Sep 20, 2023·edited Sep 20, 2023Liked by Lorenzo Warby
Excellent and detailed analysis this.
A broad-brush comment (tangential but I think closely related to this discussion)....... it seems to me (in my eighth decade) that our current hyper-liberal 'wokeness' is perhaps just an inevitable late stage on the downslope of Western Liberal Individualism's trajectory. I think perhaps the greatest degenerative element of the last 60 years has been the displacement of a mentality of "we are all sinners" (mixtures of good and bad impulses) by a narcissistic mentality of maximal "self esteem". Less blaming oneself for one's discontents and more blaming someone (or something) else.
On the matter of HOW this late stage in Liberalism's downslope developed, I think it is important to keep in perspective a balance between Conspiracy and Cock-up as explanatory tools. Histories can tend to overemphasise the importance of Hitlers, Stalins, Maos and Gramscis and Yes, ESG Networks because - dark as those stories are - the truth is darker still....these mega-powerful demons would have been nothing without the tens/hundreds of millions of favour-seeking, grudge-bearing 'ordinary folk' seduced by their snake oil. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/invasion-of-the-virtue-signallers
We are a religious species for a reason. It is quite clear that “wokery” does, in a certain, perverse, way, “re-enchant” the world. I read a chapter, published in 1961, on the dynamics of Chinese Thought Reform and it is both scary and revealing how much it “gets” the psychology of the “woke”.
Part of the appeal of victimhood is something we might call “the narcissism of neuroticism” where one’s own emotions get inflated in significance. (A term I came to from interrogating dysfunctional aspects of my own behaviour in reacting to emotional pain.)
A key aspect of “modernity” is our technology way outpacing our evolutionary adaptations. There is an interaction between leaders and movements that rely on the psycho-emotional dynamics of both. Jordan Peterson has discussed this.
I am not sure how inevitable “wokery” is, given it comes out of a particular intellectual tradition that might well have never existed. But that there has been selection to target various institutional and psychological frailties is very clear.
Sep 21, 2023·edited Sep 21, 2023Liked by Lorenzo Warby
I concur with the other commenters that this essay is top notch, especially via exploring the evolved and/or demonstrated psychologies and social/technical impacts as probable causes of much of this woke related nonsense. I will be copying this essay to Word to better highlight and comment on those sentences of greatest value.
But as a person who never had religious training or exposure as a child, and have never been very religious, I do hope you can amplify on your remark "We are a religious species for a reason." Perhaps a link to a prior essay or ???
I have only recently come to the otherwise obvious realization that all of those really smart friends I know who are religious, are also ... very smart. So intelligence cannot be a major factor in their levels of faith and belief*. Therefore, I suspect another portion of our evolved psychology is in play, possibly in parallel with "executive function". Maybe this evolved desire for transcendence (to use Larry Arnhart's phrase) exists on a spectrum of intensity and capability, as do many other human capabilities (physical and mental). I am at one end of this spectrum (along with millions of other folks) and my friends and a few billion others are further long in the other direction. As you or others may have mentioned previously, the survival value of increased cooperation among people adopting a common belief system seems very credible as (at least part of) the natural selection rationale for this.
*I won't bother checking for the source of the approximate quote "that you cannot reason someone out of a given viewpoint if they were never reasoned into it in the first place."
I agree with pretty much all of this except that, in my 'big picture', I incline to the view that no one has been much in control of this recent (or any other) stage Liberal Individualism's trajectory (hence my Conspiracy/Cock-up framing).
Philosophically I am closest to John Gray on Liberalism. I hardly dare think it to myself but, in truth, I don't think most people really want Freedom (and they certainly don't want Equality); nor are they that well adapted to it. I think Western Liberal Individualism has been a marvel - the greatest civilisation that there has ever been - but I fear its day is done nevertheless.
I am still (naive enough to be?) inclined to optimism. [I have not read John Gray - any recommended links?]
But I do agree that "Western Liberal Individualism has been a marvel - the greatest civilisation that there has ever been", presumably largely from the cultural impacts of our Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman plus Enlightenment heritage. Too bad this heritage was not more forcefully employed in the colonial US and elsewhere in the world sooner and more widely to end slavery. None the less, I do not understand the "guilt posture" we are supposed to adopt a century or two after it was ended, never used by our grandparents or others, etc.
Lorenzo et al; I would be extremely careful not to call a Hispanic Man “Latinix” in America, unless you wish to discover their readiness to do violence is not at all mere hype.
I only use it sparingly with close comrades who understand I’m Irish and love me anyway, because being a wise ass is a congenital defect. Also I’m already a friend.
Sep 21, 2023·edited Sep 21, 2023Liked by Lorenzo Warby
Yes to all that. All these otherwise admirable conservative thinkers (Rufo, Hanania, Lyons, Crawford) frame things too much in terms of conspiracies and bogeymen, thereby absolving humankind in general of complicity in its fate. Yours is the first comment I've come across that chimes (somewhat anyway) with my own perspective (as outlined in my comments below) .
I really enjoy your work. Excellent analysis.
Excellent and detailed analysis this.
A broad-brush comment (tangential but I think closely related to this discussion)....... it seems to me (in my eighth decade) that our current hyper-liberal 'wokeness' is perhaps just an inevitable late stage on the downslope of Western Liberal Individualism's trajectory. I think perhaps the greatest degenerative element of the last 60 years has been the displacement of a mentality of "we are all sinners" (mixtures of good and bad impulses) by a narcissistic mentality of maximal "self esteem". Less blaming oneself for one's discontents and more blaming someone (or something) else.
On the matter of HOW this late stage in Liberalism's downslope developed, I think it is important to keep in perspective a balance between Conspiracy and Cock-up as explanatory tools. Histories can tend to overemphasise the importance of Hitlers, Stalins, Maos and Gramscis and Yes, ESG Networks because - dark as those stories are - the truth is darker still....these mega-powerful demons would have been nothing without the tens/hundreds of millions of favour-seeking, grudge-bearing 'ordinary folk' seduced by their snake oil. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/invasion-of-the-virtue-signallers
We are a religious species for a reason. It is quite clear that “wokery” does, in a certain, perverse, way, “re-enchant” the world. I read a chapter, published in 1961, on the dynamics of Chinese Thought Reform and it is both scary and revealing how much it “gets” the psychology of the “woke”.
Part of the appeal of victimhood is something we might call “the narcissism of neuroticism” where one’s own emotions get inflated in significance. (A term I came to from interrogating dysfunctional aspects of my own behaviour in reacting to emotional pain.)
A key aspect of “modernity” is our technology way outpacing our evolutionary adaptations. There is an interaction between leaders and movements that rely on the psycho-emotional dynamics of both. Jordan Peterson has discussed this.
I am not sure how inevitable “wokery” is, given it comes out of a particular intellectual tradition that might well have never existed. But that there has been selection to target various institutional and psychological frailties is very clear.
I concur with the other commenters that this essay is top notch, especially via exploring the evolved and/or demonstrated psychologies and social/technical impacts as probable causes of much of this woke related nonsense. I will be copying this essay to Word to better highlight and comment on those sentences of greatest value.
But as a person who never had religious training or exposure as a child, and have never been very religious, I do hope you can amplify on your remark "We are a religious species for a reason." Perhaps a link to a prior essay or ???
I have only recently come to the otherwise obvious realization that all of those really smart friends I know who are religious, are also ... very smart. So intelligence cannot be a major factor in their levels of faith and belief*. Therefore, I suspect another portion of our evolved psychology is in play, possibly in parallel with "executive function". Maybe this evolved desire for transcendence (to use Larry Arnhart's phrase) exists on a spectrum of intensity and capability, as do many other human capabilities (physical and mental). I am at one end of this spectrum (along with millions of other folks) and my friends and a few billion others are further long in the other direction. As you or others may have mentioned previously, the survival value of increased cooperation among people adopting a common belief system seems very credible as (at least part of) the natural selection rationale for this.
*I won't bother checking for the source of the approximate quote "that you cannot reason someone out of a given viewpoint if they were never reasoned into it in the first place."
Thank you. This essay discusses religion through the evolutionary lens.
https://www.notonyourteam.co.uk/p/the-transcult
I agree with pretty much all of this except that, in my 'big picture', I incline to the view that no one has been much in control of this recent (or any other) stage Liberal Individualism's trajectory (hence my Conspiracy/Cock-up framing).
Philosophically I am closest to John Gray on Liberalism. I hardly dare think it to myself but, in truth, I don't think most people really want Freedom (and they certainly don't want Equality); nor are they that well adapted to it. I think Western Liberal Individualism has been a marvel - the greatest civilisation that there has ever been - but I fear its day is done nevertheless.
"re-enchant the world"....I love that phrase.
I am still (naive enough to be?) inclined to optimism. [I have not read John Gray - any recommended links?]
But I do agree that "Western Liberal Individualism has been a marvel - the greatest civilisation that there has ever been", presumably largely from the cultural impacts of our Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman plus Enlightenment heritage. Too bad this heritage was not more forcefully employed in the colonial US and elsewhere in the world sooner and more widely to end slavery. None the less, I do not understand the "guilt posture" we are supposed to adopt a century or two after it was ended, never used by our grandparents or others, etc.
This link is to a conversation between John Gray and NYT columnist Ross Douthat....I found it very interesting. https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2022/01/the-light-that-failed-why-liberalism-is-in-crisis
Lorenzo et al; I would be extremely careful not to call a Hispanic Man “Latinix” in America, unless you wish to discover their readiness to do violence is not at all mere hype.
I only use it sparingly with close comrades who understand I’m Irish and love me anyway, because being a wise ass is a congenital defect. Also I’m already a friend.
Yes, it is a nonsense term. But it was striking how quickly it spread within the “woke”, before public ridicule put a bit of a crimp on it.
“so long as it is (jihad) , no action is a crime both arises from, and attracts, such personalities “
Yes to all that. All these otherwise admirable conservative thinkers (Rufo, Hanania, Lyons, Crawford) frame things too much in terms of conspiracies and bogeymen, thereby absolving humankind in general of complicity in its fate. Yours is the first comment I've come across that chimes (somewhat anyway) with my own perspective (as outlined in my comments below) .
Thank you.