Liberal Totalitarianism.

Social Science suggests that the politicization of everything destroys the spread of ideas.

//Loosening these tight group boundaries means that people's next-door neighbors may have different jobs or levels of education, but they may still have similar politics or recreational activities. These similarities allow people in different social groups to encourage the adoption of a new complex idea, take neighborhood recycling as an example, which can then spread to other neighborhoods and social groups.

But when group boundaries are eliminated entirely, people have almost nothing in common with their neighbors and therefore very little influence over one another, making it impossible to spread complex ideas.

"There's a belief that the more that people interact with strangers, the more that new ideas and beliefs will spread," Centola said. "What this study shows is that preserving group boundaries is actually necessary for complex ideas to become accepted across diverse populations."//


Interesting that this is the world created by "Liberal Totalitarianism," which seeks by seeking to politicise everything creates a Manichean world of Good v. Evil based on "race" or "tolerance" without the nuance of intermediate groups that aren't permitted to dispense with such ultimate orientation.

Football, for example, used to be something that could be watched by Democrats and Republicans, people of all races, Rotarians, and Elks, but as soon as there became an ideology based on the notion that America was an evil, racist country where there was a conspiracy of police officers hunting down "unarmed black men" football players either had to subscribe to this ideology or leave.

The net result is that football is no longer a social organizing principle where ideas could bleed across. Instead, it became a megaphone used by the Left to drown out any message other than the dominant Leftist message.

And America became poorer and closer to the edge because of it.

Liberal Totalitarianism...

...may have seemed over the top a few years ago.

Not so much now.

https://youtu.be/2cMYfxOFBBM

The Racist Totalitarian Left.

Sure, it's an ugly fever-swamp idea, but it is an ugly fever-swamp idea being casually discussed in the Huffington Post.

Can you imagine the level of outrage sparked if the National Review talked about taking the vote away from Asian women?

//Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa's biggest cities.

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world. The influence of reckless white males were one of the primary reasons that led to the Great Recession which began in 2008. This would also strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed.

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners. After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism. A period of twenty years without white men in the world's parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world's wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.//