New Discourses

By New Discourses

Listen to a podcast, please open Podcast Republic app. Available on Google Play Store.

Category: Education

Open in Apple Podcasts

Open RSS feed

Open Website

Rate for this podcast

Subscribers: 159
Reviews: 0


Pursuing the light of objective truth in subjective darkness.

Episode Date
NO! Critical Race Theory Does NOT Continue the Civil Rights Movement
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 22 Critical Race Theorists like to claim that they have inherited and continue the noble legacy and justice work of the Civil Rights Movement, but this is an abject lie. In this episode of James Lindsay OnlySubs, my subscribers-only podcast, I take about half an hour to make the case definitively that, while they are content to portray this illusion, it is a grotesque distortion of reality, using their own words. By exploring the book Critical Race Theory: An Introduction (, by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic (Delgado is something of a founder of Critical Race Theory) and the paper "Mapping the Margins" ( by Kimberlé Crenshaw, who is regarded as one of the true founders of CRT and the founder of intersectionality, the case against the Woke claim on the Civil Rights Movement is easily and definitively made. Join me to hear the details and the argument! -James Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Feb 15, 2021
How the Woke Fail the Paradox of Tolerance
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 21 In 1945, even as the Nazis fell from power, Karl Popper told us how to find the line where free, liberal societies are in imminent danger in his book The Open Society and Its Enemies, most simply summarizing a crucial part of the argument in a short footnote about "The Paradox of Tolerance." There, Popper lays out a short summary of when a free society should and must not tolerate intolerant movements if it is to survive. It is not only when they espouse and preach intolerance but when they also cease to be amenable to reason and rational debate, forbid their followers from listening to reason and rational debate, cannot be held in check by public opinion, and encourage their followers to respond to arguments with "fists or pistols," i.e., violence of some form or another. I contend that the Woke, uniquely, have crossed this line in this episode of the New Discourses Podcast. They are absolutely intolerant, will not debate or listen to alternative perspectives, and, unlike all other hate movements that fail those two criteria, have grown to be completely unchecked and uncheckable by public opinion. This places them outside of the range to which tolerance should be extended in free, open societies, and it identifies them uniquely as a threat to their continuance. Join me to hear my argument for how Karl Popper warned us in 1945 so that we might see this situation when it arose. Infographic: For more on the idea of tolerance, check out the entry on "tolerance" ( in my Critical Social Justice Encyclopedia and check out the four-part series on Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" on the New Discourses podcast, part 1 here: -James Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Feb 11, 2021
Critical Theorists as Grand Inquisitors: The Logic of "Repressive Tolerance"
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 20 Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 4 of 4 In this fourth and final part of his four-part lecture series about "Repressive Tolerance," James Lindsay takes the reader from the darkest point of the essay, which was the exciting climax of Part 3, through the end of Marcuse's argument. In this part, Marcuse dedicates the rest of the original 1965 essay to explaining why it is him and people like him (that is, Critical Theorists) who get to decide what constitutes good violence and bad violence, truth and falsity, liberating tolerance from the kind that must not be tolerated and must be suppressed. In our own time, it is the Woke and the high-powered elites in government, media, education, and law who have taken up this mantle of being able to decide, in the spirit of Herbert Marcuse, what must be tolerated, no matter how bad it is, and what must be suppressed, no matter how legitimate it is. The parallels to our own time are undeniable, and, as Lindsay has claimed throughout, the unavoidable conclusion is that we live in the asymmetric and totalitarian logic of "Repressive Tolerance" today. The second half of this episode leaves the essay itself and dives into a postscript to the original essay that Marcuse added three years later, in 1968, after the logic of his essay had already caused innumerable riots and episodes of civil unrest at the end of that tumultuous and transformational decade. In exploring this postscript, we see Marcuse sticking to his guns, but we also see just how blatantly obvious it is that his repressive tolerance has become the monster it sought to slay, which sheds considerable light upon what some people are now calling "the Great Realignment" in our societies, cultures, and politics. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Feb 08, 2021
Repressive Tolerance: Left Good, Right Bad, What Could Go Wrong?
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 19 Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 3 of 4 In this third part of James Lindsay's lecture series on Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance," we see how the essay takes a particularly dark turn. Having set up the framing of the essay in the first part and explaining the condition of the "administered society" in the second, Marcuse now turns to answering the question of what a Repressive Tolerance should look like, including what it must suppress and what it must tolerate, including the sorts of violence and extralegal behaviors it must tolerate. The statement, which we arrive at near the end of this part, is simple, in Marcuse's own words: "Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left." In this part of the lecture series, Lindsay walks the listener through the darker part of Marcuse's argument to show how he arrives at this blatantly biased and ridiculous conclusion that has set the stage for the totalitarianism we see today in Wokeness and from Big Tech. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Feb 03, 2021
One Pill, Two Pill, Red Pill, Blue Pill: Herbert Marcuse and the Administered Society
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 18 Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 2 of 4 In this second part of his annotated reading of Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance," James Lindsay reads and explains the portion of the essay where Marcuse defines the "administered society" that he claims we live in. The listener will find striking parallels to today's world, which certainly qualifies as the type of "administered society" far more accurately than the world that Marcuse inhabited in the 1960s when he wrote the essay, but paradoxically, or ironically, because it adopts the logic of this very essay as justification for its administration! This part of the series, then, raises particularly interesting questions about whether or not Marcuse would support the fruits of his own work and thus sheds interesting light on the problem we currently find ourselves in. It sets the stage for answering at the end of the series how we might go about solving this problem while avoiding the mistake Marcuse plainly made. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jan 29, 2021
How Not to Resolve the Paradox of Tolerance
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 17 Repressive Tolerance Series, Part 1 of 4 We live in a crazy world today that seems to have gone off the rails. That's because it is being driven by a broken logic, and, for all the flaws on the right, that broken logic is centered in the no-longer-tolerant left. The logic of the left today is overwhelmingly rooted in a single essay published in 1965 by the neo-Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse. That essay is "Repressive Tolerance." The thesis statement of this essay can be boiled down to "movements from the left must be extended tolerance, even when they are violent, while movements from the right must not be tolerated, including suppressing them by violence." This asymmetric ethic has been the heart and soul of left politics in the West since the 1960s, and we're living in the fruit of that catastrophe now. To help people understand this vitally important and intrinsically totalitarian essay and its relevance to our present moment, James Lindsay walks the listener through Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" in a four-part lecture series. In this series, he reads the essay in full and attempts to make clear how it is the logic underlying the present moment. The goal is to explain the essay as Marcuse would have understood it, in his own context, and to show how his own logic has become dominant and the monster that he believed he was fighting. In the first part, Lindsay begins by framing the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory to give background on Marcuse. He also explains that Marcuse seems to be attempting to give a solution to Karl Popper's famous "Paradox of Tolerance," which was provided as an aside in his 1945 book The Open Society and Its Enemies, which analyzed how fascism can arise and overtake liberal societies. Marcuse's answer to this conundrum is that a "discriminating tolerance," a "liberating tolerance," must be practiced that offers favoritism to the left and actively suppresses the right, as he defines them (from a perspective of Critical Theory). Join Lindsay as he contextualizes and then brings the first portion of this essay to life, and stay tuned for Parts 2, 3, and 4 to come! Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jan 26, 2021
Antonio Gramsci, Cultural Marxism, Wokeness, and Leninism 4.0
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 16 If you want to understand the present moment, especially how similar Wokeness seems to Mao's Cultural Revolution, you have to understand the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci wrote a series of essays and books while imprisoned by the Italian fascists in the 1920s and 1930s that are referred to as his Prison Notebooks. These are the birthplace of Cultural Marxism, which James Lindsay argues has evolved into "Identity Marxism" since. Once you understand Gramsci, you can easily understand what is going on with our society at present and understand more clearly than ever why it must be resisted. Though he didn't coin the term, the idea fellow communist Rudi Dutschke would name "the long march through the institutions" in 1967 is ultimately Gramsci's roadmap to getting communism to take hold in the West. Gramsci identifies that the "cultural hegemony" of Western cultures prevented communism from having any chance of taking root, so he recommended a strategy that seeks to tear apart and capture major cultural institutions, including religion, family, education, media, and law. Mao understood this clearly and used it to devastating effect. The same thing is happening throughout the West today. Join James Lindsay as he explains the thought and relevance of Antonio Gramsci in today's Woke movement, which he aptly brands "Leninism 4.0." Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jan 21, 2021
The Birth of a New American Mythology
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 15 We are witnessing the birth of a new national mythology in America, and it is not good news. Imperfect as it was, the old one was better, warts and all, and it needs to be fought for. This new mythology turns the story of America on its head, positioning it not as having been born in the pursuit of freedom and liberty in 1776 but in slavery and evil in 1619. It has mainstreamed itself since the 1960s but especially over the last five years as it used Trump's presidency as a foil to legitimize its pseudo-real description of America for millions, and now it has gained the beginnings of cultural hegemony (which it is already abusing). This magic narrative has been and remains the key to their power. This new mythology is using its own narrative about Trump's presidency and, especially, the events that took place at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, as a pivotal moment in its story arc, where it finally gained the upper hand on more than 400 years of evil and could usher in a new world order based on equity, guaranteed by the "perfected" state apparatus and its corporate partners (especially in tech). The thing is, while the real American story genuinely is the story of freedom, this new alternative, of "liberation," is based not in truth but in alchemy, and like all such regimes, it will therefore end in catastrophe. Lead, as it sees our history, cannot be changed into gold, as it views our future through its manic utopian lenses, and drinking potions of cinnabar will not make people live forever but will slowly poison them into madness. Join James Lindsay as he tries to make sense of the events we have been watching unfold over the last few days and years, relying in an unexpected way, if you'll believe it, on the postmodern philosophers who in some ways saw this danger first. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jan 13, 2021
The Nature of Pseudo-Reality
The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay - Episode 14 In a recent long-form essay on New Discourses (, James Lindsay explained the origins of totalitarianism in a single word: psychopathy. There, he explained that totalitarianism arises from people who cannot cope with reality as it is, and yet who are content to manipulate others, constructing a "pseudo-reality" in service to a vision of the world that serves their needs. That pseudo-reality holds as its North Star a Utopian vision that aligns with artificial resolutions to their inability to cope with reality as it is, and it thereby attracts others who have similar issues. By constructing a false logic (a paralogic) and a false morality (a paramorality) to define and enforce the pseudo-reality, they can gather supporters in a cult-like fashion. In the end, those ensnared lose the ability to distinguish reality and pseudo-reality almost entirely and become functionally psychopathic, and if they gain enough social, cultural, economic, and political power, they can hold hostage entire societies that are, in effect, on the march to totalitarianism and, eventually, total catastrophic collapse. The essay is an important read, but it is also a difficult one. In this episode of the New Discourses podcast, James seeks to explain the essay in easier language and to flesh out its ideas one by one. He sees this process of unpacking the essay as his next major work, and in this podcast, he begins the process of linking the concept of "ideological pseudo-reality" to more familiar examples, not least Wokeness. Critical Race Theory, for example, is a pseudo-reality that positions racism as the ordinary state of affairs in society, not an immoral aberration from them. Queer Theory is a pseudo-reality in which being normal with regard to sex, gender, and sexuality is a problem while being in some way deviant (which is not the same as being gay or even trans) is elevated as normal. Communism is a pseudo-reality that deems socially engineered command economies as effective and efficient ways to maximize human flourishing. Covid-19 is a pseudo-reality built to enact control around a genuine and serious virus called SARS-CoV-2. These topics and more are presented in this episode of the New Discourses podcast to help people understand and, hopefully, able to see reality for itself again. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jan 07, 2021
The Next Chapter of the American Story
Human beings think in stories. We understand ourselves and the world, societies, social groups, and contexts we live in that way. One type of story is a national story, and in this episode of the New Discourses podcast, James Lindsay makes the case that Americans have, by and large, forgotten the totality of their own story. This has happened by placing too much focus and too much emphasis on one valuable and important part of the American story, which is equality. All men are, in fact, created equal, at least so far as liberal ethics should understand men, but this part of the American story exists in some tension with the other parts, especially the liberty part of the story, which is threatened by an overemphasis on equality in the same way that equality is threatened by an overemphasis on liberty. The truth is, even on a perfectly equal playing field, liberty will produce unequal outcomes because people will behave in unequal ways, and this form of inequality of outcome is just, even if inequality of opportunity isn't. In this podcast, Lindsay argues that Americans have mistaken the equality part of their story for the whole story, and in that the equality part of their story has been largely but not perfectly fulfilled, Americans now find themselves retelling the story in ever more tendentious ways, including Critical Social Justice. That is, Americans, in seeking to understand themselves against their own story, which they have misunderstood, are telling a kind of genre fiction on the equality story, trying to resurrect its themes in new ways to give themselves meaning and personal and social context. The Critical Social Justice, or Woke, story is comprehensible as a certain type of genre fiction on the equality portion of the American story, one that inverts the very values it claims to espouse in the pursuit not of further equality but of equity, which is a type of enforced equality of outcomes, regardless of behavior, talent, and merit. In the end Lindsay urges Americans to remember the totality of their story: liberty and equality in balance with one another, government with the consent of the governed, and a place, at least one place in the world, where these values can be kept alive. The American story has not been fulfilled, although it is not necessarily clear what its next chapters are. This podcast hopes to start finding the next parts of the American story. In that, Lindsay urges that Americans today are called to be keepers of the flame of liberty in a society that values and has, in largest part, achieved equality. They are also encouraged to offer their balanced model of federalism and anti-federalism, individual and national sovereign liberty, in this case, to the world as globalism increases with technology. Should the world refuse, Americans should not turn their backs on their story but should, instead, keep the flame of Americanism burning bright for any who should want it. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Nov 30, 2020
Biden Is Not The Room
James Lindsay recently said on Twitter that he will vote "unhappily" for Republicans including Trump in these troubled times after seeing an argument that the left should work to abolish the Constitution. Join him on this episode of the New Discourses Podcast for an explanation of his thought process on this issue as it has unfolded over this tumultuous summer of 2020. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Oct 21, 2020
Understanding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
We live in an era of unprecedented pressure for ideologically based organizational trainings: anti-racist, racial sensitivity, unconscious bias, cultural awareness, and, perhaps most commonly, some combination of "diversity, equity, and inclusion." We're also rapidly waking up to the fact that in this era, the basic terminology describing and informing these training programs cannot be trusted to mean what it seems to on its face. What's needed, then, is clarity around these terms and these ideas. In this episode of the New Discourses podcast, James Lindsay walks the listener through the concepts of "diversity," "equity," and "inclusion" so that listeners can understand what these terms mean in the context of the Critical Social Justice ideology and thus be better informed to deal with their infiltration into our organizations. Join in to learn more! Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Sep 25, 2020
How Social Justice Silences | Peter Boghossian
Follow Peter at Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Sep 04, 2020
Two and Two Make Four
We have to talk about 2+2. Unfortunately. Most unfortunately. This is because what looks like a simple and profoundly stupid Twitter fight must be understood in the full context in which it is playing out. This context is, in fact, the most important and least reported part of the origin story of the Great 2+2 War of 2020, and few realize that this ridiculous discourse didn't come out of a vacuum. It arose in reaction to something James Lindsay posted on Twitter, as has been reported, but more specifically it is the product of a Washington State Ethnic Studies program director, Shraddha Shirude, jumping into that fray with a request to make 2+2=5 "into a true statement" in order to defend her Ethnic Studies education program in that state (and beyond). This "ethnomathematics" program has deep ties into the academic literature within the critical study of mathematics education and is now currently being implemented in Washington and may spread to California and New York soon, and from there, beyond. It is also part of a deliberate attempt to destabilize our ability to identify and name objective truths so that the activists pushing these agendas cannot be criticized and so they can advance their agendas unimpeded. Join James Lindsay on the New Discourses podcast for a deep, sometimes emotional dive into the real story of the 2+2 discourse. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546 © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Aug 14, 2020
Saying No to Critical Race Theory
I want to explain Critical Race Theory to you. I just want to help you understand it, so I sat down with my microphone and no real plan except to talk through the claims, history, and thought of Critical Race Theory, highlighting where it came from and why it's a terrible way to think about race and racism, in its own ideas. So, this episode of the New Discourses podcast is a little different. It's just me sitting down with you through my microphone to make a seemingly complicated thing clear. I hope it helps. -James Lindsay Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: @newdiscourses…es/id1499880546…nzwvdjjpd6gg3cmuy © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jul 20, 2020
The Evolution Of Postmodern Thought | Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose develops the definition of "Social Justice" as it is used in the academic literature in this tradition, explains its connections to identity politics and the political correctness movement, and then shows the relevance of the original postmodernists to this Theory in some detail. She does this to elegantly describe the progression of these ideas from Theory to activism to the streets by describing how these ideas originated, evolved, and were built upon by successive generations of Theorists leading up to those who have become famous names even outside of the scholarly world today: for examples, Peggy McIntosh, Barbara Applebaum, and Robin DiAngelo. She wraps up by explaining how this newest generation of Theorists simplified the highly abstract ideas of their predecessors and made it far clearer and easier to understand so that it could, as we now see all around us, eventually go mainstream. Follow Helen Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jun 22, 2020
In Defense Of The Status Quo
Join Lindsay in this episode of the New Discourses Podcast for a little over an hour of common sense in his liberal defense of the so-called "status quo." Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jun 16, 2020
Staying Sane in an Age of Narratives
In my line of work taking on Critical Social Justice and other forms of increasingly dominant societal insanity, I get asked a lot of questions. If there's one question I'm asked more often than any other, it's how don't I go crazy looking at this stuff every day? To be fair, I've flown pretty close to that sun, but I didn't fall in, and so I've reflected quite a bit on it. I thought it might help people to spell out some of the answer. -James Lindsay Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast:…es/id1499880546 © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Jun 02, 2020
Stealing the Motte: Critical Social Justice and the Principle of Charity
There is a rhetorical strategy called the “motte and bailey” that is getting increasingly famous lately. This is because it is one of the central tools of the Critical Social Justice movement. In that strategy, named after a kind of castle, a highly defensible “motte” position, like “we just want to treat people more fairly,” is maintained while also pushing a more radical “bailey” position, like “we need to radically remake our school systems so that no one can fail.” Activists advance the bailey and, when pressed on it, retreat to the motte until scrutiny and pressure go away, at which point they return to the bailey. In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, your host James Lindsay explores the principle of charity in debate and dialogue in the context of the motte-and-bailey rhetorical strategy. His goal is to explain how the game of critical theories is not the same game the rest of us play in broadly liberal societies. In fact, the critical game seeks to disrupt and dismantle the liberal game and replace it with its own. Exploiting the principle of charity is one of the most common ways it can achieve this. In this long-form, flowing discussion of the phenomenon, Lindsay breaks down several recent examples of Critical Social Justice activists playing a completely different game than our own. He then illustrates how the principle of charity is exploited by Critical Social Justice advocates, who get us to build their castle for them and then use it to advance their radical, disruptive agendas. He explains that what’s needed in answer to this insidious critical game is to use the principle of charity to steal their motte and then trenchant, informed criticism to bomb their bailey every time. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast:…es/id1499880546…?t=New_Discourses © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
May 07, 2020
Age of Narratives and the Postmodern Democratic Political Regime
On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, your host James Lindsay explores the concept of political regimes through American history. From Washington, to Lincoln, to Roosevelt, right up through W and Obama, the “US of A” has seen a broad spectrum of political ideals displayed under the common framework known as “Modernity.” But where are we now? Considering the rise of Trump, the media's explicit bias, and the prevalence of critical social justice theory throughout culture, Lindsay suggests that America may have moved into a new Postmodern Regime: a regime that is making us wonder how we can tell what's true anymore. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast:…es/id1499880546…?t=New_Discourses © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Apr 13, 2020
How the Woke Virus Infects Academia and Our Covid-19 Response
Critical Social Justice operates like a virus. I’ve said it about them; they say it about themselves; we’re all in agreement. It infects liberal institutions and liberal-minded people (philosophically speaking, whether on the left, right, or center), perverts “critical” as in “critical thinking” into “critical” as in “critical theory,” which means something completely different. It then turns those institutions and individuals into woke cells that produce more Critical Social Justice and spread it to others, hollowing out the institutions and organizations it infects as it goes. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast:…es/id1499880546…?t=New_Discourses © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Apr 04, 2020
Why Professors Fear to Livestream Critical Social Justice Classes
James lindsay takes a few minutes to dig deeply into the mindset of Critical Social Justice to explain exactly why its proponents are so reluctant to be seen applying their work in administrative and educational spheres. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast:…es/id1499880546…?t=New_Discourses © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Apr 03, 2020
Coronavirus Life: Will Things Be the Same Again?
“Life will never be the same again.” We hear this over and over again with regard to the impact that the Covid-19 pandemic is having on us, even though we’re only weeks into the pandemic. Is that true, though? Won’t most of us “regress to the mean,” as it’s sometimes phrased, as we move forward and get this crisis in our rearview mirror? I think we will, more or less, and I think we need to remember that. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: Podcast: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Mar 28, 2020
The Way Forward | Peter Boghossian
New Discourses convened in October of 2019 in the National Liberal Club of London for a day-long conference titled Speaking Truth to Social Justice. There, Portland State University philosophy professor Peter Boghossian gave a rousing talk about the need to “speak truth in the face of danger,” parrhesia, as the Ancient Greeks called it, as this applies to Critical Social Justice. Follow Peter Boghossian: Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Mar 26, 2020
The Truth About Critical Methods | James Lindsay
Dr. James Lindsay in his talk, “The Truth About Critical Methods,” makes very clear that Critical Social Justice is not the same thing as social justice. He argues that the branding of social justice, which is how Critical Social Justice promotes itself, misleads people about the nature of that movement. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Mar 19, 2020
James Lindsay Discovers Decolonizing Graphic Design
In February, I discovered an article on Twitter about “decolonizing graphic design,” published in the summer of last year. These sorts of articles are incredibly useful for showing exactly what’s going on in the Critical Social Justice mindset once you know how to read them, and this one doesn’t disappoint. After quickly threading about the article on Twitter to show it and explain it to my followers, I grabbed my microphone for an impromptu discussion of what I read. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Mar 14, 2020
Satire in the Digital Age | Andrew Doyle
In October of 2019, a small group of genuinely liberal-minded people gathered together for a day of speeches, panels, and community in the Gladstone Library in the National Liberal Club of London. The conference had a title that succinctly described its purpose: Speaking Truth to Social Justice. Over the course of the day, even as the Extinction Rebellion protest raged outside just a block away, we gave seven talks and held two panel discussions, all with the intention of recovering and restating genuine liberalism in this unique era of history, where it faces unique threats. Last to speak in the evening was our good friend Andrew Doyle, a comedian and satirist most famous for his excellent work with the satirical faux-Woke Twitter account Titania McGrath. In his brilliant and hilarious talk, Doyle provides a worthy and robust defense of both free speech and free thought. He does so by explaining the long history of satire and satirical hoaxes and their applications against unjust power. These, he reminds us, are necessary anywhere power over-asserts itself, especially in censorship, not just to deflate scolds we tend to associate with the right but also those who have arisen recently on the left, before ending with a twist: revealing that he, too, (maybe…, and that’s beside his point) has contributed to this sometimes-necessary tradition. Support New Discourses: Website: Follow: © 2020 New Discourses. All rights reserved.
Mar 10, 2020
The Cost of Speaking Up for Your Beliefs | Peter Boghossian
Peter speaks with Conor about if there's anything he believes but doesn't say because people will think he's a bad person. Then the conversation shifts into whether or not we should stand up for what we believe. Purchase 'How to Have Impossible Conversations' here: Peter's Twitter:
Feb 20, 2020