terms, he reduces complex issues to false binaries, and he cherry picks quotes and dishonesty shoehorns them into his arguments. He’s not a truth-seeker (as most honest scholars are), he’s a panderer and an opportunist, just like his pal Jorden Peterson. He’s cashing in on the Right and Alt-right’s fear and/or confusion about progressive politics. Why? Because it pays. Just like Peterson, Hicks is a shameless huckster. His books are not scholarly, they’re pop-philosophy. He’s also an Ayn Rand apologist and a lackey for the Atlas Society, and this alone speaks volumes about his partisan allegiances. I’m sick of all these fake ‘professorial’ presentations. Hick’s is smart enough to know he’s being utterly dishonest.

[@PattisKarriereKarten]

Also thought he came across quite biased. He only had to explain what the terms mean, but he also gave his opinion which is better, while conveniently forgetting how much poverty and suffering on a personal level extreme libertarian societies as the US cause. Anyone who only cries for even LESS government interference than there is currently in the US is nuts. Collectivism on the other hand is bad too. You have to find a middle ground of the two ideologies and the best approach to that so far are social democracies, however flawed they still are.