- Joined
- Jul 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,220
- Reaction score
- 721
Interesting book written in 2002. He saw a lot of things coming down the pike that seemingly popped out of nowhere but of course they didn't.
Original post was made in response to the question of "where did all this cultural guilt come from?"
Thread disappeared so reposting book info here if anyone is interested.
"What prompted all this white guilt anyways ? Collective guilt is so intellectually fraudulent and pathetic.
What prompted all this guilt?"-
Very astute question. And to be sure it didn't happen in a vacum.
Many people like to believe it's the angels of their better nature rather than a cultural construct carefully and shrewdly crafted. Those that believe it's proof of their moral sensitivity that others are lacking will defend their position with a crusaders zeal ignited with fury by those that would question their altruistic motives.
However, even a cursory scan of some threads will tell a novice that something is wrong with this picture.
This book was written in 2002 and things he predicted are moving along quite nicely although even he could not have come up with the plethora of multiple gender and Otherkin constructs in play.
Note he points out that "the therapeutic regime has become very adept at
pathologizing descent."
"The state gains enormous power and the halo of sanctity when it manages to "credibility define itself" as speaking on behalf of victims..... at the expense of victimizers."
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/615971.Multiculturalism_and_the_Politics_of_Guilt
Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Towards a Secular Theocracy
Gottfried’s book, Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt, published in 2002, focuses attention on the therapeutic regime that has arisen from the managerial welfare state. (He focused on the managerial state generally in an earlier book, entitled After Liberalism.) He identifies three defining characteristics of the therapeutic regime: “the attempt to present as mere psychological and educational matters what are increasingly intrusive uses of government power to alter social behavior; dividing society into victims and non-victims (or victimizers); and a politics of disposition, in which ‘sensitivity’ becomes the decisive issue for drawing friend-enemy distinctions.” As to the first characteristic, Gottfried notes that defenders of the therapeutic regime have proved very adept at pathologizing dissent. As to the second, Gottfried thinks that the State gains enormous power and the halo of sanctity when it manages to credibly define itself as speaking on behalf of “victims” in an attempt to redress historic wrongs at the expense of “victimizers.” Concerning the final characteristic, Gottfried points out that when sensitivity becomes the decisive issue for drawing friend-enemy relations, no one outside the therapeutic consensus is safe, even if they mind their own business and merely wish to be left alone. (Gottfried was very prescient regarding this point, as can be easily discerned by looking at the post-Obergefell landscape.)
#162
unimackpass, 4 minutes ago
EDIT REPORT
+ QUOTE REPLY
Original post was made in response to the question of "where did all this cultural guilt come from?"
Thread disappeared so reposting book info here if anyone is interested.
"What prompted all this white guilt anyways ? Collective guilt is so intellectually fraudulent and pathetic.
What prompted all this guilt?"-
Very astute question. And to be sure it didn't happen in a vacum.
Many people like to believe it's the angels of their better nature rather than a cultural construct carefully and shrewdly crafted. Those that believe it's proof of their moral sensitivity that others are lacking will defend their position with a crusaders zeal ignited with fury by those that would question their altruistic motives.
However, even a cursory scan of some threads will tell a novice that something is wrong with this picture.
This book was written in 2002 and things he predicted are moving along quite nicely although even he could not have come up with the plethora of multiple gender and Otherkin constructs in play.
Note he points out that "the therapeutic regime has become very adept at
pathologizing descent."
"The state gains enormous power and the halo of sanctity when it manages to "credibility define itself" as speaking on behalf of victims..... at the expense of victimizers."
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/615971.Multiculturalism_and_the_Politics_of_Guilt
Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Towards a Secular Theocracy
Gottfried’s book, Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt, published in 2002, focuses attention on the therapeutic regime that has arisen from the managerial welfare state. (He focused on the managerial state generally in an earlier book, entitled After Liberalism.) He identifies three defining characteristics of the therapeutic regime: “the attempt to present as mere psychological and educational matters what are increasingly intrusive uses of government power to alter social behavior; dividing society into victims and non-victims (or victimizers); and a politics of disposition, in which ‘sensitivity’ becomes the decisive issue for drawing friend-enemy distinctions.” As to the first characteristic, Gottfried notes that defenders of the therapeutic regime have proved very adept at pathologizing dissent. As to the second, Gottfried thinks that the State gains enormous power and the halo of sanctity when it manages to credibly define itself as speaking on behalf of “victims” in an attempt to redress historic wrongs at the expense of “victimizers.” Concerning the final characteristic, Gottfried points out that when sensitivity becomes the decisive issue for drawing friend-enemy relations, no one outside the therapeutic consensus is safe, even if they mind their own business and merely wish to be left alone. (Gottfried was very prescient regarding this point, as can be easily discerned by looking at the post-Obergefell landscape.)
#162
unimackpass, 4 minutes ago
EDIT REPORT
+ QUOTE REPLY
