Read on Twitter
Right wing just doesnt get nuance at all. Im exclusively talking about the most popular ones(Ben Shapiro&Vivek Agnihotri fans?). They confuse terms, make a strawman and argue against that strawman. This is very disingenous and closes all doors to reconciliation(1/n)
For instance, they'd paint all Marxists as communists. Just not true. Marxian economics,for instance,is an unorthodox field of inquiry which seeks to study economics through Marxist methods. Its a descriptive field&makes no normative claims(2/n)
One can't critique Marxian economics by saying "Communism has never worked". Marxian economists like Richard Wolff and Yanis Varoufakis are not communists. Marxian economic geographer David Harvey is also not a communist(3/n)
Mainstream economic ideas have developed from Marxian economics, for instance Goodwin's model and creative destruction. Moreover, many reputed sociological ideas have have developed from a Marxist framework. Check out the work of Manuel Castells(4/n)
Why is it so hard for the right to differentiate between normative and destructive claims? Why do Marxists have to be wrong about everything? I dont understand. One of the most effective critique of liberalism that I've read came from the fascist Carl Schmitt(5/n)
The intellectual right and the left understand this. Shcmitt's ideas have influenced leftists like Zizek,Habermas but also conservatives like David Brooks. One doesn't have to be a fascist to appreciate Schmitt's critique of liberalism(6/n)
Heidegger, who is repeatedly referenced by Jordan Peterson, was also a Nazi(and friend of Schmitt's). Does this mean we shouldn't appreciate his philosophy of being? Ridiculous! But the problem of our political discourse goes beyond nuance(7/n)
Its strawmanning. I've heard people repeatedly say that Bernie Sanders wants to abolish capitalism. This is a strawman. Sanders repeatedly says he wants to reform capitalism. That he's a social democrat. That he doesnt support open borders(8/n)
Yet RW keeps saying "Youre a communist". Azeeb zabardasti hai. This is the "friend-enemy distinction" in explicit terms that Schmitt talked about(see? told ya he's valuable). RW keeps conflating social democrats, democratic socialists&communists(9/n)
Social democrats want to reform capitalism through policy measures like Universal healthcare,accessible education,high taxes etc. Democratic socialists want to eventually abolish capitalism through winning elections. Communists want to abolish capitalism by armed revolution(10/n)
When you conflate these terms,youre harming your own cause. You only have political disagreement with social democrats while communists pose an existential threat to the democratic state and capitalism. There is simply no equivalence between the two(11/n)
When I have a conversation on politics with anyone I disagree with, I first ask them what their views are beyond the label ascribed to them. I agree or disagree based on what their actual views are,not on their percieved views.This is not an attack on RW as a whole(12/n)
RW scholars understand nuance. Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton,for instance,points out how similar his critique of pop culture is with the apparent "Neo marxist" Theodor Adorno. They actually bother to read what their opponents say. Cant say the same about pop RW discourse