Successor ideology: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:11, 21 June 2022

The successor ideology is a term devised by essayist Wesley Yang to describe an emergent ideology within left-wing political movements in the United States centered around intersectionality, social justice, identity politics, and anti-racism, which he claims is replacing conventional liberal values of pluralism, freedom of speech, color blindness, and free inquiry.^[1]^[2]^[3] Proponents of the concept link it to an alleged growth in the intolerance of differing opinions, to cancel culture, "wokeness," "social justice warriors" and to the far left;^[4]^[5]^[6] Yang has summarized it as "authoritarian Utopianism that masquerades as liberal humanism while usurping it from within."^[4]

The term has garnered support from some commentators, with Roger Berkowitz linking it to a broader retreat of liberalism worldwide—challenged from the left in the form of the successor ideology and from the right in the form of illiberal democracy^[7]—and with Matt Taibbi calling the ideas of those he associates with the ideology "toxic" and "unattractive."^[3]^[8] The concept, however, has also come under criticism, with some commentators arguing that the term does not accurately describe trends within left-wing movements^[9].

Origins

The term was coined by political writer Wesley Yang in a March 4, 2019 Twitter thread discussing diversity in college admissions and among the professional–managerial class; following a tweet arguing that the end-point of an emergent racial ideology is "critical race theory", Yang stated, "This successor ideology has been a rival to the meritocratic one and has in recent years acquired sufficient power to openly seek hegemony on campuses and elsewhere."^[10] He expanded on the term in further tweets in May 2019^[11] and in a 2021 blog post,^[12] and has appeared on podcasts by The Wall Street Journal and the Manhattan Institute to promote it.^[13]^[14]

Criticism

Sarah Jeong, writing in The Verge, has argued that there is no such thing as a 'successor ideology,' saying the term "seems to only muddy the waters since the thing that [critics of the 'successor ideology'] are concerned about isn’t actually a concrete ideology but an inchoate social force with the hallmarks of religious revival."^[2]

References

^ Douthat, Ross (12 June 2020). "The Tom Cotton Op-Ed and the Cultural Revolution". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ ^a ^b Jeong, Sarah (10 July 2020). "Social media and the end of discourse". The Verge. Archived from the original on 28 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ ^a ^b Nwanevu, Osita (6 July 2020). "The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism". The New Republic. Archived from the original on 20 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ ^a ^b West, Ed (23 June 2020). "As a conservative, I mourn the loss of liberalism". Unherd. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Fonte, John (25 June 2020). "The Vanguard of Record". The American Mind. The Claremont Institute. Archived from the original on 2 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Sullivan, Andrew (12 June 2020). "Is There Still Room for Debate?". Intelligencer. New York Magazine. Archived from the original on 16 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Berkowitz, Roger (18 June 2020). "The New Orthodoxy". The Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanity. Bard College. Archived from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Taibbi, Matt (June 20, 2020). "Matt Taibbi: The press is destroying itself". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on April 13, 2021.
^ "The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism".
^ Yang, Wesley (4 March 2019). "Tweet". Twitter. Archived from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Yang, Wesley (24 May 2019). "Tweet". Twitter. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
^ Yang, Wesley (June 14, 2021). "Welcome to Year Zero". Year Zero.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
^ Baker, Gerry; Yang, Wesley (June 13, 2022). "The Successor Ideology and the Threat to Our Freedoms". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on June 16, 2022.
^ Douthat, Ross; Hughes, Coleman; Yang, Wesley; Salam, Reihan (August 6, 2020). "The Successor Ideology". Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

External links

The Successor Ideology — 2020 video by the Manhattan Institute featuring Ross Douthat, Wesley Yang, Coleman Hughes, and Reihan Salam

[1] Douthat, Ross (12 June 2020). "The Tom Cotton Op-Ed and the Cultural Revolution". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[The_Verge-2] Jeong, Sarah (10 July 2020). "Social media and the end of discourse". The Verge. Archived from the original on 28 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[NR-3] Nwanevu, Osita (6 July 2020). "The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism". The New Republic. Archived from the original on 20 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[Unherd-4] West, Ed (23 June 2020). "As a conservative, I mourn the loss of liberalism". Unherd. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[5] Fonte, John (25 June 2020). "The Vanguard of Record". The American Mind. The Claremont Institute. Archived from the original on 2 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[6] Sullivan, Andrew (12 June 2020). "Is There Still Room for Debate?". Intelligencer. New York Magazine. Archived from the original on 16 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[7] Berkowitz, Roger (18 June 2020). "The New Orthodoxy". The Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanity. Bard College. Archived from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[8] Taibbi, Matt (June 20, 2020). "Matt Taibbi: The press is destroying itself". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on April 13, 2021.

[9] "The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism".

[10] Yang, Wesley (4 March 2019). "Tweet". Twitter. Archived from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[11] Yang, Wesley (24 May 2019). "Tweet". Twitter. Archived from the original on 23 July 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.

[12] Yang, Wesley (June 14, 2021). "Welcome to Year Zero". Year Zero.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

[13] Baker, Gerry; Yang, Wesley (June 13, 2022). "The Successor Ideology and the Threat to Our Freedoms". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on June 16, 2022.

[14] Douthat, Ross; Hughes, Coleman; Yang, Wesley; Salam, Reihan (August 6, 2020). "The Successor Ideology". Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 The '''successor ideology''' is a term devised by essayist [[Wesley Yang]] to describe an emergent ideology within [[left-wing politics|left-wing]] political movements in the [[United States]] centered around [[intersectionality]], [[social justice]], [[identity politics]], and [[anti-racism]], which he claims is replacing conventional [[Liberalism in the United States|liberal]] values of [[Pluralism (political philosophy) |pluralism]], [[freedom of speech]], [[Color blindness (racial classification)|color blindness]], and free inquiry.<ref>{{Cite web|last= Douthat|first=Ross|date=12 June 2020 |title= The Tom Cotton Op-Ed and the Cultural Revolution|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/nyt-tom-cotton-oped-liberalism.html |url-status= live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200723042605/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/nyt-tom-cotton-oped-liberalism.html |archive-date=23 July 2020 |access-date=8 August 2020|website=The New York Times}}</ref><ref name= "The Verge">{{Cite web|last=Jeong|first=Sarah|date= 10 July 2020|title=Social media and the end of discourse|url= https://www.theverge.com/21320338/letter-harpers-writers-free-speech-canceled-social-media-illiberalism|url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728034701if_/https://www.theverge.com/21320338/letter-harpers-writers-free-speech-canceled-social-media-illiberalism|archive-date=28 July 2020|access-date=8 August 2020|website=The Verge}}</ref><ref name="NR">{{Cite magazine|last=Nwanevu|first= Osita |date=6 July 2020|title= The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism|url= https://newrepublic.com/article/158346/willful-blindness-reactionary-liberalism|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200720234605/https://newrepublic.com/article/158346/willful-blindness-reactionary-liberalism |archive-date= 20 July 2020|access-date=8 August 2020 |magazine= The New Republic}}</ref> Proponents of the concept link it to an alleged growth in the intolerance of differing opinions, to [[cancel culture]], "[[woke]]ness," "[[social justice warrior]]s" and to the [[far left]];<ref name="Unherd">{{Cite web|last=West|first=Ed|date=23 June 2020|title=As a conservative, I mourn the loss of liberalism|url= https://unherd.com/thepost/as-a-conservative-i-mourn-the-loss-of-liberalism/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200723125336/https://unherd.com/thepost/as-a-conservative-i-mourn-the-loss-of-liberalism/|archive-date= 23 July 2020|access-date=8 August 2020|website=Unherd}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Fonte|first=John|date=25 June 2020|title=The Vanguard of Record |url= https://americanmind.org/essays/the-vanguard-of-record/ |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200702115005/https://americanmind.org/essays/the-vanguard-of-record/ |archive-date=2 July 2020|access-date=8 August 2020|website=The American Mind|publisher=The Claremont Institute}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sullivan|first=Andrew|date=12 June 2020|title=Is There Still Room for Debate?|url= https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/andrew-sullivan-is-there-still-room-for-debate.html|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200716051534/https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/andrew-sullivan-is-there-still-room-for-debate.html|archive-date= 16 July 2020|access-date=8 August 2020|website=Intelligencer|publisher=New York Magazine}}</ref> Yang has summarized it as "[[authoritarian]] [[Utopianism]] that masquerades as [[liberal humanism]] while usurping it from within."<ref name= "Unherd"/>
-The term has garnered support from some commentators, with [[Roger Berkowitz]] linking it to a broader retreat of [[liberalism]] worldwide—challenged from the [[left-wing politics|left]] in the form of the successor ideology and from the [[right-wing politics|right]] in the form of [[illiberal democracy]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Berkowitz |first=Roger |date=18 June 2020 |title=The New Orthodoxy |url=https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/the-new-orthodoxy-2020-06-18 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200808070820/https%3A%2F%2Fhac.bard.edu%2Famor-mundi%2Fthe-new-orthodoxy-2020-06-18 |archive-date=8 August 2020 |access-date=8 August 2020 |website=The Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanity |publisher=Bard College}}</ref>—and with [[Matt Taibbi]] calling the ideas of those he associates with the ideology "toxic" and "unattractive."<ref name="NR" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Taibbi |first=Matt |date=June 20, 2020 |title=Matt Taibbi: The press is destroying itself |url=https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2020/06/21/Matt-Taibbi-The-press-is-destroying-itself/stories/202006210043 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210413153427/https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2020/06/21/Matt-Taibbi-The-press-is-destroying-itself/stories/202006210043 |archive-date=April 13, 2021 |website=[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]}}</ref> The concept, however, has also come under criticism, with some commentators arguing that the term does not accurately describe trends within left-wing movements.
+The term has garnered support from some commentators, with [[Roger Berkowitz]] linking it to a broader retreat of [[liberalism]] worldwide—challenged from the [[left-wing politics|left]] in the form of the successor ideology and from the [[right-wing politics|right]] in the form of [[illiberal democracy]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Berkowitz |first=Roger |date=18 June 2020 |title=The New Orthodoxy |url=https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/the-new-orthodoxy-2020-06-18 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200808070820/https%3A%2F%2Fhac.bard.edu%2Famor-mundi%2Fthe-new-orthodoxy-2020-06-18 |archive-date=8 August 2020 |access-date=8 August 2020 |website=The Hannah Arendt Center for Politics and Humanity |publisher=Bard College}}</ref>—and with [[Matt Taibbi]] calling the ideas of those he associates with the ideology "toxic" and "unattractive."<ref name="NR" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Taibbi |first=Matt |date=June 20, 2020 |title=Matt Taibbi: The press is destroying itself |url=https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2020/06/21/Matt-Taibbi-The-press-is-destroying-itself/stories/202006210043 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210413153427/https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2020/06/21/Matt-Taibbi-The-press-is-destroying-itself/stories/202006210043 |archive-date=April 13, 2021 |website=[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]}}</ref> The concept, however, has also come under criticism, with some commentators arguing that the term does not accurately describe trends within left-wing movements<ref>{{cite news|url =https://newrepublic.com/article/158346/willful-blindness-reactionary-liberalism|title=The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism}}</ref>.
 ==Origins==

Revision as of 21:11, 21 June 2022

Origins

Criticism

See also

References

External links