It’s telling the the comment you’re responding to, the best comment in the thread, is flagged and dead so fast.
They are clearly co-opting university departments around the nation to prevent left wing revolution or any meaningful anticapitalist stuff from happening. This has happened since at least the 1960s and a significant amount of the dumbest parts of “wokism” was planted by the IC into academia.
I’m so fucking tired of having to listen to yet more academic post modern neo Marxism from folks who are obviously connected to the IC. We know that you only use this rhetoric to knee cap actual “revolutionaries”.
my take is significantly more nuanced; orthodox Marxists aren't really very interesting nor do they have a good concrete understanding of things. Those French thinkers, particularly Derrida, have a legitimate response to "revolutionaries," and its not his fault that his philosophy was co-opted by the IC. For his part, I know scholars who are certainly outside that world, who are very radical and take a great deal of influence from him.
I don't think it's about one ideology over the other. It's about extremism of any sort that threatens to become violent. I'm not justifying or excusing it, but in my limited experience it's mostly about the bureaucratic justification of continued funding. Then the nuance becomes: 'Are these extremist movements genuine speech, or a function of foreign interference' and more often than not, it's both.
(I have no idea why the parent comment was flagged, would love an explanation for it though)
And those graduates also subsequently make their way into the IC.
It’s telling the the comment you’re responding to, the best comment in the thread, is flagged and dead so fast.
They are clearly co-opting university departments around the nation to prevent left wing revolution or any meaningful anticapitalist stuff from happening. This has happened since at least the 1960s and a significant amount of the dumbest parts of “wokism” was planted by the IC into academia.
I’m so fucking tired of having to listen to yet more academic post modern neo Marxism from folks who are obviously connected to the IC. We know that you only use this rhetoric to knee cap actual “revolutionaries”.
my take is significantly more nuanced; orthodox Marxists aren't really very interesting nor do they have a good concrete understanding of things. Those French thinkers, particularly Derrida, have a legitimate response to "revolutionaries," and its not his fault that his philosophy was co-opted by the IC. For his part, I know scholars who are certainly outside that world, who are very radical and take a great deal of influence from him.
I don't think it's about one ideology over the other. It's about extremism of any sort that threatens to become violent. I'm not justifying or excusing it, but in my limited experience it's mostly about the bureaucratic justification of continued funding. Then the nuance becomes: 'Are these extremist movements genuine speech, or a function of foreign interference' and more often than not, it's both.
(I have no idea why the parent comment was flagged, would love an explanation for it though)
7 replies →