Beautifully written, nice seeing you step into different genre writing!
I think I have to quibble with your example of the jubilee video though. I'd argue it's a right wing network by virtue of platforming and paying right wing (often bigoted) people for videos. The very idea of a debate with validates fascistic ideas then profits off engagement to me feels very in line with right wing rage bait. But besides jubilee itself I wonder how left the doctor can be considered when he's in a room with all those people, validating their positions; and despite being a medical professional is unmasked in a room full of pandemic denier and anti-vaxxers. That very fact makes him politically closer to the rest of the people. Obviously outside of the video which you now know is him being Zionist so I think it's interesting to consider how this facade of bridging the political gap with poise hides a man uninterested in covid safe measures or in preserving the lives of colonised people.
In general I feel complicated about tolerance, I'm certainly for accountability. Part of me recognised the majority of people are hovering in centralist liberal position holding some right leaning and some left beliefs so realistically persuasion is a powerful tool. But then you have to wonder is having people who have to be persuaded to not be misogynistic or ableist really in aid to a revolution? I appreciated your take on the topic.
Thank you Ndiho my darling, definitely looking forward to expanding my literary voice!
I understand your opinions on Jubilee, I believe they are a very monetary motivated channel and their founder Jason Y Lee has not stated his own political beliefs in the public eye but clearly operates under 'clickbaiting' and what trends (prior to the 2024 US election cycle when liberalism was more widely practiced, Jubilee could have been said to be left wing). I did not choose Jubilee as an example of tolerance but rather that specific edition of the surrounded series mostly because it was the more recently released debate and trending, I definitely recommend watching Sam Seder's iteration too as he was quite competent in extending repressive tolerance IMO.
I'm more aware of the aforementioned Dr's beliefs outside of the debate than I was at the time of watching, alongside with Zionism he seems to be a race realist (scientific racism supporter) but within the context of the video I would argue he is ideologically opposed on the subject matter of the debate which as you mentioned is anti-vaccinations. Considering the contrasting points that the participants stand on, I still believe it was a notable exercise in bridging said political gap solely on this topic but I recognise the obvious similarities between him and many of the conservatives in hindsight.
Tolerance is a very complicated concept and I think it has been misconstrued by both opposing factions of the political spectrum, the political majority holds the power in the current pseudo-democratic state of world politics so it cannot be abandoned by the neo leftists of todays world, having the majority in support of the revolution is critical regardless of individual opinions. I mentioned past movements such as the Slavery abolitionists having to practice tolerance with white women falsely equating their oppressed status in society to that of the enslaved Black people. A more recent practice of this quintessential tolerance could be the Sri Lankan 2024 presidential elections in which the Marxist party won by a landslide with a front of anti-corruption and economic liberation (aspects of nationalism and capitalism where even canvassed by the party but they are still regarded as Marxists!), I just think looking at the past and even the current world, there is harm in living in an echo chamber and disregarding bi-partisan support because it would just lead to a yo-yo of progression where we take 2 steps forward and are pushed 40 steps back.
Beyond honoured that you found value in my piece, thank you for your comments! Nuance is extremely worth defending and a lack of has serious repercussions there has actually been a recent Norwegian study on ideological bias hampering reasoning skills which you might enjoy taking a look at! https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/13546783.2022.2038268?needAccess=true
Beautifully written, nice seeing you step into different genre writing!
I think I have to quibble with your example of the jubilee video though. I'd argue it's a right wing network by virtue of platforming and paying right wing (often bigoted) people for videos. The very idea of a debate with validates fascistic ideas then profits off engagement to me feels very in line with right wing rage bait. But besides jubilee itself I wonder how left the doctor can be considered when he's in a room with all those people, validating their positions; and despite being a medical professional is unmasked in a room full of pandemic denier and anti-vaxxers. That very fact makes him politically closer to the rest of the people. Obviously outside of the video which you now know is him being Zionist so I think it's interesting to consider how this facade of bridging the political gap with poise hides a man uninterested in covid safe measures or in preserving the lives of colonised people.
In general I feel complicated about tolerance, I'm certainly for accountability. Part of me recognised the majority of people are hovering in centralist liberal position holding some right leaning and some left beliefs so realistically persuasion is a powerful tool. But then you have to wonder is having people who have to be persuaded to not be misogynistic or ableist really in aid to a revolution? I appreciated your take on the topic.
Thank you Ndiho my darling, definitely looking forward to expanding my literary voice!
I understand your opinions on Jubilee, I believe they are a very monetary motivated channel and their founder Jason Y Lee has not stated his own political beliefs in the public eye but clearly operates under 'clickbaiting' and what trends (prior to the 2024 US election cycle when liberalism was more widely practiced, Jubilee could have been said to be left wing). I did not choose Jubilee as an example of tolerance but rather that specific edition of the surrounded series mostly because it was the more recently released debate and trending, I definitely recommend watching Sam Seder's iteration too as he was quite competent in extending repressive tolerance IMO.
I'm more aware of the aforementioned Dr's beliefs outside of the debate than I was at the time of watching, alongside with Zionism he seems to be a race realist (scientific racism supporter) but within the context of the video I would argue he is ideologically opposed on the subject matter of the debate which as you mentioned is anti-vaccinations. Considering the contrasting points that the participants stand on, I still believe it was a notable exercise in bridging said political gap solely on this topic but I recognise the obvious similarities between him and many of the conservatives in hindsight.
Tolerance is a very complicated concept and I think it has been misconstrued by both opposing factions of the political spectrum, the political majority holds the power in the current pseudo-democratic state of world politics so it cannot be abandoned by the neo leftists of todays world, having the majority in support of the revolution is critical regardless of individual opinions. I mentioned past movements such as the Slavery abolitionists having to practice tolerance with white women falsely equating their oppressed status in society to that of the enslaved Black people. A more recent practice of this quintessential tolerance could be the Sri Lankan 2024 presidential elections in which the Marxist party won by a landslide with a front of anti-corruption and economic liberation (aspects of nationalism and capitalism where even canvassed by the party but they are still regarded as Marxists!), I just think looking at the past and even the current world, there is harm in living in an echo chamber and disregarding bi-partisan support because it would just lead to a yo-yo of progression where we take 2 steps forward and are pushed 40 steps back.
amazing piece!
Thank you
Beyond honoured that you found value in my piece, thank you for your comments! Nuance is extremely worth defending and a lack of has serious repercussions there has actually been a recent Norwegian study on ideological bias hampering reasoning skills which you might enjoy taking a look at! https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/13546783.2022.2038268?needAccess=true