Should deconstructionism be tolerated?

[quatona]

What some do is attack attack attack. They attack marriage and other social norms. They attack and ridicule things that have kept society stable and undermine it. They tear down and never build up. They are paid for by people like George Soros and other wealthy people that want to undermine the structure of society so they take from society and more easily control society.

Should society tolerate such attacks or should it fight back?

One of the nasty things about these attacks is they use things like free speech to attack and then they take away your right to free speech. The Frankfurt school called it Critical Theory and its been very effective in free societies to tear things down and open them up to various manipulations.

Translation: You don´t like change and therefore you attack attack attack it.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Ironically, this is not a constructive argument. All biased rhetoric; no substance.

Its accurate. That is all I aim for.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Yes, Critical Theory should be fought in all of its forms.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Do you understand that you can stand in the breach there based on who you are and what you believe? I can see it but I can't really fight it. The ones knocked off can't see it or fight it.

I wish I as more articulate. I'm not.

 

[Cearbhall]

Its accurate. That is all I aim for.

You failed.

 

[essentialsaltes]

What some do is attack attack attack. They attack marriage

I dislike the way you use the word 'attack', but yes.

People fought to see that women were not treated as property in marriages.
People fought to see the interracial marriages became legal.
People fought to see that same-sex marriages became legal.

I don't see these as attacks, but as expansions of liberty, with no harm (attack) done.

Should society tolerate such attacks or should it fight back?

How do you want to 'fight' against these non-attacks?

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

What some do is attack attack attack. They attack marriage and other social norms. They attack and ridicule things that have kept society stable and undermine it. They tear down and never build up. They are paid for by people like George Soros and other wealthy people that want to undermine the structure of society so they take from society and more easily control society.

Should society tolerate such attacks or should it fight back?

One of the nasty things about these attacks is they use things like free speech to attack and then they take away your right to free speech. The Frankfurt school called it Critical Theory and its been very effective in free societies to tear things down and open them up to various manipulations.

I think that you need to read Grassroots Post-Modernism: Remaking the Soil of Cultures, by Gustavo Esteva and Madhu Suri Prakash, and hear the stories of people who have--some for as many as five centuries--lived under conquest and domination by outsiders but in spite of that have kept their cultures and identities intact.

I read the 1998 edition. I do not know what the newer edition is like.

 

[DogmaHunter]

What some do is attack attack attack. They attack marriage and other social norms. They attack and ridicule things that have kept society stable and undermine it. They tear down and never build up. They are paid for by people like George Soros and other wealthy people that want to undermine the structure of society so they take from society and more easily control society.

Should society tolerate such attacks or should it fight back?

One of the nasty things about these attacks is they use things like free speech to attack and then they take away your right to free speech. The Frankfurt school called it Critical Theory and its been very effective in free societies to tear things down and open them up to various manipulations.

If society would not "tolerate" such "attacks", then we'ld still be living in caves, fighting over fire.

Every major "change", socially or technologically or otherwise, came about through the kind of things that you are describing here as an "attack".

 

[MrSpikey]

One of the nasty things about these attacks is they use things like free speech to attack and then they take away your right to free speech.

And yet, somehow, you still managed to say that.

I assume you are in hiding now?

 

[Moxie123]

What some do is attack attack attack. They attack marriage and other social norms. They attack and ridicule things that have kept society stable and undermine it. They tear down and never build up. They are paid for by people like George Soros and other wealthy people that want to undermine the structure of society so they take from society and more easily control society.

Should society tolerate such attacks or should it fight back?

One of the nasty things about these attacks is they use things like free speech to attack and then they take away your right to free speech. The Frankfurt school called it Critical Theory and its been very effective in free societies to tear things down and open them up to various manipulations.

This is why I study the FreeMasons, mostly the upper levels, and their Gematria/signs/symbols. One of their mottoes is "Order Through Chaos" which explains the tearing down, then re-organization of things, procedures, etc just like after 9/11.

 

[Chany]

Could you define deconstructionism, for the sake of the discussion?