Show Outline with Links
Thought Provocation is Good
Socialism Looks Fun
Statistics More Dangerous Than Guns
Rosaria Says It
This interview is just marvelous.
The Content Cluster Muster (8.8.19)
Show Outline with Links
Show Outline with Links
Have 'Em Delivered
Write to the Editor
Does Pastor Wilson post his own links? Last week the lead link was a strong affirmation of evolution and climate change. This week the lead link is Jordan Peterson arguing persuasively that income inequality is naturally bad for society and especially so from a religious conservative perspective. Other than framing a couple things more lazily than he could have, I agree with pretty much everything Peterson says in that video. And it seems to be at odds with what Pastor Wilson has said before. It makes me wonder whether he watched the whole video or just saw the beginning and… Read more »
Well thought provocation is good, so I think Doug knows what he did with those items.
Thought provocation is good, but it isn’t exactly a typical M.O. around here. When Pastor Wilson has spoke of income inequality in the past he rarely moves beyond the old right-wing talking point of “it’s all just envy.” No discussion of Scripture on the issue, the Church Fathers on the issue, psychological insight, how systems have been set up to favor the rich, the sinfulness that has led to the current situation, anything. No suggestion there’s the slightest issue with inequality at all. Just a condemnation of those who feel that way. This is typical and recent: https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/%EF%BB%BFin-hell-where-they-already-have-it.html Other than… Read more »
Peterson has said elsewhere that weath inequality is inevitable so I’m not sure how different his and Wilsons views are exactly. But to my main point, why are you afraid of Wilson misinterpeting a joke or why is deviating from from his M.O. a bad thing?
What about my response implied fear? I was more hoping to highlight how Peterson’s response was at odds with the status quo around here and hoping to elicit discussion.
“Other than an off-hand joke near the beginning of the video that I fear Wilson may have misinterpreted” I don’t think Wilson misinterpeted anything.
Petersons point in the video is that wealth inequiality in a local area is dangerous and that something should be done about that, what that something is isn’t gone into or well defined anywhere else.
He actually said local, state, national, it holds at every level.
Whereas I haven’t seen Pastor Wilson admit that wealth inequality is a problem or that anything should be done, despite much Scripture and Church precedent on this point.
And you are correct that Peterson didn’t offer a solution (which I appreciate as he isn’t very well equipped in that area so it was fair humility there).
The possibility exists that Peterson is wrong that something should be necessarily done about wealth inequality as such, when what really needs to have something done about it is people getting violent in an atmosphere of wealth inequality. The gospel has a lot more to say about loving your neighbors than about making sure all your neighbors stay within a certain economic range. We’ve come full circle — it’s entirely plausible that Wilson thinks that what Peterson has to say is thought-provoking, without buying all of his conclusions. Same thing as last week — it’s possible to find the existence… Read more »
I have no ability to “police” anything. I already know that Wilson doesn’t endorse those positions. “Policing” Wilson’s posts would suggest that I wish him to stop posting things he disagrees with. Never! What I want is for people to see the discrepancy, understand it, think who is in the right, and move towards life. And yes, violence is always bad (from the violence of the poor that seeks self-respect to the violence of the rich that invades foreign nations to protect corporate interests). Envy, greed, and jealousy are bad, and fairly uniformly distributed among rich and poor, in fact… Read more »
“the violence of the poor that seeks self-respect ”
Yes, gang-bangers who commit atrocious crimes are only looking for a little self-respect. Jonathan’s amazing bias is in full view again.
“yourself among them and live out Christ’s commands.”
“Any change you desire to see in their behavior, without having first demonstrated the corresponding change in your own, is unlikely to come to much of anything.”
So they should spend an inordinate amount of time as internet keyboard warriors?
MKT, my statement and your summary are not the same. I was repeating what Peterson is saying at 2:17 and several more times throughout the tape. I’m not sure what bias you are accusing me of there.
If you are actually interested in the lives and motivations of gangbangers, I would suggest “Tattoos on the Heart” by Father Gregory Boyle as a strong starting place.
And once again, making an ad hominem attack when you respond to me instead of dealing with the subject in any way whatsoever is not helpful to the conversation.
You can calculate the genie coeficiant at any level, and a lower coeficiant means less crime; but having a huge inequality between the richest and poorest in the U.S. does not make the entierity of the U.S. a high crime area. So local inequality is more dangerous than national inequality. This works with Wilsons focus on envy because it’s much easier to be envious of your neighbors than faceless rich people accross the country.
The scriptural solution to wealth inequality is generosity which you don’t get from socialism or any other government distribution.
And that solution doesn’t “solve” wealth inequality, it just solves the negative effects of the inequality. Inequality really doesn’t seem to be the actual problem, whether you’re talking biblically, or the genie coefficient.
(I’d upvote Christopher’s comment but I seem to have lost the ability to log in.)
Christopher, I totally agree that generosity is at the root of the solution. However, I see a huge disconnect between the conservative mantra that handouts and welfare aren’t good for people, and the visible actions that conservative “generosity” rarely goes beyond token handouts. A soup kitchen, a food pantry, a $20 bill handed out to a beggar, a Christmas distribution, at best those efforts will soften the heart of the people involved and at worst they will further cement the divisions and the problems. Talk to Christians who are actively involved in helping people as a life mission, especially those… Read more »
I’m not sure what there is in Peterson’s presentation that indicates that anything other than envy is what is going on. What, other than envy, could be behind the fact that mere proximity to greater wealth, power, status motivates more crime? You might be able to argue that there are other things going on, but there’s nothing in what Peterson says that contradicts envy as a driver.
I know I’m kicking against a quite ingrained dogma here, but I’ll give it my best shot. Peterson’s driving point had nothing to do with envy (other than the joke near the beginning), but with self-advancement. People, and especially men, have what feels like an innate desire to make something of ourselves, to become something, to “self-actualize”, to earn the respect of others, whatever you want to call it. Now in real life it takes a very long time to make something of ourselves. Many people who will never gain the position in life they feel they deserve will nonetheless… Read more »
Jonathan, Just wanted to chip in to say this is a pretty good post. I don’t think inequality, per se, is the cause of a lot of violence. It is inequality as it functions in certain enviroments, when it builds resentment due to an implied (or sometimes explicit) social contract not being honored. And when modes of meaning and belonging that function outside of economic score keeping are removed or devalued. Young men are going to hunt for status, that is an absolute given. When young men achieve status by marrying, working hard at a job, and acquiring a small… Read more »
Very unequal societies can nonetheless have stable ways for men to gain and maintain status and can have very low levels of violence I can see that. The caste example I gave is one (not very attractive) example, but you could do better. I would believe that in a society where judicial, employment, education, and political access were relatively flat across the income spectrum, and people from poverty had a reasonable shot at jobs with meaningful status even if they didn’t pay well, you could retain high wealth inequality and still have relatively low violent crime. Of course, disentangling such… Read more »
I think the entitlement mentality has a lot to answer for, along with the rejection of the notion of punishment. Unattractive though the caste system is, it has proven itself as a stabilising influence on an already unequal society. (It must be, what, 3500 years old?) But I guess both run on different forms of hopelessness, and different notions of justice. The caste system relies on everyone believing that he has received his just deserts (karma) and in our system everyone believes he deserves more than he has.
DSA National Convention = End Stage Woke-ism
Hopefully, but it could be a painful (for the rest of us) and drawn out process.