GOP Climate Change Denialism, Gary Palmer Edition (w/ Bonus Elbow Thrown at Neo-PCs)
link
You know, in a twisted way this is almost comforting to me. Lately I've been hypnotically focused on the absurdist train wreck that is the SJW/neo-PC crapfest. In a way, I find GOP climate-change denialism almost cozy. Here's just straight-up, dogmatic refusal to accept the facts, along with a sorry-ass cover story about "mangling the data" that's barely more than a pro forma gesture at an excuse for refusing to take science seriously. Compared to the psychotic, misologistic conceptual convolutions of the crackpot uber-left...indiscriminate, incoherent appeals to "social construction," along with self-sealing re-definitions of pesky terms, the introduction of goofy neologistic abominations aimed at covertly begging crucial questions, sexism and racism bizarrely masquerading as anti-sexism and anti-racism...not to mention moral outrage theater in response to any utterance that deviates so much as an iota from the preferences of the doctrinal fashionistas that determine their ever-evolving, fascistically-enforced orthodoxy...and...well...a little good, old-fashioned pig-headedness seems downright quaint by comparison...
Of course that quaint, old-fashioned pig-headedness is going to kill us all...but still... It's more immediately dangerous...but far less grotesque...
You know, in a twisted way this is almost comforting to me. Lately I've been hypnotically focused on the absurdist train wreck that is the SJW/neo-PC crapfest. In a way, I find GOP climate-change denialism almost cozy. Here's just straight-up, dogmatic refusal to accept the facts, along with a sorry-ass cover story about "mangling the data" that's barely more than a pro forma gesture at an excuse for refusing to take science seriously. Compared to the psychotic, misologistic conceptual convolutions of the crackpot uber-left...indiscriminate, incoherent appeals to "social construction," along with self-sealing re-definitions of pesky terms, the introduction of goofy neologistic abominations aimed at covertly begging crucial questions, sexism and racism bizarrely masquerading as anti-sexism and anti-racism...not to mention moral outrage theater in response to any utterance that deviates so much as an iota from the preferences of the doctrinal fashionistas that determine their ever-evolving, fascistically-enforced orthodoxy...and...well...a little good, old-fashioned pig-headedness seems downright quaint by comparison...
Of course that quaint, old-fashioned pig-headedness is going to kill us all...but still... It's more immediately dangerous...but far less grotesque...
posted by Winston Smith at
11:05 AM
6 Comments:
This is insane. You are suffering a severe sampling bias, stuck in academia the way you are. Outside of academia (and high-magnitude stars of the liberal blogs) the issues you are complaining about simply don't exist.
Further, I expect the whole SJW issue you gripe about would go away if the trolls weren't so fierce. Here, I'll give you a taste.
You fucking cunt, you are just a whore for the anti-SJW MRA crowd. Useful idiot doesn't go near far enough. You're just a political slut, down on your knees with your mouth on hit throbbing conservative cock.
So, no. PC is primarily about politeness. While it has its excessess, it's not a major problem in the grand scheme of things. Global warming, now, is a real big one.
-Pete mack
> PC is primarily about politeness.
Dude, that sentence is as false as sentences come.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I think the neo-PCs are more likely to be really and immediately dangerous than the GOP...which is weird, because I've said just the opposite any number of times.
You also seem to be under the misapprehension that those folks have a corner on the market with respect to hoping to make the web a more civil place, especial for its female denizens... But, of course, they don't.
PC isn't "primarily about politeness," and it isn't *close* to being primarily about politeness. In fact, they deride politeness, and deride *pleas* for politeness (or even mere civility) as "tone policing" and so on.
As I note, the current conservative craziness is more dangerous--though less sinister from a purely intellectual perspective--than the current uber-left craziness.
The current GOP craziness might kill us...but at least it doesn't seek to derange us... Cold comfort...but of some interest to me...
PM!
Why? Why dost thou write this way?
Why you gotta rant, Pete Mack?
Long day? You trollin, bro?
Look...PC is not about politeness. PC is about wielding umbrage as a weapon. People milk PC like a big ol' heifer tits that gush frothy moral superiority.
Problem is, is that from a 10,000 foot view, being PC implies being careful to not offend. PC seems to be about politeness. And so it shrewdly masquerades as being about politeness...but it is not about politeness. It is about feigning injury to manipulate others.
PC movement types can profess to be judge, jury, and hangman with a hair-trigger proclivity for umbrage. PC can distort vulnerable and honest conversation, due to fear of offending and fear of shame.
And yes, the PC movement matters, and here's why: PC mentality demands presumption from us that there's a victim in every sentence, all that's left to do is identify the victim via our damned bungling imbecilic insensitivity. This mentality then seeps out in to our approach to conversations. It seeps, like seepy baby poop, from a floppy cultural diaper. And it stinks, and spreads everywhere. It spreads noxious fumes of "There's a victim here. If you disagree then you don't understand and you're part of the very problem."
What follows seems unrelated, and maybe it is, and maybe it isn't. I'm too tired to specify the parallels but dammit it feels similar to the PC movement.
Regardless, I stand by the above.
Just the other day I read an article about written by a pretty UVA co-ed about how much she wishes her sorority she joined would not put a restriction on the women being at a frat's upcoming gathering. She found it offensive as a young woman, that she would be told to stay away from young men.
Turns out I still have grains of grit in my eyes, stuck there from the sandpaper scrubbing my sockets had after reading.
The rub is this (and this is PC incorrect, so, trigger warning for those who have been PC offended in the past): That author fabricated her problems and then bitched about them as if they were someone else's fault and then solved none of them.
Dominant comments in the comments section were largely "ya-ya" style for her for standing up to the idea of a woman being told what to do! I wondered why no one commented: If you didn't like being told what to do as a woman, did you expect joining a sorority was going to liberate you? When you pledged, did you all burn your bras and bust out ouija boards to channel Gloria Steinem's virtuous wisdom? Or did you wear cute dresses and heels, throw a mixer and get shitfaced and grind up on the frat boys? Go to the frat's gathering and quit your sorority. And please stop publishing, or improve your thinking, pick one.
Anywho, PC is not about politeness. PC is about manipulation. And yeah, global warming: also bad.
Anon--I was making a point. The comments at a lot of supposedly PC sites read very much like this. I find them a hell if a lot more obnoxious than the articles they are "commenting" about.
It seems virtually unquestionable that the PC phenomenon occurs primarily in academia, so WS is probably suffering from a sort of sampling bias. I don't know what sort of impact that should have on one's thinking about the matter - bad, stupid stuff is bad and stupid even if it's less prevalent than other bad, stupid stuff, but we are finite creatures with a need to prioritize our time and energy.
My guess at the matter is that the current state of the PC thing is sufficiently low-grade relative to the entirety of society that it's not a major threat and can therefore safely be generally ignored by the average person. The average person should probably be sufficiently acquainted with it to effectively understand and refute it when necessary, but it's hard to determine the intellectual effort and time expenditure adequate for such a task.
And that's why I'm always glad when WS provides his surgically precise analysis and counter-arguments for large-scale multifaceted stupidity. Shredding this stuff clearly and articulately lightens the burden on folks like me who really just don't want to devote the time to scrutinize something which is obviously silly from the onset, and having the analysis performed and served up is a very convenient service which I appreciate.
That said, I hope WS paces himself so as not to burn out. The howitzer's barrel needs some cooldown and maintenance time every once in a while.
So, quick question. Does this count as SJW? Because a lot of people say it does.
http://seriouspony.com/trouble-at-the-koolaid-point/
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home