this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
11 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

2844 readers
69 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.


Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Karl Marx’s home life was a hot mess. Jordan Peterson can’t keep his room clean. So what?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 9 points 5 months ago

Setting aside the sad man that is Peterson, this rhetoric has always existed in some form throughout history as a way to shut down criticism.

Whether through 'whatabout-ism' (which points out issues on the side of the criticizer in order to assert their lack of ground to criticize), or through claims of lack of experience or knowledge (which must be 'made up for' to whatever extent the dismiss-er feels is warranted before they will accept criticism, which is probably never), this rhetorical device is just a trick to discount and dismiss.

The CurrentAffairs author seems to be taking this claim at face value, insomuch as they spend much more time attempting to validate Marx, rather than discussing the bad-faith employment of this argumentation.

Instead of devoting a whole article to attempting to somehow disprove the relevance of literal cleanliness to political acumen or the 'right' to speak on politics, it might have been better spent examining the purpose of these types of claims, or the mechanisms by which they function. There is one line- the literal last line of the article- in which "ad hominem" is said; it should not take that long, or require that much prefatory work, to name "I (selectively) don't listen to you because your room/body/desk/life is dirty" as such.