Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > Contemporary Elite Support for Transgender Rights and Neoliberalism

Contemporary Elite Support for Transgender Rights and Neoliberalism

Note: Once again, please read this post in its entirety before you comment on it.

Here are my definitions for terms used in this post: Elite = people who are rich and powerful because they (or their parents) got lucky; “e-Liberals” = credentialed people who are part of the establishment; Neoliberalism = relentless exploitation of the majority dressed up with pretty sounding but empty words and ideas; identity-based politics = exploiting social issues to facilitate “legal” exploitation of people on both sides of those issues.

Before we start, a quick clarification. I strongly believe that no person or institution has any right to tell or enforce how another person should live their life or who they should have sex with- as long as it does not involve animals or children. Also, it is abundantly clear that sexual orientation and attraction are based in biology. In other words, what occurs between two or more sexually mature people is their own damn business.

Having said that, let us turn to the topic of this post. So what inspired me to write this post in the first place? The short answer is- a set of observations about the nature of public discourse in USA over the last few years. The somewhat longer answer is that I have noticed a peculiar trend among the supposedly “liberal” establishment class (both elites and their cronies) in many western countries, especially the USA over the previous 15 or so years.

As many of you know- for a few decades after ww2, liberalism (in the west) was associated with changes and movements meant to improve the economic and social conditions of everyone in those countries. But somewhere along the way (between 1970s-1990s depending on the country) liberalism stopped being associated with improvements in economic conditions for the majority. Instead it became an ideology devoted to retaining power, for its own sake, through the division of people along various lines of their identity- racial, sexual, educational etc.

To be fair, living in the pre-1990 era as an openly gay or non-white person (in the west) meant that you were always seen and treated as a second-class citizen or worse. Therefore any elite or institutional support for movements which strove to improve the treatment of sexual and racial minorities in those countries should be seen as a good thing. Except that it seldom occurred during that era.

A bit confused by what I just said? Let me explain it in a bit more detail. See.. prior to the late-1990s or even the very early-2000s, movements dedicated to improving the status of sexual and racial minorities had basically no elite or institutional support. Indeed, elites and “e-liberals” in those eras saw such movements and the people they represented with disdain and contempt. As late as the mid-1990s, these supposed “pillars of western society” still openly talked about gay or non-white people as if they were second-class human beings.

So what changed? How come the elite and “e-liberals” of today cannot stop talking about how much they like people who are gay or of alternative sexual orientation? Why can’t they stop talking about how much they love non-whites and promoting diversity? What accounts for their fairly abrupt shift in public attitudes towards groups they were previously complicit in marginalizing? And what does any of this have to do with neoliberalism?

Let me explain..

1] Contemporary elite and “e-liberal” support for a number of progressive causes has almost nothing to do with the extent of their belief in those causes. A significant part of their motivation for doing so comes down to virtue signalling to themselves, their peers and all those underneath them. Such signalling serves many purposes- from feeling good about themselves and making sure that they fit in with their peers to feeling morally superior than those underneath them. Therefore, their support of certain socially progressive causes is not dissimilar from some of them adopting a token Chinese or African orphan. It is about the public optics and gaining small temporary status increases in their circle of peers.

2] Perhaps more relevantly, it serves to perpetuate the idea (at least in their minds) that they are somehow more moral and deserving of their ill-gotten wealth and power. Supporting such social issues also enables the elites and “e-liberals” to partially deflect attention from how they keep on exploiting and robbing everybody else. You may have noticed that elites and “e-liberals” go to considerable lengths to avoid talking about socio-economic issues that affect the majority. However they never tire of telling everybody within earshot about how they like gays, lesbians, non-whites and pretty much every social minority identity that they can invent.

3] Which brings me to why so many elites and “e-liberals”, nowadays, take every opportunity to express their support for people who are, or feel, transgender. Newsflash- It has nothing to do with elites and “e-liberals” feeling any real solidarity with people in those social groups. But it has a lot to do with signalling that they are morally superior to ‘all those other people below us’. Therefore, all of their current support for legislation to improve the legal status of that group is largely self-serving. As far as the elite and “e-liberals” are concerned, expressing public support for transgender people is just the latest cause to become fashionable. Sorta like supporting gay rights was during the early 2000s or adopting non-white babies was during the late-2000s.

4] It should be noted that the hard work on securing equal legal rights for gay people was largely done by gays themselves. Similarly adopting non-white children from non-western countries became mainstream because of ordinary people who wanted to adopt children. However, in both cases the elite and “e-liberals” adopted what was becoming mainstream and promoted it as if they came up with the ideas and did all the hard work. Luckily, both those ideas had become mainstream enough to not be tarnished by their association with the elites and “e-liberals”. The same is not true with transgender rights and the way it is being supported by elites and “e-liberals”. They got on this cause at a much earlier stage and have rightly or wrongly become associated with that movement in the public mind- to its detriment.

There is, therefore, a real risk that their association with that cause will damage its public image. This is especially so in an era where the general public is fed up with the abuse, exploitation and hypocrisy heaped upon them by elites and “e-liberals”. Of course, this is not going to stop those morons from using that cause as another example of their moral superiority and indirect justification for their ill-gotten wealth.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. March 10, 2017 at 10:00 pm

    I’ve wondered why homosexuals are such a big part of the alt-right (Jack Donovan, Milo Yiannopolis.) The alt-right seems like it would be against homosexuals just to prove how un-liberal they are, but I am guessing that homosexuals (white, at least) have a privilege similar to women. They can act mean and say despicable things but if someone punches them it is a “hate crime.”

    Funny fact- some of more well known members of the Nazi Party in early-1930s Germany were also gay..

    It seems like the old left was about things like living wages and workers rights but it seemed easier for the elites to tell everyone that Kaitlin Jenner and Anne Coultier should be able to pee standing up in the ladies room. Just think, if you don’t support that, you are an evillle transmisogynist bigot… But how dare you bring up the fact that over 50% of the American population would be unable to come up with $400 for an emergency, Kaitlin needs to pee. “Gay Rights” are much less of a threat than paying living wages and if anyone complains about living wages, they will be told to shut up and that Jack and Milo being able to marry is the real human rights issue at hand and if you disagree you are a bigot. Seems like how feminists try to control the conversation and then when an MRA comes by with stats about male suicide, he is told to “check his privilege.”

    I am writing something about that intentional dissonance among elites and “e-liberals”.

    BTW- “e-liberal” is a pun on illiberal.

  2. anon
    March 10, 2017 at 10:10 pm

    Democrats had had control of both the House and Senate for 44 years, that is, up until Clinton screwed things up during his first term, besmirching not only the presidency but all Democrats, too. Ever since, Democrats have been on a downward spiral, virtually politically insignificant now, and will be for the next two generations or more. Democrats know this all too well now, so in desperation for votes to regain power, they patronize every identity group out there. Even this is not working out very well for them now, as Trump has demonstrated by successfully transforming minority Democratic voters into Trump conservatives. Women, blacks, Latinos, immigrants and other minorities are seeing through the fake armor of the Democratic Party and ditching the Left for Trump’s ideology of borders, language, culture, jobs and America first. The only way a Democrat can get in power today is by feigning conservative ideology, and even then the smell test will make it more difficult to win office.

  3. A reader
    March 10, 2017 at 10:23 pm

    I’ve noticed this a lot especially among elites with a particularly odious past. They try to advocate for charitable causes, give aid to Africa, etc. Notice how, despite all their power and wealth, they never impart any significant change to the system? Like actual, real change that would improve the lives of average people.

    I mean, it’s great that you’re helping out third world countries, but what about the grinding poverty in inner cities and rural areas? Some of these elites live a few miles away from some of the most violent places on earth, but they seem blind to them.

    There’s also this bizarre impotence among elites when it comes to getting anything good done. Warren Buffet has noted for decades how he pays less tax than his secretary. Why doesn’t he actually help change the system then?

  4. P Ray
    March 11, 2017 at 3:14 am

    In the UK, such people are called “luvvies”.
    They talk plenty about the plight of migrants, but it seems few/none actually want a migrant to stay with them.
    Similar to David Beckham, he is willing to “be the face of a charity, and collect appearance fees”, but will NOT actually donate any of his money to the charity, just LOL.

  5. 0x8890
    March 11, 2017 at 6:14 am

    Indeed, the “e-liberals” are quick to disparage Milo for being gay, Ivanka for being a woman, Carson for being black, or just about anyone who identifies with a marginalized group if they don’t fit their narrative.

  6. c
    March 11, 2017 at 6:34 am

    test

  7. c
    March 11, 2017 at 6:35 am

    The whole cisgender/tranny/sexless bathroom ordeal is primarily about lawsuits. Enterprising lawyers (typically politically liberal) found a way to sue public schools. Expect your local public school’s insurance premiums to go up. Who’s really the enemy of public schools? Elites and e-liberals. So yes, the elite are stealing from the middle class via “legal” insurance transfers.

    SWPL parents who parrot this kind of elite propaganda and whose children attend public schools are doing themselves a grave disservice while feeling good about themselves, as “transgender rights” is actually being used as means to passively extract wealth from them!

  8. March 11, 2017 at 9:41 am

    The ongoing and increasingly ridiculous elite neoliberal strategic exploitation of gays and nonwhites serves two calculated purposes.

    First it creates a distraction and a diversion from the fact that liberal policies established during the previous few decades have not produced the results they promised but never intended. The liberals are using homosexuality, race, LGBT, global warming, “democracy”, etc. to inflame conflict, create confusion and a general sense of hoplesness in an attempt to hide their real, agenda, which is to obtain more power, control and self enrichment. They create a buffer between themselves and others knowledge of their actual intent.

    Second, they employ this dissonance they orchestrate to vilify their adversaries. All “inequalities”, are framed and attributed to their adversaries and ANYONE WHO MAY QUESTION THEIR MOTIVES. EVEN THOUGHT CONTROL IS NOW ATTEMPTED. Any group or individual or ideal that seems to remotely threaten their agenda is instantly and automatically conflated with the cause of this dissonance they orchestrate.

    It is all a game of smoking mirrors orchestrated by consensus rather than conspiracy, a covert conquest, an usurpation of power from within after infiltratiing. This infiltration, as historically trended, was facilitated by pity and the goodwill of those willing to acquire power by overt control and direct conquest. The same has been practiced repeatedly through history and it is manifested by social manipulations facilitated by psychological obliquety. New civilization and stability are established by overt conquest. Any “democracy” is an open invitation to covert usurpation and instability historically marked by unbridled blackmail, bribery, and chicanery so indicitative to that ilk currently masquerading as “progressive”.

    The outlandishness and absurdity of their current effort is self evident as now the sociolegal complex is arguing about who will be allowed to urinate and deficate with whom in public latrines. This is occurring in in cities where the municipal sewage system is so poorly managed and behind update that everyone’s urine and feces bubbles up into,the public streets during typically occurring heavy rain events. This appalling stupidity is enraging, however, it also reflects the increasing desperation of “progressive” neoliberals.

    • anon
      March 11, 2017 at 10:21 am

      Well stated!

  9. March 11, 2017 at 1:39 pm

    Antithetic corollaries exist for every phenomena in the tangible world as well as the imaginary. Ideals are the motivators of psychological and sociological impetus. For ever action there is an opposite and equal. Every social mandate benefits some while detracting from others.

    Christianity is the corollary of Judaism. Forgiveness of “sin” resolves the neurotic futile attempt to comply with obesessive compulsive law making. Yet the process of forgiveness itself employees it’s own neurosis. The New Testament is the second book of Hebrew con artistry. Islam claims its own neurosis which of course mandates cutting off the heads of non pretenders and especially those who pretend competing lies! Oh! How the world is so blessed by the Semitic superstititions.

    The antithetic corollary of true liberalism is the inevitable illiberalism experienced and practiced by those who seek to implement true liberalism. This is so simply because true liberalism is in itself illiberal. The ideal that all ideals must be accepted by all persons must include accepting the ideal that not all persons will accept all ideals.

    In reality we know that you cannot get somthing for nothing. Matter and energy are conserved in the physical world as best we know and experience. Only their forms change. This is also true for social and socioeconomic dynamics. Yet the hope that somthing for nothing can occur prevails and exists as the most prevalent sales scam in both the materialistic and religious market places. Historically the creditors collect whether in money or blood.

  10. March 11, 2017 at 3:23 pm

    I think support for liberalism/progressivism is dying out fast…

    low status men know they are getting a raw deal and the situation won’t improve by being nice to womyn and gays…

    here is a blog:

    http://www.feministcritics.org/blog/

    they used to have threads that would have hundreds of comments, now they have hardly any…

    but you had to play nice and be pro abortion and accepting of liberal ideas….

    they had allot of blinders, for example it was okay for Jack Donovan to be a bully because of his orientation, but if anyone stood up aggressively, they were a “bigot.”

  11. webej
    March 11, 2017 at 5:05 pm

    The sympathies of the left completely revolved around virtue-signalling and cultural symbolical rituals, in other words, they are philosophical. The left always has pet groups that help define who is good and who is heartless, whether it concerns adopting Korean orphans, Vietnamese boat people, or the LBGTQ “community”. It is axiomatic that any pet group is a small slice of people world-wide that are suffering the same plight, and that any compassion does not extend to ordinary next door-people who may be suffering some similar version of hard luck or misfortune. The sympathies never extend to the actual people, only to the “class”. Once apartheid or migrant farm labor exploitation or whatever has been overwon, there is no concern for the persons afterward outside of their embodiment of a certain class of moral outrage.
    This is most true of LBGTQ. Part of the hatred of Putin and Eastern Europe is their unwillingness to follow the west, retaining illiberal attitudes to “sexual deviance”. Transsexuals and misgendered people actually represent a minute slice of the population, often not even occurring in a building, company, or school. It’s obviously not concern for people you know that are suffering, since the chance of knowing too many gendered misidentified people is exceedingly small. And yet here we are, the bleeding edge of Western society and the progress of freedom has been all tied up with this heretofore insignificant problem. When the war dead (heroes) are remembered, there are speeches tying their fight for freedom from oppression (fascists) directly to tolerance for Muslims refugees and the gender benders.
    It seems clear that the last frontier in the struggle for man to free overcome nature is to make gender identity an object of human subjectivity and freedom. Even biological binary sex has to yield to the urge of the free soul to be his/her own project, and not some sort of “given”. The struggle between master and slave has migrated into the individual’s internal consciousness. Tatoes and scarring which used to be applied to “mark” people as slaves or as “belonging” to a “totem”, are now used by the individual to prove that his skin is truly his to do with as he pleases. Her body and his gender identity have finally been overcome and have been made into objects (slaves) of the master’s (individual whim) free will.

    • Tweebs
      April 19, 2017 at 2:23 am

      Cool concept… our struggle for master and slave takes place within….. you say it’s migrated there and in a historical context I get it… slavery, chains, whips…. all external and for most of human history.

      However isn’t it fair to say the struggle is ALWAYS internal?

      Jacob Marley forged the chains of his own hell in A Christmas Carol. His greed weighed him down in the afterlife.

      Milton says in Paradise Lost that the mind can make a heaven of hell or a hell of heaven.

      Quantum physics is showing us that there may be multiple worlds accessible to us.

      Transgender? I say yeah…. sure… whatever floats your boat just don’t expect me to give a shit about the 45 different gender designations in just the same way I don’t learn every last function MS Excel can do. Let transgenders marry, have kids, etc. Or not.

      There are WAAAAAAY more pressing problems facing humanity than what 0.2% of the population thinks about their genitals and identity. Just pass a law validating whatever transgenders want and let’s move on to more important topics like overpopulation.

      When everyone’s dying of thirst is it gonna matter which pronoun you used in some office meeting?

      Grow up. Strap on your peen. Or vageen. Or whatever the frig genital you want and man/woman/unicorn up.

  12. March 12, 2017 at 10:54 am

    AD,

    Off Topic, but I think you’ll find this interesting…

  13. Yusef
    March 23, 2017 at 10:54 am

    ” Before we start, a quick clarification. I strongly believe that no person or institution has any right to tell or enforce how another person should live their life or who they should have sex with- as long as it does not involve animals or children. Also, it is abundantly clear that sexual orientation and attraction are based in biology. In other words, what occurs between two or more sexually mature people is their own damn business.”

    The power of what you are addressing here is exemplified by your need to genuflect to it before further commentary, and yet for once it appears (judging by the comments you’ve drawn so far) genuflection wasn’t necessary. I don’t know how many thousands of times on internet I’ve seen someone carefully explain only to have the majority of replies ignore the explanation and even treat the explanation as itself the most compelling evidence of the opposite intention.

    This could be a genuine sign elite and e-liberal tricks are indeed being exposed and becoming obsolete. .

  14. Tweebs
    April 19, 2017 at 2:11 am

    Spot on again. Nice work. I live in Massachusetts and was at the DMV listening to a lawyer and a consultant yammer on and on for 45 minutes while we waited for the place to open. The consultant, a woman, mentioned her baby from China at least 5 times. They both rent. They talked about their areas as being “really nice” which is what everyone in Boston who is NOT a home owner says to make themselves feel better about being 45 years old and making enough money to rent a decent place but not enough to actually buy a piece of property. The Chinese baby for status observation is truly brilliant. I am not Democrat or Republican. I vote the issues and ideals of the day so Ive voted for Bush and Obama. Imagine that. Lol. Anyways… yes the textbook Liberal asshats are just as you say… they want status and control….. which is not surprising as this is what most people want. No one’s ego likes to admit what Carl Sagan points out in his Pale Blue Dot monlogue…. that we are all nothing more than little atoms of carbon suspended on a mote of dust in infinite space. So… if adopting a Chinese baby fills that gap for ya, splendid. Whatever it takes to get through the day right….. hahahah.

  1. March 24, 2017 at 7:02 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: