Boethius

In some of my previous posts I have mentioned spending time struggling with Critical Race Theory. In particular, I am an academic who belonged to a racial affinity group for over a year reading a variety of books on these topics. One thing that is incredibly striking about the conversations is that the more you engage with them the "deeper" they bring you into yourself. This is very much unlike other cultural topics -- climate change, for example, where the conversation is likely to revolve around the strong scientific consensus that change is happening, some of the political proposals for keeping global warming under control, and some relatively modest changes we can make in our lives to help do our part as individuals. With CRT you can start at the level of interpersonal interactions between white people and POC, go down a level to internal thought processes (implicit biases), then descend into the level of emotions and unhealed trauma, push down into the level or morality and politics, and finally plunge all the way down to metaphysics and theology. In fact, as a Christian I can say that nothing has helped reconcile me to my Christian faith as thoroughly as has engagement with CRT -- if I am guilty of racial sin simply by virtue of being white, as CRT strongly leads one to believe, then from what quarter can I hope to receive any amount of redemption or salvation? My point is that discussions that take CRT as the framework can quickly spiral into incredibly sensitive territory (hence all the admonitions against "white women's tears"). I do not think that most of what I listed above are appropriate topics for the workplace, even in spite of the fact that many institutions and schools are holding these sorts of conversations among their employees. I don't think anyone at work really needs to hear about how I came to accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, I don't think I need to reshare childhood wounds and traumas that have very much informed my views on race and redemption (Robin DiAngelo herself relates her brutally painful childhood to her relationship with race), and I don't see the value in hashing out my personal position on incredibly divisive political questions (like the appropriate interpretation of the slogan Defund the Police). So seeing all of this laid out, what are some healthy boundaries for engaging with CRT at the workplace in a professional manner? I'm thinking of things like "I don't feel comfortable discussing my childhood traumas at work". In many ways, I'm asking about the situations under which it is in fact appropriate for a white person to remain *silent* about their relationship with race in order to avoid professionally inappropriate oversharing. I know that CRT explicitly says that "silence is violence" but I again think this is a divisive slogan (remaining silent when a coworker is being racially harassed is unethical but a certain level of emotional restraint and hence silence is professional). Thoughts?

@Opo The examples that pop off the top of my head are ones of moderating the "progressive" impulse to tear it all down and have a full-on revolution. I have not seen on Slate, for example, any consideration of which statues it might not be wise to tear down or the fact that not each and every single problem the Black community faces can be laid at the feet of white folk. This makes sense, given that we are in a polarized period of time where most politically minded and active people view politics as a game of tug-and-war between two competing sides (so that everyone is incentivized to pull as hard as they can in their team's direction and give no slack to the opposition). But if your interest is in thinking through problems systematically then it is simply not the case that the most radically leftist position is going to be the most practically effective one. So the conservatives I listed above have useful perspectives to offer in providing some balance (and I should mention that most of them are adamantly opposed to Trumpism). A decent taste of what I mean is offered by David Brooks' most recent article: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/13/opinion/conservative-radicals.html And the commenters there are very predictably confused/angry by what he wrote since they expect political pieces to be arguments either for or against one of the two major parties in the US, so that they just don't have a way of making sense of something that's more idiosyncratic and "individualized" even.

For the past couple years I have mainly followed the journalists Damon Linker, Ross Douthat, David Brooks, Rod Dreher, Matthew Walther, Andrew Sullivan, and Michael Brendan Dougherty. All of whom I realize are either centrists or conservatives! Well, I used to be super progressive on most issues, so I know the progressive position backwards and forwards and can read random articles on Slate, NYTimes, Vox, BBC, etc. and generally agree with the position being advocated while also seeing the limitations of that position (limitations that conservatives are more able and willing to explicitly identify than are progressives).

@Girzo I was thinking Yellow because there are personal relationships in the game (optional romantic interests even) along with very "holistic" story lines.

For Green I would say a game like "Life is Strange" that emphasizes the development of personal relationships. For Yellow maybe something like "Mass Effect".

And yet America, arguably, was only ready & willing to elect its first Black president precisely because of how accomplished Barack Obama personally was. Put differently, if Barack Obama "set the standard" for Black people in America, then America felt like it had nothing to fear in elevating a Black man to the highest office in the land. It was after Obama became president and started bringing awareness to the suffering of the Black community (with unfair policing as with the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. and with brutality as with the murder of Trayvon Martin) that America's attitude started to curdle. It was one thing, after all, to acknowledge Black people when they were self-reliantly overcoming lingering hardship -- such an acknowledgment actually flatters America's view of herself as the Land of Opportunity -- but quite another to acknowledge the ongoing debt that America owes to the Black community and the ways in which America continues to fail her Black citizens. Hence Trump. As soon as Black people started asking for help or demanding accountability from the government, what they got instead was the boot. From the beginning, Trump directed law enforcement agencies to halt the trainings and initiatives they had started to put in place under Obama for curtailing police brutality. And he seemed to think the Black community should be grateful for his administration ("what have you got to lose?" he asked of Black people many times). So we know from Obama's time as president that "respectability politics" isn't going to work in inspiring (white) America to provide the relief the Black community requires. We know from Trump's time as *whatever it is he is doing* that blunt force isn't going to magically cause the Black community to straighten out its own affairs. The only option left is for the Black community to play a leading role in setting governmental policy for uplifting its people. This will come about from both the Black community seeking such power and from (white) America ceding its power in turn. Hence the excitement over Biden choosing a Black vice-president.

If we take as given the simple fact that physical objects act according to fixed "laws of Nature", we might ask why we human beings are the one thing in the universe that don't (seem) to obey such laws. I'm reminded of the poem: "Creator of the starry heavens, Lord on thy everlasting throne, Thy power turns the moving sky And makes the stars obey fixed laws. Thou makest lesser stars grow dim Before the Moon's reflected rays When opposite her kinsman bright; Then closer to the Sun she moves And loses all her borrowed light. Thou the Evening Star dost make Rise cold and clear in early night, And change, as Morning Star, his reins To pale before the new sun's light. When Winter's cold has stripped the trees Thou holdest day in confines tight: When Summer comes with torrid heat Thou givest swifter hours to night. Thy power rules the changing year: The tender leaves the North wind stole The Spring West wind makes reappear; The seeds that Winter saw new sown The Summer burns as crops full-grown. All things obey their ancient law And all perform their proper tasks; All things thou holdest in strict bounds, -- To human acts alone denied Thy fit control as Lord of all. Why else does slippery Fortune change So much, and punishment more fit For crimes oppress the innocent? Corrupted men sit throned on high; By strange reversal wickedness Downtreads the necks of holy men. Bright virtue lies in dark eclipse By clouds obscured, and unjust men Heap condemnation on the just; No punishment for perjury Or lies adorned with speciousness. They use their power when whimsy bids, And love to subjugate great kings Whose sway holds countless men in fear. O Thou who bindest bonds of things Look down on all earth's wretchedness; Of this great work is man so mean A part, by Fortune to be tossed? Lord, hold the rushing waves in check, And with the bond thou rul'st the stars, Make stable all the lands of earth." -- Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy

I started working on my own trauma once I got away from my family and went into college. It's been a long ongoing process, however, and one that I was only able to really start focussing on once my education was complete and I was reasonably secure in my profession.

I wonder if the US was always going to have problems controlling a virus like this -- relative to other countries -- because of how large we are and how many international airport hubs we have. Not that the administration's response has been anything less than inept, of course. But I do figure this was going to be pretty bad for us no matter what.

I don't have that kind of power -- I'm relatively new to these forums myself. I was trying to point out to you that we can engage in political topics in ways that are constructive (respectful, relevant, exploratory) instead of being merely provocative and argumentative. And I actually think there is a good topic here, about the ways in which conservatives might experience liberal political norms as being tyrannical. But as others also pointed out, I don't think the way you started this thread was likely to lead to that sort of deeper conversation.

I believe honor is a fundamentally Blue value. So it sounds like you would be looking for a person who is transitioning from Red into Blue. Maybe someone like Charlemagne after he became baptized into Christianity. As an aside, recall that he threatened death for any of his followers who didn't convert to Christianity, which quite a Red way of imposing Blue!

@IJB063 You start from a premise that the people on this forum are "Trosky esque" in their views and then ask people to reveal how highly they score on a fascism test, where your conception of fascism is that of an anti-semitic neo-Nazi. It's hard to understand what you think this will achieve, aside from the exact same provocation that Leo has set as a warning to avoid. Why don't you try to constructively engage with the members of this forum instead of picking a fight?

As the computer scientists say, "garbage in, garbage out".

I get the sense that when people think of "socialism" they are imagining the USSR's version of Communism, as in the clip below. That clip does a good job showing how it is that a Green sounding idea like Communism is actually Blue to the core, and why we need to carefully distinguish between "socialism" as it exists in the Nordic countries, for example, from Communism as it existed in the USSR.

It might be worth noting that theories of childhood development (like Piaget's) are pretty much uncontroversial. It is theories of adult development that generate more controversy and doubt.

@lmfao Speaking for myself, I still carry with me the "weight" of a particular mistake I made 20 years ago. But I will say the weight has gotten lighter over time. Maybe one day it won't even be something I'm thinking about, who knows...

@Scholar What do you mean by "scientifically literate"? Are we talking about physics, chemistry, biology, math or are we talking psychology, sociology, philosophy? And are we talking about academics or laypeople? As I mentioned, Robert Kegan is a developmental psychologist who came up with his own five part scheme for human growth, he is an advocate of the SD model himself, and I believe he is the chair of a psychological department at Harvard University. So it's not true that developmental psychology in itself is not peer-reviewed, though that is more likely to be true of SD than of other developmental models given that Clare Graves died before his work could be published.

@Scholar First of all, I think we need to keep in mind that SD is a model of human beings rather than physical objects. That is going to change the standards for "scientific accuracy". Second of all, there are many other models for the development of human beings, with theorists including Robert Kegan, Lawrence Kohlberg, Jane Loevinger, James Fowler, Jean Piaget, etc. So yours isn't a question that has a simple answer...

No one is saying communism is what's required right now.

Isn't this the very definition of what Orange values?

@louhad

@-Tim- I am looking through the post "Black Lives Matter" that Dutch Guy started where he argued that the only problem with race in America is that Americans are so focussed on race. I also see that he states he is from the Netherlands. Let's just say that if a person is not from the USA they probably shouldn't be cavalierly weighing in on racial issues in the USA -- this is an incredibly easy way to show off their ignorance & possible prejudice, so it's not surprising they get called racist or a white supremacist.

Kind of.... The doctrine of Imago Dei (common to Christianity, Judaism, and Sufism) says we are made "in the image and likeness of God" with an incredibly detailed theology that has been developed over the centuries around how to make sense of that. Though honestly, I don't think going through all of those particulars is very illuminating on its own. Instead, I find two quotes by St. Paul to be more instructive: Galatian 2:20 says "My old self has been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." Philippians 2:5 says "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus."

@Nak Khid Beck also came out (in conjunction with a few other authors) with another book in 2018 called Spiral Dynamics in Action: Humanity's Master Code where they very specifically apply spiral dynamics to a variety of different regions in the world, including work they've done on Israel and Palestine. This a denser and more technical book than the one you mentioned from 1996, so I've been only reading bits and pieces of it, but it's simply false that spiral dynamics is somehow not "reputable". Hell, I've heard (though I don't have citation for this) that the US government trains some of its foreign affairs officers in SD!