The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Grievance Studies
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

The Allure of Protective Stupidity
by Steve Sailer, February 06, 2019

The most important aspect of the Grievance Studies hoax—in which three writers duped supposedly scholarly gender and race journals with absurd papers such as “Human Reactions to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at the Dog Park”—may also be the most overlooked: the triumph of their term “Grievance Studies” as the collective noun for the various “disciplines” of woke academia. …

Nobody can deny Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose one historic accomplishment: They’ve permanently affixed the name Grievance Studies to their targets.

Before last fall, there were a variety of self-designations that only their smartest critics could keep track of. For example, Steven Pinker tweeted,

Is there any idea so outlandish that it won’t be published in a Critical/PoMo/Identity/‘Theory’ journal?

But if you aren’t quite up to Pinker’s level of brainpower, it’s hard to remember that “Critical/PoMo/Identity/‘Theory’” are all more or less the same moonshine.

But now we don’t need to. They are all just Grievance Studies.

Google searches show that the term “grievance studies” appeared only 85 times in the history of the internet before they announced their hoax last October, but 89,700 times since then.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 139 CommentsLeave a Comment
139 Comments to "Grievance Studies"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I’ve always preferred the term “Resentment Industry” since it covers academia, journalism, entertainment etc.

  2. kihowi says:

    needlessly multisyllabic jargon such as “microaggression.”

    That’s a bad example, because that happens to be one of the more concrete and descriptive words of the New Woke Order. In fact, it’s a great example of Sa[ir-Whorf because that kind of feminine aggression has always existed but it used to take an Oscar Wilde play to talk about it. You know that thing you do where you are continually degrading others by subtle remarks, looks, and inflections of the voice? Now we can call that something. Progress!

  3. Jason Liu says:

    Academia purge when?

    I’m always surprised how little attention the right pays to this, considering academia is the source of almost all leftism

  4. The “Grievance Studies” (GS) departments at universities prepare priests to go out into the world and lead the various Churches of Victimhood. GS is in a high growth mode becomes because there is a growing, ferocious competition for victim-status. Recall Hillary’s “basket of deplorables” whine in 2016 which concluded with “you name it.” Not just a throw away line, rather a invitation to get into the game.
    Some of the Victim clergy are much better than others — think ADL and Deborah Libstadt.

    See: http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2018/10/my-victimhood-is-bigger-than-yours-or.html

    • Agree: Stick
    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
  5. AndrewR says:

    Can anyone give a reason why, if the right-wing manages to give real power in the US, why the NYT shouldn’t be shut down and its employees and especially its editors and publishers… um… “arrested”

    I mean, the classical liberal in me loves the first amendment and all that jazz, but I’m starting to wonder if the Founders could have ever conceived of how it would be exploited in the current year.

  6. @Jason Liu

    Jordan Peterson is very outspoken about the regressive aspects of Gender studies etc. He proposes to cut these departments back since what they do is no science.

  7. Great. (- One more for the book.)

  8. Coag says:

    “Grievance studies” is the best term because it’s snarkier than other terms.

    If the quote “To speak another language is to possess another soul” is attributed correctly to Charlemagne, then the ol’ king of Franks can be credited with discovering Sapir-Whorf.

  9. Dear Mr. Sailer:

    If one is to be paid by the letter or letterhead, “School of Ressentiment” might look not only more sentient, but also be more apt to snag a sinecure. We hope that you can also see the “allure” of “Ressentiment, The Musical” and Ressentiment-Seeking, as well as the “protective stupidity” of the Ressentiment Is Too Damn High Party.

    Best,
    Adam & Zadie Smith,
    New York, Old York

    cc C.W. “Concealed Weapon” Ceram @ Gods, Grievances and Scholars,
    “Billy Bob” Thorton Wilder @ By The Skin of Our WhiteTeeth

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gods,_Graves_and_Scholars
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skin_of_Our_Teeth
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rustication_(academia)

    Also see Dan Rather rusticated to The School For Scandal
    Headlines fit to print should not include: Hate Hoax, Gruntled Post Office Workers, Ruly New Zealand Vacationers…

    stunning prediction: sailer answers above with “no thanks”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  10. watzi says:

    Steve: I don’t want to nitpick, but it seems you forgot to mention the biggest fan of Alfred Korzybski among the science-fiction writers: A. E. van Vogt ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._E._van_Vogt ) . Of his main works (as far as I can remember), the “Null-A” series plays in a world where Korzybski’s philosophy developed into the main line of thought, and in the “Voyage of the Space Beagle” the main hero is a “Nexialist”, a specialist in some kind of universal science.
    Its a long time since I read van Vogt – so experts might add some more insight (and examples..)..

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  11. George says:

    “A FemmeNist ManiPedifesto

    This is an autoethnography about the role of nail salons in relation to my own evolving feminist and femme consciousness.”

    Is your manicurist a sex slave? Nail salons are booming all over Britain. But behind the glossy facade, lies a shockingly disturbing story…

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2396774/Is-manicurist-sex-slave-Nail-salons-human-trafficking.html

    “If you simplify your English…when you make a stupid remark its stupidity will be obvious, even to yourself.”

    NYTimes Journo (NYT Opinion Editor Bari Weiss) Melts Down On Joe Rogan’s Show
    Trigger warning: Weiss uses a 4 letter word to modify the word ape, and a second animal reference to toads.

  12. njguy73 says:

    The importance of names is underrated. When something doesn’t have a name, humans have a hard time noticing a pattern. It’s hardly impossible—otherwise we’d never develop names in the first place—but names exist to make thinking easier.

    – Steve Sailer, conversative columnist

    I believe in the power and mystery of naming things. Language has the capacity to transform our cells, rearrange our learned patterns of behavior and redirect our thinking. I believe in naming what’s right in front of us because that is often what is most invisible.

    Naming things, breaking through taboos and denial is the most dangerous, terrifying and crucial work. This has to happen in spite of political climates or coercions, in spite of careers being won or lost, in spite of the fear of being criticized, outcast or disliked. I believe freedom begins with naming things. Humanity is preserved by it.

    – Eve Ensler. feminist author

    https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5285531

    Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Already, in the Eleventh Edition, we’re not far from that point. But the process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller.

    – “Syme,” from George Orwell’s 1984

    http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/4.html

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Rosamond Vincy
  13. @George

    That’s kind of the point of the “A FemmeNist ManiPedifesto” is that it’s okay to use slaves to get your nail done.

    • Replies: @Jake
  14. @TelfoedJohn

    Two slogans for the all-inclusive bettering of our future:

    The resentment industry of the regressive left excels in Grievance Studies! Becoming totally appalled is our goal.

  15. Anonymous[102] • Disclaimer says:

    Very interesting.

    Of course, anyone with a brain is well aware of the fact that the so called ‘social sciences’ are more often than not sick jokes which seem to exist as make-work-schemes for various low Brower loud mouthed second raters who rather like the sound of their own voices, and rather pompously, love to think of their opinions as being ‘important’. Nothing more than mutual masturbation societies with pomposity as the goal.

    In this regard all the sniggering about ‘dog shit in the park’ studies is small potatoes, worthy of a belly laugh or two.

    Unfortunately, the most pompous of the pompous, the most self important of the self important are the Economists. Too bad they more or less talk shit for a living just like the grievance study bandit people do. The white man’s tragedy is that the damn cool politicians who have supreme power in the west take the graven flatulence of The Economist as revealed religion.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  16. dearieme says:

    “Grievance Studies” must rank with “virtue-signalling”.

    James Delingpole believes he invented the latter. Is he right?

  17. Clyde says:
    @George

    Salon swoop: 100 arrested by modern slavery police in crackdown on nail bars (salons) that employ illegal immigrant staff https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4069256/Salon-swoop-100-arrested-modern-slavery-police-crackdown-nail-bars-employ-illegal-immigrant-staff.html

    Some 97 men and women were seized during a blitz on salons that employ non-EU citizens who do not have permission to be in Britain.

    More than a dozen of those rounded up during a series of swoops were suspected of having been trafficked by organised gangs into modern slavery.

    The majority of people arrested were Vietnamese. Others came from Mongolia, Ghana, China, Nigeria, Pakistan and India.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @Anonymous
  18. 47,700,000

    This is how many hits I got from Google today for “Grievance Studies”.

    • Replies: @jim jones
  19. Does the Internal Revenue Service let you deduct getting your nails done if you are a published autoethnographer on the subject of getting your nails done?

    LOL!, and the inner anti-complex-tax-code Libertarian in Steve Sailer comes out.

  20. Jake says:
    @AndrewR

    Being naive proponents of the Enlightenment, they either outright denied, or else totally ignored, Original Sin. And that means that they could not truly fathom the Evil they were up against, much less its source.

  21. Jake says:
    @Steve Sailer

    That’s how and why Cultural Marxism has almost totally replaced old fashioned Marxist. In Cultural Marxism, you can be a multi-billionaire who uses his/her/their/its wealth to force tens of millions of poor people to move, which makes you and your BFFs even richer, and still be identified as a Victim who deserves perpetual redress, because you are a Jew or Mohammedan or black or Asian or gay or tranny or atheist or abortion-loving feminist.

  22. I think we’ve (some commenters here along with Mr. Sailer) been through some of this before regarding Sapir-Whorf (and thanks for the interesting background of Mr. Whorf). It’s not that I don’t agree with the article in general, especially with your point that the current ctrl-left is making writing MORE COMPLICATED to just obliterate meaning in writing.

    I never did agree with the theory, such as in Jayne’s The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, that human beings cannot think thoughts that they don’t have words for. That idea is ludicrous, in fact.

    As an example, there are plenty of fed-up conservative white people who, having never read iSteve, or alt-right/conservative blogs at all, haven’t heard of “hate hoax” and now “protective stupidity”* ( I LIKE IT, of course). However, these same people may have thought to themselves many times “hey, I don’t believe any of this story. This will turn out to be bogus like all of them seem to”. They may not even think those exact words, or any, for that matter, as you don’t need a language to think.

    I do think there’s a big benefit in coining terms for things that the ctrl-left do not want people to think about much. That is, it’s to enable the WRITING about these things more clearly, which does get to the point of your article, reversing the trend of “protective stupidity” or “crimestop”. See, there were no blogs, hence no memes, during the time of Orwell’s writing. Things CAN be different. When someone coins a great descriptive term now, the alt-right/conservatives can run with it. It’s hard to stop the blogs vs. stuffing old newspaper articles down the literal memory hole.

    .

    * I know that’s from Orwell, per your article, but most have not read it, unfortunately. I have read it, TWICE, yet did not remember that term “protective stupidity” from the passage you pasted in, though I remembered it as “crimestop”>

  23. Stick says:
    @kihowi

    New Woke Order describes things nicely.

  24. Stick says:
    @AndrewR

    When discussing the NYTs and WAPO one needs to remember that the first is the PR organ for the CIA and the later an organ for the FBI. That is their real value, a window into what Deep State plans on doing. Now that Fusion GPS has prospered it seems that they can spin coordinated stories that please both the CIA and FBI and sell the story for profit after being paid to create the story. Maybe Fusion GPS will collapse the market value of these two newspapers?

    • Replies: @Forbes
  25. Well, “Grievance Studies” is better than working!

  26. Who wore it better?

    or

    • LOL: reactionry
    • Replies: @Lot
    , @densa
    , @Excal
    , @Kyle
  27. @AndrewR

    Is the First Amendment really being “exploited” or is it that the Left, Big Media, the Academy, etc. neither believe in it nor approve of it? The Left used to give lip service to “Free Speech” (so long as the subject was pornography or Yippee treason), but lately I don’t see them even doing that. They just want everyone else shut down, banned and, if possible, maimed or killed. The hardly even try to exploit 1A. They’re just trying to get rid of it.

    When they’re fighting to deplatform you, and you’re fighting for their right to deplatform you, what exactly is it accomplishing? If they win, they win. If you win, they win. It’s become a kind of honey trap for Constitutionalists.

    Possible Sapir-Whorf category names:
    one-way altruism
    death by principle
    altruism martyrdom
    altruism masochism
    pathological altruism

  28. Jack D says:

    Does the Internal Revenue Service let you deduct getting your nails done if you are a published autoethnographer on the subject of getting your nails done? Perhaps autoethnography is in part an elaborate tax-evasion scheme to write off whatever the authors would spend money on anyway?

    No, it’s much better than that – you pay for getting your nails done using your grant.

  29. Pericles says:
    @Jason Liu

    Strategically speaking, the leftists have these well-funded safe spaces wherefrom they unopposed manufacture zombies to attack the right all across society, and furthermore also launch unhinged attacks that are nevertheless taken seriously.

    So it’s a wonder cozy academia isn’t questioned, exposed and attacked continuously. (Well, except their opposition are cucks.) The malicious nonsense taught to students should be laid bare to the public and relentlessly attacked. There should be continuous petitions to close down these mockeries of learning and send those ensconced therein into the streets. Donors should be questioned, exposed, attacked and mocked for being opposed to civilization. Spend your money on something useful instead, you idiot cucks.

  30. TWS says:

    And the endless loops back to pop-up ads renewed my vow never to go back to taki

  31. Jack D says:

    I had never seen this Orwell quote before, and it’s a good one:

    If you simplify your English…when you make a stupid remark its stupidity will be obvious, even to yourself.

    The inverse of this is that if you want to write something stupid, you write it in complex language so its stupidity will NOT be obvious. Academic writing in the Grievance Studies field is intentionally opaque and filled with jargon for this exact reason. And a side effect is that it’s very easy to perpetrate a hoax – there is no real content anyway and the style lends itself to parody.

  32. Che Guava says:

    Esteemed Mister Sailer.

    Good article.

    I read about the joke, it was good, except that the trio seem to have pulled the plug on themselves.

    They should have left (and made) more articles to be approved.

    The action was more pointed than Alan Skopal’s famous essay, but not necessarily better.

    Skopal demonstrated that western liberal arts/humanities faculty and courses are generally moronic in principle, and will accept absolute bullshit.

    The recent trio seems to have taken on a set of particular targets, then losing their courage after realising how continuing may damage their cushy jobs.

    BTW, I have wanted to post a comment on the word ‘performative’.

    A commenter on a thread early this or late last year was mocking the word, and I agree as far as the stupid sense in which modern western leftist morons misuse the word.

    However, it is a very valid and meaningful term in linguistics.

    Two strong examples in English follow, there are many more, of course also in other languages.

    In a marriage ceremony, ‘I now pronounce you man and wife’.

    In a court, ‘you are sentenced to …’. Sure, it later becomes non-performative, as those below the court enforce the decision. At the time it is spoken, it is performative.

    It is a shame that the lunatic western left is so often to twist the meanings of words. I suppose that it is not always a conspiracy, just that most liberal arts/humanities/grievance studies students, and their teachers, are just too cretinous and lazy to notice, or to learn the meanings of words.

    There is that line in Alice in Wonderland, just paraphrasing, ‘a word means anything I want it to mean.’

  33. @TelfoedJohn

    ‘I’ve always preferred the term “Resentment Industry” since it covers academia, journalism, entertainment etc…’

    The real kicker here is that there are actual people with some conceivable grounds for resentment — sometimes only very arguably justified, but they certainly aren’t very well off.

    We’ve got black drug addicts/derelicts, Hispanics working eighty hours a week at two dead-end jobs, the lost offspring of parents whose parents were loggers sixty years ago, and so on, and so on. They’re out there; great herds of them, in fact.

    But they’re not the ones complaining. They’re either too dim-witted, too busy, or too stoned to do that. As an almost invariable rule, it’s people who’ve led rather privileged and sheltered existences, who have been given free rides on the magic escalator or even started at the top who are doing the whining.

    • Replies: @TelfoedJohn
  34. @Jack D

    ‘…The inverse of this is that if you want to write something stupid, you write it in complex language so its stupidity will NOT be obvious. Academic writing in the Grievance Studies field is intentionally opaque and filled with jargon for this exact reason…’

    Oh, for sure.

    A couple of times I’ve become exasperated enough to sit down and decipher some of this bafflegarb. Just look up each successive incomprehensible term and keep at it until I’ve made sense of a page-load or so of it.

    It seems to invariably turn out to be one of two things: either a bit of triteness that could have been readily expressed in two sentences of ordinary English, or evident nonsense.

    Now, I’m too damned old, and I’ve got better things to do. I can’t insist on good writing, but if you can’t give me at least some idea of what you’re talking about, I’ll assume what I’m looking at is willful obscurantism of some sort and move on.

  35. Jack D says:
    @AndrewR

    Why? Because that way lies hell. The Founding Fathers were not naive men. They knew that freedom could be abused but that abused freedom is still better than tyranny.

    The whole point of our constitutional framework was to reduce the stakes on changes of power. Once you raise the stakes that high, there’s no going back. You know that you have to cling to power at all costs or it’s your neck. Merely by making this proposal, you are telling the Left that will not be wrong if they regard any challenge to their power as a matter of literal life and death and that they should therefore use any and all means at their disposal (including “arresting” you) to quash it.

    Even if you really meant to do this, it’s a really bad idea to announce it in advance. Castro (a clever man) did not say “when I win the Revolution I’m going to set up a Communist dictatorship with me as the dictator for life.” First you take power and consolidate your power and THEN you can talk about purges, but telegraphing your intentions in advance is dumb.

  36. [Could something so unoriginal and bloated as the below prove to be a Black Swan Song? The Better Anglos of my nature say, Please Gawd, Yes!]

    Studied Aversion

    yawn

    The most important term for which there is a massive discordance in use is “white genocide.” A Google search today gives about 800,000 results for that search term in quotes and for ” ‘New York Times’ ‘White Genocide’,” about 50,000 hits. Much of the latter appears to take the form of “white genocide” as being used by bad people and/or for bad purposes – which are not, of course, relevant as to its objective reality. Arguments which are not absurd (and with which I disagree) include those along the lines that genocide of whites is justified and that genocide of whites does more good than harm.

    That whites (along with every other major racial group) have committed genocide is incontestable. In a non-absurd world we might be debating whether or not genocide carried out by whites in the past justifies the ongoing genocide of whites. The relatively poor overall performance of blacks on a global scale is blamed on whites and so forth. That the West was complicit to some degree in the rise of Hitler, didn’t take in enough Jewish refugees and so on are actually compelling arguments – though at least in my (and surely most iSteve readers) not compelling enough to warrant white genocide.

    [MORE]

    The top Google entry for “White Genocide” is from Wikipedia – “White genocide conspiracy theory.” Much of it is ad hominem as above. The authors might be trying to give themselves a ridiculous “out” with “deliberately” as in
    “The conspiracy theory contends these actions are to *deliberately*[emphasis added] replace, remove, or liquidate white populations,[3]dismantle white collective power,[4] turn the countries minority-white…” A case can be made that this or that policy undertaken at this or that time is or was not deliberately genocidal (it should be noted that some Nuremberg defendants were not convicted of deliberately carrying out genocide), but the overwhelming evidence that policies with respect to legal and illegal immigration have/are having a genocidal/disparate impact *should* be difficult to ignore.

    It can not have escaped most people’s attention that at present there can be expected severe social and financial penalties to noticing white genocide in public. Someone who say, sent photographs of Nazi death camps to Britain would not have done well if caught doing so in the Third Reich.

    I find it difficult not to go off at great lengths along the banal lines that sometimes the best way to deceive an enemy is to believe (at least while it is tactically useful) those lies oneself. Contrary to Duncan’s poor excuse in Macbeth, “There *is* an art/ to find the mind’s construction in the face.” To put it another way, there are arts to discerning the attempts by others to tell the truth or to tell lies via facial (and verbal) expressions. Some are better at those arts at one time or another than others.

    Those who don’t us to “notice” white genocide (lest we fight back) – and also don’t want to notice it themselves (so as to better deceive us and to also think of themselves as not icky people carrying out genocide) will often put “white genocide” in quotes. Many, if not most, whites also try not to notice in a sort of shared delusion or folle et du lest they alarm themselves (perhaps of inevitable doom) and/or consider themselves to be cowards and/or to have been fooled (and therefore fools – stupid/inferior).

    A word greatly underused by what I assume is a well-meaning Tiny Duck who tries to remind us of how much the genocidal left hates its enemies (perhaps something of “Why do I insult you? -To see if it is still possible.”) is “narrative.” No, not as in “narrative collapse” nor of say, a person of color’s narrative of suffering (not always completely false), but rather as in the “narrative” of white loss. The person who was taken to task or whathaveyou for writing “All I want for Christmas is white genocide” later claimed that the remark had been made in jest and went on to mock that white “narrative of loss.” Do others react like me to the Left’s contempt for truth and contempt for us in this use of “narrative”?

    A strong case could be made (well, by better writers than myself) that in some ways the genocidal Left (there doesn’t seem to be much of the left that is not genocidal, though some have “walked away” in Europe and the US) is *worse* than the Nazis. The Left celebrates genocide whereas the Nazis tried to conceal it – security was probably very tight at death camps – some of which were placed outside the pre-war borders of Germany. Some present-day Nazis are into Holocaust Denial (some probably consciously lying) whereas the genocidal Left is more irrationally (yet tactically effective) into denial of white genocide. It is not clear to me whether or not there is some symmetry here or perhaps a fundamental lack of it with respect to “Right” and “Left” – conscience or “consciousness of guilt” in legal and moral senses.

    Statements by Ben Franklin and Alexander Hamilton could be taken as evidence of some consciousness of guilt or at least some empathy with Amerinds. Articles in VDARE (probably some by Steve Sailer) suggest those sentiments were present at the very earliest of English settlements in North America. They at least had some “hypocrisy” paid to “virtue.” See also “noble savage,” “Last of the Mohicans” – an Indian riding off into the sunset on the state flag of Minnesota. -small consolation to the Amerinds, but that and other factors not really extant on the Left could account for why the genocide of Amerinds in what is now the US did not go to utter completion. The genocidal Left for the most part doesn’t even pay hypocrisy to its vicious “vice” of genocide. At its core it is not hypocritical, it does not have double standards, it is not inconsistent; it is very successfully and cruelly consistent true to itself.
    Some Nazis advocated the settlement of Jews in Palestine – others favored (overall absurdly, though resourceful Jews might have eventually been able to turn it from a sh*th*le into a vacation spot) Madagascar. The thought of the survival of *any* whites anywhere (OK maybe an exception, albeit temporary, for white Muslims) on the globe seems to be intolerable to many if not most genocidal/auto-genocidal Leftists.

    The best arguments against all of the above would seem to be ad hominem, that is to say, I couldn’t write my way out of a paper bag, (though I’ve managed until now to avoid a stoopid remark referencing say, a possibly apocryphal paper bag which might have been used as an admission screen at parties given by light-skinned blacks many years ago).

    Well, time to post without editing before my bad judgment overrules my worst leading to its deletion. With any luck, few if any will read this. And with still more luck, will have gotten this crap from over about half of a life time out of my system and can waste the small number of remaining moments on other things.

    • Replies: @reactionry
  37. Jack D says:
    @njguy73

    As Steve points out, it didn’t really turn out the way that Orwell predicted – instead of slimming down the language, our pseudo-intellectuals have entered a baroque phase where they make it ever more complicated and filled with obscure jargon. Even the rules of English grammar have become more complex with new pronouns (they, singular) and suffixes (Latinx).

  38. Anonymous[132] • Disclaimer says:

    Speaking of Grievances Denial,
    or
    Daily Reminder That Your Spiel Will Never Be Good Enough:

    https://jewishjournal.com/columnist-2/editors-note/293367/why-cant-some-jews-say-thank-you/

    Now, just keep squeezing that mayo on your pastrami sandwich.

  39. @Jack D

    Why? Because that way lies hell. The Founding Fathers were not naive men. They knew that freedom could be abused but that abused freedom is still better than tyranny.

    The whole point of our constitutional framework was to reduce the stakes on changes of power. Once you raise the stakes that high, there’s no going back. You know that you have to cling to power at all costs or it’s your neck. Merely by making this proposal, you are telling the Left that will not be wrong if they regard any challenge to their power as a matter of literal life and death and that they should therefore use any and all means at their disposal (including “arresting” you) to quash it.

    Even if you really meant to do this, it’s a really bad idea to announce it in advance. Castro (a clever man) did not say “when I win the Revolution I’m going to set up a Communist dictatorship with me as the dictator for life.” First you take power and consolidate your power and THEN you can talk about purges, but telegraphing your intentions in advance is dumb.

    The Left has already co-opted the judiciary for extra-democratic legislation, and have themselves already announced an intention to pack the Supreme Court the next time it gets control of both legislative Chambers and the Presidency (or, perhaps President Abrams will simply nominate eleven new justices without a single vacancy and the Senate will confirm them on a majority floor vote without recourse to the House).

    The point is that we’re already well on our way to a Latin American style of government united in its disgust for whites and white males in particular. They’ll wear the Constitution like a child wearing his father’s business suit in unwitting mockery of the thing. The Constitution and the enlightenment ideas that it represents will mean nothing to a majority average 90IQ brown mass with no particular attachment to our legal and political culture and its norms – indeed, they’re taught from the first that these things are the very cause of their oppression.

  40. Forbes says:

    Whether from Grievance Studies, or the PC/SJW speech police (practically the same), they’ve improved upon Orwell’s crimestop

    Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought.

    …with a mantra I’ve proposed as: “Everything before yesterday is wrong.” Not merely was wrong, but is wrong. In this view, stopping short is a good instinct, but denouncing–declaring as wrong–goes even further, and is better.

    • Replies: @Janus
  41. @reactionry

    rulz are da rules i ‘spose but please consider deleting my last comment (and, of course, this one) -sparing myself no little embarrassment – as well as the sense and sensibilities of any who might have otherwise read it.

    • Troll: reactionry
  42. AndrewR says:
    @Jack D

    Well I’m know I’m never going to be dictator, so it’s a moot point. I’m not nearly as power-hungry as Castro was. Plus, it’s not as though anyone but the most ruthless could have removed Batista’s extremely repressive regime from power.

    And you erroneously imply that the left doesn’t already think that “it’s life or death.” It’s the right who has barely woken up to the life or death struggle we are in. Maybe you should learn about the Charlottesville protest and how that was dealt with, including sentencing a young man to life in prison for self-defense.

  43. @Jack D

    As Steve points out, it didn’t really turn out the way that Orwell predicted – instead of slimming down the language, our pseudo-intellectuals have entered a baroque phase where they make it ever more complicated and filled with obscure jargon. Even the rules of English grammar have become more complex with new pronouns (they, singular) and suffixes (Latinx).

    They have the neologisms which seem to drop from the sky at will (in reality they migrate from academia to news rooms and style guides and then abruptly become ubiquitous).

    The tact the left has chosen, however, is to use a single word as an empty vessel in the style of Humpty Dumpty.

    When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

    ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

    Words simultaneously have a single, fixed meaning and contain multitudes according to the whims of the masters who declare the meaning depending upon the identity of the speaker. You can choose your words, but they get to tell you what your words mean.

  44. densa says:
    @Alec Leamas

    Dunno, but the temperance era posture police are calling. Nice contrast in spine.

  45. L Woods says:
    @Jack D

    hey should therefore use any and all means at their disposal (including “arresting” you) to quash it.

    They’re doing that anyway, simply because they can.

  46. Only a tad off-topic but–now Liam Neeson is being arraigned. His crime? Thinking.

  47. One of the biggest linguistic/political shifts on the Left was switching their object of evil from “discrimination” against minorities to the “privilege” of whites.

    “Discrimination” implies that White society is generally run as a meritocracy and that minorities are just being unfairly excluded from participating in this meritocracy. “Discrimination” is already illegal and thus a legal remedy exists if you can prove it. But the burden of proof is on the complainant and requires actual, you know, evidence.

    For example: What specific rule is supposedly applied differently to minorities? Was the rejected minority applicant actually better qualified? Who made a specific decision, and why would that person have a reason to irrationally reject a better qualified minority? If discrimination is proven, how was any specific minority harmed, and what specific remedy would make him whole?

    “White Privilege” on the other hand, starts from an unquestioned assumption that all Whites possess an unfair advantage by virtue of their skin color. No proof is required. Where does it come from? What is the mechanism by which this “privilege” supposedly operates? These are irrelevant details.

    The point is, “White Privilege” just exists and is everywhere. All Whites are guilty as a matter of original sin — they are recipients by virtue of being White. There is no need to distinguish between particular situations, or between “good” and “bad” Whites. All Whites are too high due to this “privilege.” So, the obvious remedy is simply to take all White people down a peg in every situation, and elevate minorities in their place. Just keep repeating this process until the the “privilege” is gone. (And Hint: It will never be gone in the minds of the complainants).

    The casual acceptance of this “privilege” paradigm on the mainstream Left over the past 5-10 years is probably a huge factor in its anti-White radicalization.

  48. @George

    Bari Weiss is an almost perfect example of the intellectually vacuous, cliche-think that currently populates the journalistic leftosphere. It’s astounding that these people can exert the influence that they do.

  49. @kihowi

    He: What’s wrong?
    She: [Agonizing pause….] Nothing.

    (In my own defense, if a man asks me what’s wrong, I immediately tell him. He is generally sorry he asked.)

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  50. Janus says:
    @Jack D

    That quote is from Orwell’s essay “Politics and the English Language”, which is quite a good read. Here’s a link: https://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/Politics_and_the_English_Language-1.pdf

  51. @AndrewR

    Who even reads it? Most people get their news from the web. When I lived in NY, I looked at it only for the help wanted if yet another employer was downsizing after a hostile takeover, and at that, I tried to find that section in a neighbor’s recycling pile rather than shell out for the whole thing.

  52. @Jack D

    The inverse of this is that if you want to write something stupid, you write it in complex language so its stupidity will NOT be obvious.

    And there you have described the entire prose technique of Judith Butler.

    • Replies: @Lot
  53. “Protective Stupidity”.

    As brilliant a description of the current unpleasantness as I’ve seen in a long time! One of those “now, why didn’t I think of that” phrases.

  54. @njguy73

    Happily, Ensler is now in trouble with the trans people. Privileging birth-body parts, you know.

  55. @Stephen Paul Foster

    Some of the Victim clergy are much better than others — think ADL and Deborah Libstadt.

    They should have an award for the best propaganda coinages. (They could call them the “Newspeak Awards” or the “Himmies” as an homage to Himmler).

    I would definitely nominate whoever came up with the “______ denier” epithet. If you are a “denier” then, by definition, you are rejecting an objectively established truth. Once that is your label, it’s hard to climb out of the resulting rhetorical hole.

    • Replies: @njguy73
  56. Woodsie says:

    Hat tip to S.I. Hayakawa, whose LANGUAGE IN THOUGHT AND ACTION is the only high school text book I still posses. Per my teacher’s instruction it is full of underlined sentences, bracketed sections and other notations and to this day remains a valuable resource because he preached clarity: “When the use of language results, as it so often does, in the creation or aggravation of disagreements and conflicts, there is something linguistically wrong with the speaker, the listener, or both.” My teacher summed it up as, ‘if you don’t say it (write it) correctly, then by definition you don’t know what you’re talking about.’

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  57. Anonym says:
    @Jack D

    The left has, with varying degrees of success, attempted to ban us from using a host of words. Homo, colored, negro, oriental, Jewry, n-, dyke, fag, gay as in ridiculous, pointless and annoying, possibly also effeminate. Such a great word from the 1990s and earlier.

    Anything negative about the coalition of the fringes gets banned. With blacks I think it is as much to make us always wrong, apologetic, and lacking confidence.

    We ought to copy the Jews and start verbally dehumanizing the non-whites the way they dehumanize the goyim. From the Jewish perspective the only hominids that are human are their co-ethnics, everyone else is a goyim or shiksa.

    One way to rebel is simply to signal that you despise political correctness and openly have contempt for its tenets. It loses power for every additional person who refuses to kowtow to it. We are fighting back by creating our own preferred use of language and we are having a good deal of success.

    Breitbart has adopted the “hate hoax” terminology that Steve espouses.

    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/12/06/hate-crime-hoax-drake-university-student-admits-to-sending-racist-notes-to-herself-others/

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  58. jon says:
    @kihowi

    needlessly multisyllabic jargon such as “microaggression.”

    This term has always seemed like an own-goal to me. It seems very dismissive and belittling of the thing it is describing — the term itself is, in fact, a microagression. In an alternate universe where it didn’t exist, I think the autists at 4chan would have come up with the term and memed it into existence.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
  59. jon says:
    @George

    That Bari Weiss interview on Rogan was amazing. When Weiss called Tulsi Gabbard an Assad toady, Rogan asked what she meant by that. Now if this had been a normal “gotcha” kind of question, then Weiss maybe wouldn’t have been able to come up with any good examples of Gabbard being a toady to Assad. Instead, Weiss couldn’t even explain what the term toady meant. Like I said, amazing. And that wasn’t the only example of stupidity in the interview. She shouldn’t be taken seriously by anyone after that performance (which, of course, means she’ll probably have a long and illustrious career at the Times).

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  60. Asagirian says:

    Grievance studies for non-whites, Jews, and homos.

    Groveling studies for whites.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  61. Janus says:
    @Forbes

    Orwell pretty well covered the other aspects with the “two-minute hate”, news memory hole, children taught to spy on and denounce their parents, and omnipresent surveillance. If all else failed, a threat to have your face eaten off by rats at the “Ministry of Love” generally proved persuasive. Crimestop was meant for the naturally compliant.

  62. Jack D says:

    everyone else is a goyim or shiksa

    You really have to work on your Yiddish/Hebrew grammar. Goyim is plural (singular is goy) and shiksa is feminine (masculine is sheygetz).

    Orwell posited a time when we would no longer have words for certain concepts but apparently we still have those words that you used. Everyone still knows what they mean and knows better than to use them in public. In order to know not to use them you have to know them 1st – Catch -22.

    What is missing is that we lack NEW words for stupid stuff the Left does, like “hate hoax”.

  63. njguy73 says:
    @Jack D

    Most of the machinery of modern language is labour-saving machinery; and it saves mental labour very much more than it ought…It is a good exercise to try for once in a way to express any opinion one holds in words of one syllable. If you say “The social utility of the indeterminate sentence is recognized by all criminologists as a part of our sociological evolution towards a more humane and scientific view of punishment,” you can go on talking like that for hours with hardly a movement of the gray matter inside your skull. But if you begin “I wish Jones to go to gaol and Brown to say when Jones shall come out,” you will discover, with a thrill of horror, that you are obliged to think.

    Orthodoxy, G.K. Chesterton (1908)

    https://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Gilbert_K_Chesterton/Orthodoxy/The_Romance_of_Orthodoxy_p1.html

    • Replies: @Jack D
  64. @Colin Wright

    But they’re not the ones complaining. They’re either too dim-witted, too busy, or too stoned to do that. As an almost invariable rule, it’s people who’ve led rather privileged and sheltered existences, who have been given free rides on the magic escalator or even started at the top who are doing the whining.

    I don’t think it’s neccesarily the ‘privileged’ who are whining. It more about authenticity. Those who have none make it their life’s work to claw back some sense of authenticity. You can grow up with no authenticity in dozens of ways – you could attend an exclusive rich kids college, or grow up just watching TV, or get your world view from tumblr. The way these people try to claw back authenticity is to overidentify with whoever they think is truly authentic – ethnic minorities, immigrants, primitive people, the working class etc. So they will whine on their behalf thinking that some of the essense of the noble savage will rub off on themselves.

  65. njguy73 says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    There’s the Doublespeak Awards.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak_Award

    And its opposite, the Orwell Award.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwell_Award

    Yes, the committee has a liberal bias, but they are on to something.

  66. jon says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    “Discrimination” is already illegal and thus a legal remedy exists if you can prove it. But the burden of proof is on the complainant and requires actual, you know, evidence.

    Counterpoint: Disparate Impact
    The fact that blacks don’t make up 13-14%, or women 50+%, or … of whatever industry is all the evidence you need.

  67. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Anonym

    >Dear Fellow White People, let’s be the evil caricature the left wants us to be
    No.

  68. @AndrewR

    Can anyone give a reason why, if the right-wing manages to give real power in the US, why the NYT shouldn’t be shut down and its employees and especially its editors and publishers… um… “arrested”

    I suppose it depends upon what you mean by “right-wing.” With very few exceptions, the American right is made up of persons whose political thinking is centered around a strict construction of the Constitution. The First Amendment is pretty straightforward. I have been a right-winger all my life, a member of the Philadelphia Society for nearly 40 years, and have been acquainted with a number of prominent American conservatives. I never met anyone among them who advocated, or would advocate, shutting down the New York Times and arresting its employees, editors, or publishers. It is safe to say that nobody on the right regards that paper as anything but a propaganda organ for the left, which it has been at least since the heyday of Walter Duranty. Nonetheless it should be free to publish.

    About the farthest anyone on the right has gone has been to suggest that NPR and PBS should not be funded with taxpayers’ money, which is not so much about prior restraint as it is about whether it is appropriate that persons who disagree with those stridently partisan entities should be compelled to support them by involuntary exactions.

    Press censorship has historically been associated with war, and the last major instances of it took place during the two World Wars, when icons of the left – Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Rrosevelt – held the presidency. Lincoln also shut down newspapers and jailed journalists during the Civil War. Whether Lincoln is a figure of the left or the right is a question I leave to others, but the fairest assessment of him that I gave read was that he saved the Union at the expense of the Old Republic.

    For all the complaints of the media about Trump’s criticisms of them, he has done nothing so obviously hostile to press freedom as Obama did in using Federal law enforcement agencies against the Associated Press or Fox News reporter James Rosen. Imagine the outcry that would cause if Trump did such a thing! Yet the media at the time were remarkably muted in their response. It was all about “who? whom?”

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  69. “you might be a little more reluctant than these presidential candidates to commit yourself to the factual veracity of this latest allegation. ”

    if they were ever held accountable they might be more reluctant, but they’re not. The formula is this:

    Pols react hysterically to an alleged occurrence.

    2 minutes of hate ensues.

    Occurrence turns out to be false or exaggerated.

    Correction is ignored or buried in subsequent reports.

    Everyone has by now concerned themselves with the next perceived injustice.

    Pols are not questioned on their promotion of a false story.

    /

    What do they have to lose, really?

  70. BREAKING: Author of “A FemmeNist ManiPedifesto” to guest in upcoming season of Better Call Saul.

  71. Anon[296] • Disclaimer says:

    Not sure Stalinism offers the best understanding of what is going on.

    Communism had to be simple because it was about the pride of work, dignity of labor, simple virtues of proles. Back then, the bourgeoisie had all the privilege. Workers were barely literate or semi-literate. More literate in places like Germany but still less educated than the bourgeoisie with fancy taste and refinement. In the story of the princess and the pea, the girl notices the pea because she is really of royal background. If she were a true prole, she would have been content with a hard wooden bed with a bunch of peas. Just any place to sleep.

    Especially because communism came to power in backward Russia(and later even more backward China), the themes had to be simplified even further. In USSR, communism was less about the workers inheriting wealth and property from the bourgeoisie(that had been hoarding it all) than about turning peasants into proles to build a modern economy. According to classic Marxism, the contradictions within capitalism would lead to revolution. But because capitalism would have already built a modern and wealthy economy, revolution would be about taking the loot of the rich and sharing them equally among the workers. Also, the workers would have collective ownership of factories, land, and resources. And with more leisure and less work, workers could lead moderate ‘bourgeois’-like lifestyles. They would work about 4 hrs and devote other time of the day to art, culture, ideas, and etc. The bourgeoisie would lose out as a class, but bourgeois-ness would remain as lifestyle. In habit, culture, and attitude, Marx was even more bourgeois than Adolf Hitler who was half-bourgeois and half-bohemian. He didn’t so much want to destroy everything bourgeois as elevate workers to a point where they too could partake of the good stuff enjoyed by the bourgeoisie.

    No such luck for Russia and later China. When the Revolution happened, the majority were still dirt-poor peasants. Because there wasn’t much wealth to take from capitalists, a whole new economy had to be built. That meant the workers had to be driven to work even harder. They had to be tough. There was no time for nonsense. It was work, work, and build, build. So, naturally, the ideology had to be simplified for the masses. Trotsky scoffed at Stalin’s ‘second-rate’ intellect. Lenin and Trotsky were hyper-intellectuals. Marxist ‘Greeks'(as Nassim Taleb might describe them). Stalin was a Marxist ‘Roman’. He was about getting things done, and the fact was communism would have to build a modern economy from ground up as there wasn’t one to take and inherit from the bourgeoisie(that was much smaller in Russia). And then, later Mao made Marxism even simpler because China was even more backward than Russia. In the Soviet Union(at least until the 60s when there were some burgeoning signs of a consumer economy), the main theme was about the basic needs of survival. It wasn’t about choosing which pastry and wine but having enough bread and water.
    US was much better off than the USSR, but then, universal prosperity didn’t arrive until about after two decades after WWII. At the turn of 20th century, majority of Americans were still on the farm. Great Depression and WWII led to hardships and shortages. After WWII, 50% didn’t have indoor plumbing. So, even though there was certainly more choice than in the USSR, most people had to do with basic stuff.

    But from end of WWII to the present, US and Western Europe have continued without a great depression. There were some recessions(some serious) along the way, but life got easier for more people. With everyone taking substance for granted in a world where even poor people grow fat, style took precedence. And this goes for ideology as well. When a lot of people were hungry, the ideology was about bread. And when wars destroyed so many lives of common folk, the ideology was about peace. But there’s no shortage of bread. And recent wars have killed just a fraction of lives lost in WWI and WWII. And there’s no draft. So, ideology has turned into a game of personal choice. It’s like shopping for various kinds of cheese, wine, candy, chocolate, and etc.

    Oddly enough, consumerist mentality went better with leftist ideology. This seems counter-intuitive because capitalism was on the ‘right’ and socialism was on the ‘left’ during the Cold War. But if leftists are more likely to complain, nitpick, bitch, and fuss about social problems, it means their mentality is more like that of the finicky consumer with ‘customer is king’ mentality. Jews are known for haggling and negotiating things down to the last penny. Homos are known for being fussy and bitchy about everything. They are less likely to be content with any product. So, the consumer who is never content with any product and the progressive who is never content with society share the same kind of mentality. In a society where consumerism is king, leftism was bound to take on features of consumerism.
    So, today’s ‘progressivism’ is different from yesterday’s when the theme was Bread for Every Man. Same bread for every man? How boring. Just like consumers want lots of choice among various breads, cookies, and pastries, the new ‘progressivism’ is like 31 flavors of Ice Cream. Even within homo ideology, there is ‘gay’, ‘lesbian’, ‘bi’, ‘trans’, ‘queer’, and many more. And people can mix and match their grievance products. So, a New Muslim can intersect his identity with ‘gay’ identity, feminism(which also comes in many flavors such as slut pride, vagina mania, corporate feminism, etc), and immigrant-identity(legal, illegal, undocumented, New American, New Jews, etc). Just like there are many kinds of Comfort Food, there are now many kinds of Grievance Products.

    And capitalists appreciate this PC branding. As rich folks and big corporations are always worried about being called out for being greedy and profit-obsessed, how convenient for them to market grievance-approved products… like Gillette that is against ‘sexual harassment'(all by white men) and Nike that features Kaepernick. That way, they can rake in the dough while posing as ‘caring’. And the fussy consumer mentality and griping ‘progressive’ mentality fuse into one. Some snotty consumer who wants to buy the very best is also glad to know that the product is buying is also ‘woke’. It flatters both his status and standing. In a way, corporations appreciate micro-complaining and micro-bitching. Such gives them more of a rationale to crank out new and improved products. Sometimes, the new stuff is indeed better. Other times, like so many variations of smart-phones, it’s mostly hype to rake in more bucks.

    Your average conservative is more likely to be ‘socialist’ in his tastes and outlook. He is more likely to focus on basic needs and basic values. Less likely to be fussy wussy about the very best. Less likely to complain that not everything is as he wants it. But people who are content with basic bread and stuff make less demanding consumers who want more and better. Can anyone imagine John Wayne character complaining that his coffee ain’t the fancy kind? In contrast, homos are always bitching about everything, and they can be a real pain in the ass. But you have to give credit where it’s due, and so much of improvement in consumer goods was driven by people who always found faults in something. Germans were hardy but also extremely thorough, which made them obsessed about creating the ever-more-perfect machine or system. It’s no wonder they built a greater economy than Russia with all its resources. Culture of Complaint can do some good… in the right measure.

  72. @Jack D

    The whole point of our constitutional framework was to reduce the stakes on changes of power. Once you raise the stakes that high, there’s no going back. You know that you have to cling to power at all costs or it’s your neck. Merely by making this proposal, you are telling the Left that will not be wrong if they regard any challenge to their power as a matter of literal life and death and that they should therefore use any and all means at their disposal (including “arresting” you) to quash it.

    Exactly. Societies where those in power are riding a tiger , end up like Assad’s Syria. Even had he wanted to, if Assad had abdicated at the beginning of the Syrian civil war, there would be no Alawites left in the world.

  73. @Hypnotoad666

    This is a lovely summary of what we’ve been talking about. BTW, Long time listener, somewhat first time commentator. Steve Sailor is a genius Journalist–for what that’s worth–and the comment section is close behind. I can’t read anything posted without learning something truly profound. When I’m not a student and enter the workforce I shall repay the fellow many times over. Without him knowing, he has saved my life from disintegration (I live in a diverse area). He has made things explicable, Sapir-Whorf, or no Sapir-Whorf. Sometimes, that is all you need to do to save a man.

  74. vinteuil says: • Website
    @Lot

    OMG – did you see what she was wearing???

    • Replies: @Lot
  75. @Che Guava

    That is not what ‘performative’ means in the context under discussion.

    You have misunderstood the concept, and I rather doubt you understand anything meaningful about what ‘linguistics’ is.

  76. KunioKun says:

    Having a name for something is like having a function call in computer programs or a previously solved problem in mathematics. Once you have established it, you can use it like a building block for more complex structures. Not having a name for something means that you have to rebuild from more primitive principles which is time consuming and for multiple people prone to get everybody bogged down in committee-like wrangling over details. Memes are like a super Sapir-Whorf thing because they combine images and words into concepts that are verboten.

  77. Lot says:
    @vinteuil

    I should clarify, that is Martha Nussbaum, not Butler, who looks like Tim Cook.

    Martha has a lot of colorful outfits.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    , @ThreeCranes
  78. Jack D says:
    @njguy73

    Wow, another good one that remains fresh. I didn’t realize that social sciences academic speak went that far back, although Chesterton’s version of it is a paragon of clarity compared to most current academic jargon.

  79. @Clyde

    Unreal. We never invaded Mongolia. The others, fair dos bot Mongolia?

  80. @Rosamond Vincy

    (In my own defense, if a man asks me what’s wrong, I immediately tell him. He is generally sorry he asked.)

    In the otherwise execrable movie Exit to Eden, there’s a running gag in which Rosie O’Donnell tells fellow police officer Dan Aykroyd her feminine problems, just to watch him wince and change the subject.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  81. vinteuil says: • Website
    @Lot

    Capisco.

    Way back when I was a grad student in Philosophy at U. Mich., Martha Nussbaum was floated, as a possible hire.

    Nick White, who was still there, at the time, put his foot down, and that was that. (Or, at least, that’s the way I remember it.)

    She was notorious for sucking up to whomever she had to by any means necessary to advance her career.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
  82. lhtness says:

    Not long ago, Eric Raymond announced plans to write a book (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8229), with one of the sections being about “The Rectification of Names”. The subject is programming, but the idea is similar to what you’re talking about: “I like to find common tactics and traps in programming that don’t have names and name them. I don’t only do this because it’s fun. When you have named a thing you give your brain permission to reason about it as a conceptual unit. Bad jargon obfuscates, map hiding territory; good jargon reveals, aiding reflection on and and improvement of your practice.”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  83. @Hypnotoad666

    Excellent post.

    The shift you describe so perceptively — from making context-dependent appeals to an external standard of justice, to mindless, tribal, who/whom power plays — is profound and deeply troubling.

  84. I have a grievance and think it’s legitimate. Having lived a very long time, I once lived in a world which was sane. I don’t think it’s fair that I now have to spend my remaining days in a world that has gone completely insane.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  85. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Crawfurdmuir

    Agree, my major problem with the lyingpress is that it is an uninterrupted bloc (and therefore controls low-information voters, who are never exposed to any other views). A fairness doctrine type equal time requirement could totally fix that and the communists get to keep their newspaper.

  86. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Simply Simon

    Read if you have not already the Fourth Turning. The generational symmetry is the closest thing to comfort you will get.

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  87. @TelfoedJohn

    The ultimate grievance (resenting one’s inborn gender):

    http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/05/14-years-becoming-transgender-teacher-says-mistake/

    (Found at: https://www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/14-years-after-becoming-trans/)

    A PhD in navel-gazing studies. Another chapter in “extraordinary popular delusions, and the madness of crowds” that is the history of humanity.

  88. @Woodsie

    My dad had the earlier Language in Action. Instead of the “updated” references to Gorbachev, whom nobody remembers (except for that Reagan quote), it uses Hitler, whom everyone remembers. The discussion of advertising is hilarious.

  89. @jon

    She couldn’t even say, “kiss-up, brown-noser, bootlicker”?

    DaFARQ?

  90. Steve did you see this brutal New Yorker takedown of a popular mystery writer who faked having cancer for many years?

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/02/11/a-suspense-novelists-trail-of-deceptions

    The fun part is Twitter’s response: if it wasn’t for his white male privelege he never would have got away with it.

  91. Excal says:
    @Alec Leamas

    The sign in the second picture almost seems too good to be true. Does it work for the women in the first picture too?

  92. @Lot

    With legs like that either the camera should be located higher and angled down or she should wear below the knee dresses. But I suppose that by making us look up at her they believe they’re forcing us into a posture of submission.

    Just look at that flowing leonine mane, those ripped arms, the knobby knees, the sagging flesh…what are they trying to accomplish with this portrait?

    • LOL: Lot
  93. MBlanc46 says:
    @AndrewR

    Freedom of speech among free whites anywhere. Freedom of speech for everyone else only when they’re elsewhere.

  94. Anon[126] • Disclaimer says:

    OT: Kamala Harris is in trouble. I’ve been hanging out on Dem boards, and though the party leaders may like her, the rank and file are looking for reasons to avoid voting for her. The more they learn about her, the less they like her. The main problem is that blacks don’t see her as loyal to blacks. Obama married black, said he identified as black, and he went to a black church. Blacks saw him as one of them. But Harris married white, works in lily-white San Francisco, and she’s put blacks in prison. They see her as a careerist race traitor who doesn’t understand their lives. If she gets the nomination, I don’t see her pulling in Obama’s votes. Her main problem is that with blacks, identity politics trumps all.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    , @Mr. Anon
  95. Great term/phrase.

    When subjected to NAM literature in my freshman year of college, I dubbed it Grievance Lit, so I came mighty close to “Grievance Studies”.

    I refer to wypipo claiming Indian heritage as Stolen Grievance (e.g., Liawatha Warren). How’s that for an injun name? Stolen Grievance….

    Any non-STEM major falls under the umbrella of Grievance Studies.

  96. MBlanc46 says:
    @vinteuil

    Alas, she wound up at the place that I went to grad school, though apparently not in the philosophy department. The titles alone would put me off her books if I were ever struck by an impulse to read her.

  97. MBlanc46 says:
    @Anon

    And Obama at least looked blackish. Harris isn’t very Negroid.

  98. istevefan says:
    @Jack D

    The whole point of our constitutional framework was to reduce the stakes on changes of power. Once you raise the stakes that high, there’s no going back. You know that you have to cling to power at all costs or it’s your neck.

    I like the way you phrased that because it captures the way I feel each election. I did not used to feel that way. I could be OK if the other side won because I was confident in the rules. But this is no longer the case now, and I have intense unease during election time. Your paragraph put to words what I was probably feeling.

    On a somewhat related issue to abiding by the constitutional framework, I have come to the conclusion that Hillary should not have been President. It’s not just that I disagree 100 percent with her positions. But her behavior post-election has shown she is not up to the standards set by our Founders. Consider Washington gave up his sword after leading the winning army in the Revolution. He then quietly retired after two terms as President.

    Then Adams and Jefferson fought the first contested election and Jefferson accepted defeat. Next, Adams became the first President to lose reelection and dutifully gave up power.

    Those examples, and others not listed, show how one is supposed to behave. Hillary failed her test. By promoting and amplifying the phony Russian-collusion story, she is helping to tear this nation apart. This alone justify her having lost the election.

  99. I’ve called them Hate Studies for some time.

  100. @Anonymous

    various low Brower loud mouthed second raters

    Ayn, you’re back!

  101. J.Ross says: • Website

    USA Today: black kids face “racism” because they don’t do as well in school.
    Or maybe they just don’t do as well in school.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2019/02/04/black-history-month-february-schools-ap-racism-civil-rights/2748790002/

  102. “Studies” is just a way to avoid [a] discipline.

    Is there a serious academic department anywhere using the word? Will Shortz’s “enigmatology” degree sounds quaint, almost august, in comparison.

  103. @kihowi

    You are totally correct. I’ve pointed this out to Steve before, but he keeps making fun of “microaggression”. It looks like he doesn’t really understand what it means. I’m not sure if it’s willful ignorance or it’s that it’s just too useful and recognizable a word to stop using it to illustrate his ideas.

    I think the word was coined poorly. “micro” and “aggression” are not good choices. But the phenomenon the word points to is completely coherent and real.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  104. @Nicholas Stix

    My shorthand term has always been ‘victim studies’, but ‘hate studies’ is even more pithy.

  105. jim jones says:
    @John Henry

    Interesting to see that this thread is No.2 in the results, I would have expected Google to censor results from UR.

  106. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Chrisnonymous

    Oh come on, you’re just being silly with this “microaggression” thing of yours.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  107. anon[189] • Disclaimer says:

    Grievance Studies by the left is more akin to a phenomenon I like to refer to as “Hate Masking”. Much as a masked rioter is protected from the consequences of his immoral behavior, and even encouraged by it, the Left is given shield from the obvious connection between their rhetoric and how obviously racist it sounds by masking it with a false grievance. If they can recast themselves as the victim, then they are free to hate others at their leisure because they are free from repercussion; they may even be encouraged by it to escalate, much as ordinary people can sometimes get caught up in post championship sports riots.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  108. Anonymous[154] • Disclaimer says:
    @Clyde

    Mongolia?

    Now I’ve heard it all.

    As a boy, I was an avid reader of that great, but now sadly dying British institution, the ‘kids’ comic’ – perhaps best summed up by those two venerable names ‘Beano’ and ‘Dandy’, or even Billy Bunter and ‘The Magnet’ and ‘The Wizard’. As an aside, that notorious scatological satirical British monthly publication ‘Viz’ is an adult’s parody of the great British comic.

    Anyway, back in the day, the catchphrase ‘Outer Mongolia’ – which I believe was the actual title of a real state – was used as a stock comic phrase for a location on this planet sonutterly unbelievably remote that it might as well be on Mars.

  109. anon[397] • Disclaimer says:

    “The whole point of our constitutional framework was to reduce the stakes on changes of power. Once you raise the stakes that high, there’s no going back. You know that you have to cling to power at all costs or it’s your neck.”

    Funny. Core America faces that choice in 2020. Give up power permanently to racist bigots who hate us and have announced they will see us destroyed and our freedoms revoked … or don’t. I mean, they have set the precedent by revoking religious freedom and now they are going for free speech with this Israel boycott law. And don’t kid yourself, that law is the government testing the waters because it will be expanded once the democrats are back running the show; hence, all of their talk recently about what you are allowed and not allowed to say in a democracy.

  110. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jason Liu

    Academia purge when?

    I’m always surprised how little attention the right pays to this, considering academia is the source of almost all leftism

    This is why I propose abolishing tenure. State legislatures could do it for state universities.

    Abolish tenure. Make it possible to fire professors. And then fire them. Put them on the defensive. Even just the attempt to do so, let alone the result, would be useful. It would tie up the professoriate in a protracted campaign to protect their own livelihoods and privilege – a campaign in which they would not come off looking very good. I think it could be made a politically popular campaign too, especially by tying it to student loan debt. “You got a lifetime of debt. Your a**hole professor got a lifetime job.”

    Conservatives have known about Alinsky for sometime now. You’d think they might have learned something from him.

  111. Mr. Anon says:
    @Anon

    But Harris married white, works in lily-white San Francisco, and she’s put blacks in prison. They see her as a careerist race traitor who doesn’t understand their lives. If she gets the nomination, I don’t see her pulling in Obama’s votes. Her main problem is that with blacks, identity politics trumps all.

    Three words for you: Ricky Ray Rector. Bill Clinton had blacks executed while he was governor of Arkansas, and blacks seemed to like him pretty well.

    Maybe black men wouldn’t like Harris so much because she’s a woman, I don’t know. But then black men are far less likely to vote than black women, and black women might vote for her out of a sense of “you go girl”. As you said, identity politics trumps all for blacks. So if she is the only black candidate in the general, whom will blacks be voting for?

  112. TheJester says:

    The term “Grievance Industry” captures and encapsulate “Grievance Studies”, “Resentment Industry”, affirmative action, disparate resolutions, intersectionalities, etc.

    The term “grievance” implies an actual or supposed circumstance that is a just cause for complaint and deserving of recompense. Hence, the expectation of compensation is built into the notion of having a grievance. Hence, the expectation of financial or other remuneration/reparation is assumed wherever there is a grievance.

    Bottom line: It pays very well to have grievances … lots of grievances. From Elizabeth Warren (female and Amerindian) to Jessie Jackson (a black grievant to whom being alive is a grievance), if you have enough of them, you might even hit “paydirt”. It becomes a game of playing the odds, something like playing the lottery.

    Said another way, what is the difference between a grifter and someone who works in the “grievance industry”? Nothing. Someone who works in the “grievance industry” is, at the end of the day, somewhat akin to a circus hawker. A circus is definitely what we have as a fundamental aspect of our current cultural malaise that exploits the social entropy caused by diversity for spurious financial gain.

    The sad part: our schools and universities now school children and young men and women on how to become professonal grievants for a living.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  113. Anonymous[264] • Disclaimer says:
    @Asagirian

    Grievance studies for non-whites, Jews, and homos.

    Groveling studies for whites.

    Groveling studies. That’s pretty good.

    “Students, Here are some of the topics we’ll be covering in Groveling Studies this year:

    “The First Thanksgiving
    Slavery in America
    How the American West was Conquered”

  114. bro3886 says:

    No, they’re all just professional white-hating racists funded in large part by tax dollars. It’s just another white privilege to fund the ideology of your extermination.

  115. Forbes says:
    @Stick

    Like the CIA, FBI, Mueller, et al., FusionGPS needs an outlet, a publisher, a bull horn, for their “stories”–for “their” leaks, for their propaganda, for their Narrative.

    This is the explanation for Mueller, a couple weeks ago, coming out so quickly to deny the rumored story that Trump told Cohen to lie. Mueller had to telegraph to the media that that “story” wasn’t from his camp, that it wasn’t part of The Narrative, that it wasn’t an official leak. Mueller is in charge of the leaks from his investigation. Also known as message discipline.

    FusionGPS helps keep NYT & WaPo afloat–their absence would be detrimental to those papers’ value.

  116. @J.Ross

    I had not read The Fourth Turning but after a rather hasty review I may assume there is hope for future generations.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  117. @Reg Cæsar

    I don’t mean female biological functions. I mean if a guy asks, “Are you mad at me?” I will tell him yes, and I will tell him EXACTLY what he said or did to deserve it. No huffing, no sarcastic “What do YOU thinks,” No meaningful looks without answering.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  118. @J.Ross

    The problem is that the word sounds like “almost imperceptible insult.”

    Economists did much better with “revealed preference” but something like that wouldn’t have had the virtue-signaling zing.

    As “jon” correctly points out, the term itself is almost a microaggression, revealing the prejudice of leftists who use it.

  119. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Simply Simon

    You have to read it because it is in a way particularly written: it essentially repeats the same structure over and over with slightly different examples and explanations. A summarist could tell you the idea in a sentence but actually reading the book is more like sitting through a television series, there is an irreplaceable effect.

  120. J.Ross says: • Website
    @anon

    This is good. Of course what’s happening here is the reapplication of a certain revenge-theme mythohistory to unrelated peoples.

  121. @Rosamond Vincy

    Women speaking plainly when asked would be good.

    I have not many in my four score and something.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
  122. You right-handers are oblivious to the countless microaggressions left-handers silently endure.

    Be advised, we no longer will be your “model minority.”

    Today, we ask for sympathy. Is that too much to expect?

    Tomorrow we want an apology.

    The day after tomorrow we want an apology for the inadequacies in your prior apology.

    Next week, reparations.

    NO, we are NOT kidding!
    >:-(

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  123. @Pat Kittle

    Lefthander Liberation appears to have taken place in the first half of the 20th Century: e.g., Ronald Reagan was a natural lefty forced to write righty. But all 3 candidates in the 1992 Presidential debate took notes lefthanded.

    But, I’ve never seen anybody bother to write up exactly what happened to overcome prejudice against lefthanders. Maybe it had something to do with baseball? It’s of no interest to people today because lefthanders aren’t an Identity Group.

    • Replies: @Pat Kittle
  124. @Steve Sailer

    Baseball helped “overcome prejudice against lefthanders”?

    Are you serious??

    The way the game is played, the diamond itself is blatantly anti-left-handed. Defensively, 2 base positions, shortstop, & catcher are virtually off-limits to left-handers. Only 1st base favors lefties.

    And don’t try to tell me the batters box favors lefties — to notice that is inherently offensive.
    >:-(

  125. Anonymous[310] • Disclaimer says:
    @reactionry

    School For Scandal

    Disgrace
    What a waste!
    Fill your mouth, stuff your face
    Eat them all a bloody taste
    It’s a school for scandal

    The devil’s dick is hard to handle
    Forget about the golden rule
    Keep lookin’ for a foot to land on
    Step into the scandal school
    They’re puttin’ up a school for scandal
    I can’t listen anymore
    They’re settin’ up a school for scandal
    Bash my head against a wall

  126. Anonymous[310] • Disclaimer says:
    @watzi

    Welcome to Roger Russell’s A. E. Van Vogt Page

    http://www.roger-russell.com/sffun/nulla.htm

    So what is general semantics?

    After reading the Null-A novels, I had thought of GS as a discipline for making evaluations and decisions. Van Vogt refers to this system as the cortical-thalamic pause. Instead of reacting immediately and often blindly to a situation, Null-A teaches us to stop and consider our total reaction and options before responding. This requires training for a person to use successfully, particularly on an automatic level. General Semantics, then, offers a method for improving our ability to reason, evaluate, communicate, etc. It involves the recognition and understanding of our thoughts, feelings, bias, judgments, perceptions, assumptions and inferences. It is definitely beneficial for our best interests and survival.

    Since then, I have increased my knowledge. A better introduction can be found on the pages of the Institute of General Semantics that was founded by Alfred Korzybski and incorporated in 1938. See how you can relate to the varied aspects of general semantics. Also, check out the pages of the International Society for General Semantics founded in 1943 by S. I. Hayakawa.

    General Semantics and Roger Russell

    These novels also intrigued me when I was in high school. I had no idea there was a real general semantics institute as there was nothing mentioned at the beginning or end of the 1953 paperback edition of “The World of Null-A.” It wasn’t until the early 1960’s that I learned from Richard Trout, a tape correspondence friend and ISGS member, about the connection between the novels and an organization called the International Society for General Semantics. I became a member at that time.

    The ISGS has many books available. When I first received the list of books, it was like a list of treasures. I couldn’t decide which ones to order first. I have never tired of reading them as I always find something new that I had not paid attention to before. I even learned why I was finding different things at different times.

    General Semantics and McIntosh Laboratory

    In 1967, I went to McIntosh to interview for an engineering position. You can imagine my surprise when I learned that the executive vice president, Gordon Gow, and the advertising manager, Dirk Roos, were on the board of directors of the ISGS!!

    At McIntosh, the teachings of GS were valuable in understanding human behavior and the thought process. From this, a greater understanding of beliefs and motivation that related to selling techniques could be found. I personally found these topics fascinating because it offered several perspectives of myself that I had not seen before.

  127. @Jim Don Bob

    I may have some unusual traits. We were out of town for a cousin’s wedding and I didn’t have the right shoes for my outfit, so my mother asked my father to take me to the mall. He was envisioning, with dread, several hours of trying this one, that one, asking what he thought, etc. What happened was this: I went into several shoe stores, asked if they had a beige t-strap heel, they said no, showed me what they did have, I said no thanks and went to the next store. Finally someone showed me a beige shoe with a Mary Jane strap, though not the t-strap I’d hoped to find. I tried it on, said, “This’ll do,” Dad paid for it, and we left. He said he never saw a woman shop like me.

    Not sure how this fits gender-wise. A masculine woman might not care about fashion, an effeminate man might know about fashion but engage in the same kind of dithering over options a traditional woman would do.

  128. This may seem a very moderate thing to say, but the “studies” world in academia generates a disproportionate amount of attention given its actual place in the academic ecosystem. The number of undergraduate degrees granted, for example, is very low. The College Navigator website helps show this.

    To take a non random example Sen. Hiyakawa’s own institution – San Francisco State, a pioneer in the field -in 2016-7 granted 11 A-A studies BA degrees and only 94 “studies” degrees overall. As against 1401 for business administration and fairly healthy numbers for supposedly struggling history (77), philosophy (40), English (193).

    UC Berkeley, meanwhile, awarded all of 9 AA studies degrees and 8 in women’s studies – combined the same number as given for landscape architecture. Two A-A studies doctorates were granted, which is dwarfed by computer science, engineering, etc but also English (17) and history (13).

    Perhaps these departments are more for the staff than students but a lot of every aspect of university life is about the staff rather than consumers or taxpayers. And there’s always the possibility that the staff in such departments could harm society more if they were doing something other than sitting in an academic office.

  129. @Lot

    Much like Ashy Larry in the Chappelle’s Show skit, “World Series of Dice,” Nussbaum could benefit hugely from some Chap-Stik and a pair of pants.

  130. Kyle says:
    @Alec Leamas

    That picture is enlightening. I finally understand what Derbyshire meant by “class struggle face.”

    https://johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/USPolitics/electionreflection.html

    She who arrests class struggle face first, will be the first to face ritualistic character assassination. That distinction goes to Becky four eyes on the lower right. She can’t help looking at her iPhone.

  131. ziggurat says:

    The physicist Richard Feynman attended some sort of interdisciplinary seminar, which included writings from social scientists, which he had to read.

    Here was his reaction, as described in his biography:

    “The individual member of the social community often receives his information via visual, symbolic channels.”
    I went back and forth over it, and translated. You know what it means?
    “People read.”
    ― Richard P. Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! Adventures of a Curious Character

    https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/1429989.Richard_Feynman?page=4

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution