why do you call give me or politely saying you are an idiot you don’t know what you’re talking about it’s simply I would like to know because you and I like this often when you attack somebody you said aggressively and what should read more tell me whom so I’m asking you not read more I don’t advise you but who are give me some names and so on and who are these post-modern egalitarian neo-marxist and where do you see any kind even of a Marxism I see in it mostly and important and utterly important moralization well I mean organization like jonathon Heights what’s it called heterodox Academy and other organizations like that have documented an absolute dearth of conservative voices in the social sciences and the humanities and about 25{5fec4a8730436a0188ea9fdf5e7c2aa604b3dea71af4687f361fe67458d911a6} according to the what I think are reliable surveys approximately 25{5fec4a8730436a0188ea9fdf5e7c2aa604b3dea71af4687f361fe67458d911a6} of social scientists in the u.s. identified themselves as Marxists and so there’s that very solid economic work David Harvey economic analysis and so on and so on then there is the old guy who is far from simplification Frederick Jensen and so on totally marginalized today it is politically correct mainstream you know I I don’t keep well yeah your question seemed to me to focus more on the pair a peculiar relationship that I’ve noticed and that people have disputed between post-modernism and and neo Marxism and I see the connection between the postmodernist types and the Marxists as a sleight of hand that replaced the notion of the oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie as the oppression by one identity group by another token okay so with that but so now look precisely that’s it see I guess that’s where we might have a dispute because I think what happened especially in France in the 1960s as the as the radical marxist postmodern types like Derrida and Foucault realized that they were losing the moral battle especially after the information came out of the Soviet Union in the manner that it came out yeah that the whole blood is telling us yeah the whole Stellan this catastrophe along with the entire Maoist catastrophe that they didn’t really have a leg to stand on and instead of revising their notion that human history and this is a Marxist notion should be regarded as the eternal class struggle between the economically deprived and the oppressors they just recast it and said well it’s not based on economics it’s based on identity but it’s still fundamentally oppressor against oppressed and to me that meant that they smuggled the the the fundamental narrative of Marxism and many of its schools back into the argument without ever admitting that they did so now I’ve been criticized you know for this opposition because people who are post modernists say look one of the hallmarks of post-modernism is skepticism of meta-narratives it’s like I know that perfectly well and I also know that Marxism is a meta-narrative and so you shouldn’t be able to be a post modernist and a Marxist but I still see the union of those two things in the insistence that the best the appropriate way to look at the view world is to view it as the battleground between groups defined by a particular group identity nin dividuals defined by a particular group identity so that the group identity becomes paramount and then the proper reading is always oppressor versus oppressed with the secondary insistence that it’s very similar to Marx’s insistence upon the moral superiority of the proletariat that the oppressors are by definition because they’re oppressed morally superior and and there’s the call for perhaps not revolutionary change although that comes up above but change in the structure so that that oppression disappears so that a certain form of equality comes about now you argue that Marx wasn’t a believer in equality of outcome and I’m not so sure about that because his notion of the eventual utopia that would constitute genuine communism was a place where all class divisions were eradicated and so there’s a anesthesia well well there’s at least an implication like the most important of the hierarchies had disappeared and so maybe he had enough sophistication to talk about other forms of hierarchies but if if that’s the case then I can’t imagine why he thought that the Utopia that would emerge as a consequence of the elimination of economic hierarchies would be a utopia because if there are other forms of hierarchies that still existed people would be just as contentious about them as they are now like we have hierarchies of attractiveness for example that have nothing to do with economics are very little to do with economics and there’s no shortage of contention around that or any other form of ability and so that’s why I associate the social justice types who are basically postmodernist with Marx Postma their postmodernist with Marxism it’s the insistence that you