https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=IzNvMkUFr9g
is this idea, you know, in postmodernism is that hierarchies themselves are inherently bad. The idea is, you know, you can’t have being in the world without hierarchy, you know, you can’t have hierarchies, you like certain music more than others, you like certain colors, right? It’s how you kind of determine, you know, what your values are, and destroying hierarchies as such seems like such an obviously bad idea that I kind of resonated with, you know, a few years ago, in a sense. So it’s like, you know, and I see a lot of good, smart, well-meaning people take these ideas, and that’s kind of the, you know, the strange part of what we’re seeing here, you know. Well, one of the things that’s important to understand, and I think that’s one of the things that I’ve been trying to point to as well, is that there’s certain structures that are just there. You can’t do anything about it, they’re there. And so, if you try to get rid of them, they’re going to come back, they’re going to return in a strange upside, you’re going to, they’re going to return upside down, or they’re going to return in a skewed way. And so, one of the things I’ve been wanting to do is to point out that, for example, like you can’t avoid hierarchy. So if you try to get rid of hierarchy, you end up with an upside down hierarchy. You don’t end up with equality, there is no equality, you know. It always ends up being an upside down thing. And so, it’s better to rather understand the hierarchy and to participate in it. And then also, then you can actually, you can palliate against the negative aspects of the hierarchy. You can help, you know, compensate for some of the dangerous aspects of what the hierarchy involves. But if you just say, I want to upend it, I want to get rid of it, then you’re going to end up a little tyrant, and you’re going to install a new hierarchy that is going to be more tyrannical than the one before and is going to be upside down. So it’s going to be very fragile. And the reason why it’s going to be more tyrannical than the one before is because it’s going to be upside down. Something unnatural has to be enforced, like massively enforced. And so, natural things need a little bit of nudging, but they really have to be like massively enforced. If they have to be massively enforced, then we’re in trouble. Yeah, that’s a great point. And I think you could practically kind of boil this down to, you know, and it’s ironic that, you know, Christ, in a sense, inaugurated this idea or instantiation of the left, right? The left’s appropriate role is to identify when the hierarchy has become corrupt, right? And it seems like, you know, the relationship between the left and the right, you know, I see is kind of similar to the relationship between heaven and earth. And the balance of the two is kind of where you see the appropriate way of that things work out at so many levels. And this is something that, you know, recently has come up with this idea, you can ascertain truth in a very accurate way by looking at it at all the different levels of reality. You know, we talk about the individual, the communal, you know, and then the, you know, in terms of a, you can look at how your body interacts with the world and apply that to how a nation interacts with the world. And then you can look at something like the issue of borders, right? You can look at the issues of borders as you look at the borders of your body, right? And if you take in food, indiscriminate food, processed food from anywhere and everywhere, that’s going to disintegrate your body, the identity that is James, right? But if you only eat one type of food, you know, and I talk about this with Neil, if you only know, so it’s this idea of purity and, you know, border control and open borders, there is a way to ascertain what’s the right way to, you know, look at a border. And it’s like, so that’s what I like about the system. It’s so practical in so many different ways.