Intersectionality is about power dynamics. It’s rooted in Marxism. I’m not sure it was ever about solving a particular problem. But yes, all problems boil down to what the individual person is willing to do to help themselves. Intersectionalists don’t have the same goals as you and I. They just want to be on top of a grievance Ponzi scheme.
Jordan Peterson came to a very similar conclusion in one of his lectures. He noted the ever expanding list of intersectional groups would eventually keep going until you reached the individual level. This would then match up with conservative thinking as they see people as individuals rather than groups.
We all knew this decades ago. Rand said the smallest minority is the individual. The error here is assuming the rethoric of the tolerant left is an attempt to solve a problem in reality. Tolerance is an inflationary currency. People have deluded themselves into thinking if they could only be accepted/validated that they would be happy. So they join a group of tolerance, where all manner of degeneracy and corruption are embraced. The only cost is... you also have to tolerate everyone else, that's their currency, they're using everyone else's tolerance as their main value offering, like they're pumping a shitcoin. It's the Tolerance Shitcoin. This is why the only thing that isn't tolerated is intolerance, because it tanks the coin. The tolerant left is a bubble of a bunch of people tolerating each other no matter what just to pump their own tolerance shitcoin that is completely fiat and valueless.
Your problem is that your "phase 3" makes it hard to assess blame to a particular group of people, and assessing blame is the point of intersectionality.
The problem with your theory is that you think it's about helping people. It's not. It's about power. And grouping people together to give yourself (the elite) more power. Trying to help the individual is the opposite of grouping people together for more power.
"It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which,if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree helping each other to one or the other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all of our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations - these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit - immortal horrors or everlasting splendors." C. S. Lewis
Phase 1 and Phase 2 were popular not for solving the problems of the groups but for the resentment the could be stoked and then used by political actors to gain power. Also useful for those that need an identity in victimhood, such as those with cluster B personality disorders.
F* anything from any other "persuasion expert." Scott Adams' stuff is f%^king GOLD! Great stuff. The problem folks have from extracting the value are their own blocks. The same type of blocks that get folks to not be able to spot opportunities literally slapping them in the face (look up people blind to money opportunities on YT). Dilbert is cool, but my recommendation...Buy ALL of his "mind stuff" books.
Ohhhhhh..youre saying we are all individually responsible for our own success..holy mackerel..im 89 years old and still living with mom.. why didnt you tell me this in 1956?
With more lighting, the camera aperture will be closed, creating a greater field of depth, i.e. cubic area of focus, and the speaker will be in focus, rather than blurred. Just a suggestion.
Just subbed! I see 138 comments and yet not a single mention of Spock's Vulcan principle from Star Trek of IDIC (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations). That's basically what Scott is talking about in the sixth minute.
11:43 It's not only political manipulation, but also political manipulation from which a lot of influential people benefit. That's why overcoming it is a big challenge.
@@floofykitty6361 Bro it's like a 10min video. How do you not have the attention span to listen for that short of time? I could understand if it was like those crazy podcasts where people talk for like several hours, but dude... it's 10 min! lol
Well, as a disabled veteran of colour, the characteristic I am most proud of is my identity as a Guided Missile Frigate. Josh Kruger will live on as a meme, as will that soyboy who got joggered. (The latest guy's girlfriend is already a meme: women being useless when SHTF).
There really never was a issue with gay marriage until gays made it a problem by forcing Churches who don't support it to participate. It's just like the transgenders, no one really cared what they did until they started going after kids or demanding people pay for their cosmetic treatments.
The average southern redneck and counties they reside in trample over elite theory's claims. lol Now obviously yes, the people who watch the news religiously and believe whatever people say based on their claims to authority will definitely fall in line with elite theory, but the vast majority of people simply do not care about any topic that doesn't directly and immediately affect them. This makes it seem like elite theory's mechanism in action, but in reality it is just indolence. This is why tyrannical regimes can have decades of easy ruling and then randomly get overthrown over a minor thing, because no one cared about the dictator until he makes himself known as one. Same thing in corporate leadership as well. A bad CEO will get to remain so long as he/she doesn't interrupt the work of the people in the company that are actually keeping the company afloat. Once they do disrupt the foundation, then you get the negative effects that lead to the loss of confidence.
Just do what liberals do and IDENTIFY as 100% healthy from the 100% safe and effective thing. Poof, problems gone! Sometimes I wish I was liberal so I could live in an imaginary world every day. But alas I just see reality…
@@Otisbear480also you're not alone, I know of others in the same boat but they keep getting "boosted" due to the requirements to get the care that they need... but with each booster they fall further off the cliff. There is nothing that can be done for them. Don't be like them.
There exist stereotypes of groups. Humans each develop a stereotype for groups -- it is in our nature to do so because it works. We have different expectations for the groups Men and Women. We have different expectations for groups who all dress a certain way. We have expectations for a person named George and one named Jorge. We have different expectations of doctors and nurses. We have different expectations of Blacks and Whites. It's human beings being human. "He's a credit to his race" describes someone who fails to meet the racial stereotype that speaker holds.
@@ceb4382 When people realize their own human nature they recognize that it is incorrect to overgeneralize -- judge each individual and let that judgement affect your stereotype. Just be aware you have one. It is a good starting place as you judge the individual. Because it generally works, although not always. My expectations for another race were the sum of my personal interactions with members of that race. By and large expectations were met. And, yet, I had unexpected behavior by members of that group toward me and instinctively adjusted my stereotype.
@@George4943 Our personal interactions, anecdotal evidence varies greatly. Geography, culture, technology a diversity of influences. For stereotypes Indirect Interactions based on music, dance, art, literature, etc. form stereotypes? We agree. It is the quality and quantity of direct and indierct exposure that varies greatly not only individually but as to stereotypes.
In a world Where people have problems In this world Where decisions are a way of life Other people's problems They overwhelm my mind They say compassion is a virtue But I don't have the time So many people have their problems I'm not interested in their problems I guess I've experienced some problems But now I've made some decisions It takes a lot of time To push away the nonsense Take my compassion Push it as far as it goes My interest level's dropping My interest level is dropping I've heard all I want to, and I Don't want to hear any more What are you, in Love with your problems? I think you take it A little too far, it's Not so cool to have So many problems But don't expect me To explain your indecisions Go talk to your analysts Isn't that what they're paid for? Ooh, you, you walk, you talk You still function like you used to Ooh, it's not a question Of your personality or style Be a little more selfish It might do you some good
Scott is assuming you have the smarts and will to rise above. He forgets about the large group of people on the left side of the bell curve with less than 100 IQ
@@pootthatbak2578 This is why the "Focus on the individual" will circle right back to "Phase 1". The analysis of individuals will just conclude that there is a trait (low IQ) that is shared among these individuals and one will understand why the categories in "Phase 1" already existed in the first place.
In the context of global population, the white race is the minority. What system was employed by the minority race to spread their influence across the globe?
He is saying that thinking of identity groups instead of considering the individual in front of you, will never solve any problems of that individual. There is no "average" individual. Are you average? Am I average? Think about it.
Basically if you think of yourself as belonging in a group in competition with another group, you will perpetually be in conflict trying to get even or ahead. Instead the correct mindset is to think about what actually helps yourself and other people in general. A good example is to look at the crime in black neighborhoods. The prevailing mindset in those areas is that black criminals are being oppressed by cops and need to be protected. As a result, crime concentrates there. In contrast if you look at any other neighborhood even "minority" like asians, you don't see that level of crime because a criminal there is not seen as someone in your imaginary club, it is seen as an outsider who must be removed due to their dangerous actions.
Would Scott be ok with a black man marrying his daughter (I know he doesn't have any kids, but hypothetically)? I mean a nice wholesome black man. Say a lawyer, doctor or engineer.
