Revision as of 18:26, 11 September 2020 editNewimpartial (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users24,787 edits Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:26, 11 September 2020 edit undoStAnselm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers160,611 edits →Expanding scope?: clarifiedNext edit → | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
:::::"But beyond its unshakable association with fringe conspiratorial thinkers, the cultural Marxism narrative has another shortcoming...": there's the conspiracy theory of fringe websites, and the "narrative" of conservative intellectuals (which is associated with/based on/inspired by/related to the conspiracy theory). ]] (]) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | :::::"But beyond its unshakable association with fringe conspiratorial thinkers, the cultural Marxism narrative has another shortcoming...": there's the conspiracy theory of fringe websites, and the "narrative" of conservative intellectuals (which is associated with/based on/inspired by/related to the conspiracy theory). ]] (]) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::::: For the purposes of this article, I think that's a distinction without a difference. If someone blames pronoun choice on "cultural Marxism", for example, their "conservative narrative" hasn't stopped being a conspiracy theory. I think the more relevant distinction the author is making is between "fringe" websites and users of the conservative narrative who may not be obviously Fringe (like Peterson, for example). The conspiracy theory winds through both. ] (]) 16:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ::::::: For the purposes of this article, I think that's a distinction without a difference. If someone blames pronoun choice on "cultural Marxism", for example, their "conservative narrative" hasn't stopped being a conspiracy theory. I think the more relevant distinction the author is making is between "fringe" websites and users of the conservative narrative who may not be obviously Fringe (like Peterson, for example). The conspiracy theory winds through both. ] (]) 16:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::::::Yes, but this article is weighted towards the far-right, whereas the phrase has (int he last couple of years) become a lot more mainstream than that: e.g. the '']'', '']'',, and the ]. To be NPOV, the article must describe these opinions/uses of the term. ]] (]) 18:08, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ::::::::Yes, but this (Misplaced Pages) article is weighted towards the far-right, whereas the phrase has (int he last couple of years) become a lot more mainstream than that: e.g. the '']'', '']'',, and the ]. To be NPOV, the article must describe these opinions/uses of the term. ]] (]) 18:08, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::::::That is to say, not everyone accepts that it is a conspiracy theory. ]] (]) 18:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ::::::::That is to say, not everyone accepts that it is a conspiracy theory. ]] (]) 18:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
: Also, while I am happy to discuss her before inclusion and pursue improved sources, I don't see any serious opposition in the RS to the idea that Jordan Peterson has disseminated the conspiracy theory, and therefore no BLP violation in saying so since it is not a controversial claim. ] (]) 15:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC) | : Also, while I am happy to discuss her before inclusion and pursue improved sources, I don't see any serious opposition in the RS to the idea that Jordan Peterson has disseminated the conspiracy theory, and therefore no BLP violation in saying so since it is not a controversial claim. ] (]) 15:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:26, 11 September 2020
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Expanding scope?
I'm glad that at long last this article has been created. It needs to be noted, however, that not everyone who uses the term is buying into the conspiracy theory. So my question is, do we want to expand the article to include the *term* and/or the thing people are referring to by it (if not the conspiracy theory)? StAnselm (talk) 14:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Do you have any reliable sources documenting use of the term in other senses? No-one had provided any, prior to the split. Newimpartial (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is a balanced review that should be in the article; it also mentions the British use of the term. StAnselm (talk) 15:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- I think the article distinguishes between the "conspiracy theory" and the "conservative narrative" of people like Peterson. If we are going to mention Peterson, I think we would need to adjust the scope of the article (and move it to Cultural Marxism). StAnselm (talk) 15:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- How do you see that as a distinction in the article? I read the "conspiracy theory" and the "conservative narrative" as depicted in that source as essentially the same thing, while the distinction it makes is between those appropriations and actual intellectual movements on the left and in the universities. Newimpartial (talk) 15:58, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- "But beyond its unshakable association with fringe conspiratorial thinkers, the cultural Marxism narrative has another shortcoming...": there's the conspiracy theory of fringe websites, and the "narrative" of conservative intellectuals (which is associated with/based on/inspired by/related to the conspiracy theory). StAnselm (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- For the purposes of this article, I think that's a distinction without a difference. If someone blames pronoun choice on "cultural Marxism", for example, their "conservative narrative" hasn't stopped being a conspiracy theory. I think the more relevant distinction the author is making is between "fringe" websites and users of the conservative narrative who may not be obviously Fringe (like Peterson, for example). The conspiracy theory winds through both. Newimpartial (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but this (Misplaced Pages) article is weighted towards the far-right, whereas the phrase has (int he last couple of years) become a lot more mainstream than that: e.g. the Washington Times, Tablet,, and the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal. To be NPOV, the article must describe these opinions/uses of the term. StAnselm (talk) 18:08, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- That is to say, not everyone accepts that it is a conspiracy theory. StAnselm (talk) 18:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- For the purposes of this article, I think that's a distinction without a difference. If someone blames pronoun choice on "cultural Marxism", for example, their "conservative narrative" hasn't stopped being a conspiracy theory. I think the more relevant distinction the author is making is between "fringe" websites and users of the conservative narrative who may not be obviously Fringe (like Peterson, for example). The conspiracy theory winds through both. Newimpartial (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- "But beyond its unshakable association with fringe conspiratorial thinkers, the cultural Marxism narrative has another shortcoming...": there's the conspiracy theory of fringe websites, and the "narrative" of conservative intellectuals (which is associated with/based on/inspired by/related to the conspiracy theory). StAnselm (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- How do you see that as a distinction in the article? I read the "conspiracy theory" and the "conservative narrative" as depicted in that source as essentially the same thing, while the distinction it makes is between those appropriations and actual intellectual movements on the left and in the universities. Newimpartial (talk) 15:58, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- I think the article distinguishes between the "conspiracy theory" and the "conservative narrative" of people like Peterson. If we are going to mention Peterson, I think we would need to adjust the scope of the article (and move it to Cultural Marxism). StAnselm (talk) 15:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is a balanced review that should be in the article; it also mentions the British use of the term. StAnselm (talk) 15:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Also, while I am happy to discuss her before inclusion and pursue improved sources, I don't see any serious opposition in the RS to the idea that Jordan Peterson has disseminated the conspiracy theory, and therefore no BLP violation in saying so since it is not a controversial claim. Newimpartial (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- We need something more than an opinion piece on thestranger.com. StAnselm (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed. I have added new text with a proper source. Newimpartial (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Alexander Zubatov notes, "I have never heard Peterson make reference to any crazy “conspiracy” in his many rants against cultural Marxism." StAnselm (talk) 18:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Zubatov is not exactly a reliable source on the subject, since his argument is essentially that
- Alexander Zubatov notes, "I have never heard Peterson make reference to any crazy “conspiracy” in his many rants against cultural Marxism." StAnselm (talk) 18:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed. I have added new text with a proper source. Newimpartial (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- We need something more than an opinion piece on thestranger.com. StAnselm (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
the conspiracy is real. Newimpartial (talk) 18:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Requested move 11 September 2020
It has been proposed in this section that Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory be renamed and moved to Cultural Marxism. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move |
Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory → Cultural Marxism – This article needs to be more general, and cover the use of the term, and the (alleged) theories covered by the term. There are different opinions (especially in the last few years) over the reality of the thing, and focusing purely on the conspiracy theory is POV, as it lumps everyone into the far-right. Notable voices include the Washington Times ("The Cultural Marxist attack on Western society") and Tablet magazine ("Just Because Anti-Semites Talk About ‘Cultural Marxism’ Doesn’t Mean It Isn’t Real"). StAnselm (talk) 18:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- C-Class Conservatism articles
- Low-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles
- C-Class Alternative views articles
- Low-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles
- Requested moves