Lumifer comments on "3 Reasons It’s Irrational to Demand ‘Rationalism’ in Social Justice Activism" - Less Wrong

9 Post author: PhilGoetz 29 March 2016 03:16PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (247)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gjm 01 April 2016 01:45:40PM 0 points [-]

Do you have evidence showing an actual line of descent from Maoism to "social justice", or is this just conjecture?

According to Wikipedia (which is always right, except when it's wrong) the term was first used (with something resembling its modern meaning) by a Jesuit priest and its history continues with the likes of Louis Brandeis and John Rawls. And that history -- which is clearly not Maoist in any useful sense -- seems to me like a more obvious antecedent to today's social justice movement than Maoism does. Even if Pol Pot studied in Paris.

(Perhaps I'm taking you too literally and "is the newest incarnation of Mao Zedong Thought" just means "is kinda leftist and boooo, I hate it"?)

Comment author: Lumifer 01 April 2016 03:12:02PM *  1 point [-]

SJ had multiple influences of course, the existence of one line of descent (e.g. Rawls) does not invalidate other ancestors.

Comment author: gjm 01 April 2016 04:04:42PM 2 points [-]

For sure. Which is why, having observed one obvious non-Maoist line of descent, I'm asking "any evidence for the Maoism thing?" rather than saying "you're obviously wrong about the Maoism thing".