There's an interesting dynamic here where imo the silent majority of progressives don't buy his approach and think it's counterproductive, but any lone soul who says so is called out, which side are you on here anyways.

So this guy gets to represent himself as a spokesman for the movement and nobody really wants to contradict it under their real name.

Perhaps, but I think it’s often less a matter of being afraid of calling extremists out, and more of what I heard someone once refer to as “sane-washing”. Progressives hear extremist views and say “when they say X, what they really are saying is Y. No one actually wants X”, when in reality that’s exactly what extremists want and it gives them cover to continue to push the Overton window until it’s no longer an extremist view. The above exchange is a perfect example.

This is a good take and probably covers 2/3 of liberals, actually, thanks.

He isn't a lone wolf or something though. Critical Theory covers not only race (as in this case) but gender, sexuality, disability and fat studies, and all types of "social justice" scholarship. They all come from Postcolonial Theory (essentially deconstructing Western thought and Western Liberalism) which has had a massive influence on all of these as they have adapted them.

From bell hooks and Kimberle Crenshaw (intersectionality) into leading theories on feminist and racial thought - this is the progressive and academic left. It is the leading thought in every elite university. And you can't run away from it and say "us silent majority progressives...." - a progressive is either this or they aren't progressive by today's standard. It is a social force that is trying to get inside of everything it can, from unrelated academic scholarship (look at what's in modern STEM curricula) as well as corporate America and now elite high schools.

My advice is to choose Liberalism without identity politics and reject this school of thought as illiberal, totalitarian, and harmful.

(For what it's worth, the entire scholarship of critical theory isn't all awful. There's good things in there and the identification of many societal problems is probably right. However, it isn't unique to them and their solutions for these problems are awful and regressive.)

I'm not trying to let anyone off the hook, just describing the dynamics as I see them.

I identify as a cultural moderate for that reason. This stuff is all divorced from actual politics, economics or governing, it's purely cultural.

> the silent majority of progressives

Really, from what I can see all of current progressivism is compatible with his approach.

The silent majority of people who would have called themselves progressives a decade ago are silent because they are silenced and called racists or just right-wing if they question the new orthodoxy.

Ergo, the people you are referring to as a silent majority are no longer included as progressives.

If all of my policy preferences code as progressive but I think Kendi and the white fragility lady are jackasses, what does that make me then under your definition?

Charitably, cognitively dissonant and more harshly, a useful idiot some would say. I’d assume an egalitarian person who means well and has started to become suspicious of the more illiberal aspects of progressive motivations.

Wow. So, what, I have to vote Trump now? That won't be happening but always interesting to hear different perspectives.

> So, what, I have to vote Trump now?

Why is that the implied option?

Americans live in a two party system. The only realistic alternative to the Democrats, who are associated with progressives, are the Republicans.

Even if you believe that a two party system is the only possibility, you can do many things that don’t involve voting for Trump.

The 'useful idiot' part that I replied to.

“Useful idiot” is a term coined back in the day to describe people who unwittingly spread the propaganda of communists without really understanding the ultimate goals. In this case being a progressive while disagreeing with the leading ideas of the movement.

And no it doesn’t mean a vote for Trump. It means not supporting candidates that parrot this type of rhetoric and to not support causes/movements that are a part of it. FWIW Trump did ban critical race theory from being brought into federal offices and Biden quickly reinstated it under the guise of “learning to be nice to each other” - which it isn’t. Biden, in this case, I believe is a useful idiot for propagating their propaganda, mistaking it for harmless “diversity training”. There’s a big difference!

Worth reflecting on how the John Birch Society looks in retrospect, now that you mention it.

Prophets, or paranoid fools? Are we looking back and saying, gosh, we should have listened to them, that damn Jane Fonda ruined America.

according to kendi's framework, you would be a racist.

Someone who is looking for another group. Kendi and DiAngelo’s ideas are what progressives are actually enacting.

I think that the issue goes both ways. Modern conservatives have adopted a strategy of ignoring or exploiting discrimination and inequality. So if someone cares about addressing those issues, then the current progressives are the only game in town.

> So if someone cares about addressing those issues, then the current progressives are the only game in town.

If you believe in the approach of Kendi and DiAngelo, they are the only game in town.

If you believe Kendi and DiAngelo’s approach is counterproductive then supporting modern progressives is acting against the very issues you care about.

You don’t have to make a choice of which foot to shoot yourself in. You can simply not fire.

There are plenty of more moderate political voices, even within the parties. You can support them and you can denounce the groups whose policies you dislike.

Modern progressives are only in the ‘game’ because people support them. If you don’t like what they represent, you can stop.

> Modern conservatives have adopted a strategy of ignoring or exploiting discrimination and inequality

Are you saying that conservatives today are more likely to engage in "exploiting discrimination and inequality" than conservatives yesterday? Or what did you mean by "modern"?