He’s right in the sense that performative wokeness is not a threat to power and that power is very successfully coopting and weaponizing idpol to inoculate itself against criticism, but he’s concluding that intersectionality itself is useless or even damaging. which is, in a word, bullshit
first, before I say anything, I have a conspiracy theory. glenn is straight up saying stupid/controversial/provocative shit because he's scared for his life in brazil. the ruling class in brazil has the means of assassinating journalists and not being held accountable. he's been associated with a couple of local journalists who've been assasinated. I straight up think the guy is drawing this attention to himself because he knows the more relevant you are in America the less likely you are to be murdered.
second, I'm not seeing him conclude in the way you think he is. In a recent interview of his, he sounded extremely cynical about american politics (which is the only correct view) but also proclaimed his support for the lgbt and blm struggle.
Greenwald is a lib, but he's also a journalist with integrity and has a far more internationalist view than you're average Bernie supporter. those latter two things should matter more to us than his opinions because 99% of americans have opinions way more trash than his.
I straight up think the guy is drawing this attention to himself because he knows the more relevant you are in America the less likely you are to be murdered.
Its' a common strategy for the wealthy to increase their public profile to make themselves less assassinateable. Like buying a football team or a newspaper or something. It's quite logical for Greewald to be possibly doing something similar imo.
Yeah, well aware of the history. Doesn't change the fact that he's much safer with a large international profile than without and that it's a common strategy. What other ways would be more effective, genuinely?
i think a problem here might be disagreement about what "intersectionality itself" refers to. if it's just the barest bones of standpoint epistemology holding up a long list of polite manners, as many people across the political spectrum seem to think it is, then Glenner's analysis is pretty reasonable.
He isn’t concluding intersectionality itself is useless. There are debates to be had over the value of intersectionality in a pre revolutionary environment
He’s right in the sense that performative wokeness is not a threat to power and that power is very successfully coopting and weaponizing idpol to inoculate itself against criticism, but he’s concluding that intersectionality itself is useless or even damaging. which is, in a word, bullshit
first, before I say anything, I have a conspiracy theory. glenn is straight up saying stupid/controversial/provocative shit because he's scared for his life in brazil. the ruling class in brazil has the means of assassinating journalists and not being held accountable. he's been associated with a couple of local journalists who've been assasinated. I straight up think the guy is drawing this attention to himself because he knows the more relevant you are in America the less likely you are to be murdered.
second, I'm not seeing him conclude in the way you think he is. In a recent interview of his, he sounded extremely cynical about american politics (which is the only correct view) but also proclaimed his support for the lgbt and blm struggle.
Greenwald is a lib, but he's also a journalist with integrity and has a far more internationalist view than you're average Bernie supporter. those latter two things should matter more to us than his opinions because 99% of americans have opinions way more trash than his.
This is exceedingly unlikely.
Its' a common strategy for the wealthy to increase their public profile to make themselves less assassinateable. Like buying a football team or a newspaper or something. It's quite logical for Greewald to be possibly doing something similar imo.
He said things like that before Brazil, just not as much
There is a million other ways to do that which would probably be more effective too.
Yeah, well aware of the history. Doesn't change the fact that he's much safer with a large international profile than without and that it's a common strategy. What other ways would be more effective, genuinely?
I mean there are other ways to be intentionally controversial and talked about... Ones that won't alienate a big part of your audience...
hmm Greenwald has been less worried than his peers about alienating whatever could be defined as his audience imo
i think a problem here might be disagreement about what "intersectionality itself" refers to. if it's just the barest bones of standpoint epistemology holding up a long list of polite manners, as many people across the political spectrum seem to think it is, then Glenner's analysis is pretty reasonable.
Not just to inoculate against criticism, but as an offensive tool in atrocity propaganda.
He isn’t concluding intersectionality itself is useless. There are debates to be had over the value of intersectionality in a pre revolutionary environment