Featured Post

PZ Myers dissects evolutionary psychology: brief, sharp and fabulous

I admit I LOL'd at the part about lighting up "like a Christmas tree." WATCH AND LEARN all IDWs!

The Brian Ferguson Interview

Sunday, November 6, 2022

Amy Wax and her racist rant at the Stanford Academic Freedom Conference

Thanks to the last panel of the Stanford Academic Freedom Conference (aka The Peter Thiel CPAC for racists) sponsored by the Stanford Graduate School of Business, the true purpose of the SAF Conference was revealed.

The last panel included infamous racist Amy Wax who vomited forth a racist rant in which she acknowledged the giant racist elephant in the room. 

Her racism is so much like Steve Sailer's, I expect Steven Pinker will try to publish her work.

TRANSCRIPT (my highlight) 


The goal of the progressive Left today, and we've heard about this on the prior panel, is to destroy and demolish our legal system with its safeguards, procedures and practices, a system that is the envy of the world. Why? That justice system is oppressive and bigoted. A cover for hatred, for racism, for white privilege. Our legal system represents whiteness, and whiteness has to go. It has to be replaced. 

But replaced with what? Well, with some corrupt, unprincipled, arbitrary, unpredictable, fact-free system driven by identity politics, by preferment, by power, by tribalism. The goal is to take our carefully constructed first world legal system and send it back to third world status. And the only upside I can see of this project? Well, it might alleviate our immigration problem. Why would people want to come to us for the same miseries and injustices they have at home? That's the mystery. 


Now, there is one more aspect of my cancellation experience that really is important to comment on. Students from Penn and elsewhere repeatedly reach out to me for advice on how to resist the depredations and humiliations of woke conformity, not just in the Academy, but in the elite world that they will eventually occupy. And of course, we have "Woke Inc." we have the woke financial system, the nonprofit system, entertainment. There's no escape. There's absolutely no escape. Now, unfortunately, I don't have very encouraging words to offer. In my pastoral role, and that is the role that I have assumed in my university, I tell them, well, this is a culture war. What about war don't you understand? War has casualties. People get hurt. Can you avoid it? Well. You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you. Yet I don't encourage or expect them. 


(They tell her she's going over her allotted time.)


Oh, how many times? How much time do I have? Oh, OK. Then I'm going to finish up. 


I don't expect them to stick their neck out because they're vulnerable. But there is one group I'm very disappointed in and that - who are in a position to stick their neck out, and that's other tenured professors like me. And here I am talking about the old, mostly white guys who regularly tell me in private how much they hate wokeness. How stupid it is. How destructive. But do they do anything about it? No. Do they speak up? No. They're just too comfortable. Is it selfishness? Is it cowardice? 


Let me just say one thing about the cowardice part, alright? The elephant in the room at this conference, the one subject that has not come up is race. The centerpiece of wokeness is that all disparities, all group disparities, are due to racism, racism, racism, racism. If people on the Right want to embrace meritocracy, and fight wokeness and be colorblind, they have to have an answer to that. 


They have to face up to the fact that the meritocracy will produce different outcomes by group. And they can't shrink from that, and I think that is where I see them stumbling.


Finally I will, I will leave you with a Latin motto, which is the motto of some of my children's very overpriced, fancy and expensive boarding school. That Latin motto is non sibi. That means not for ourselves. I hope that we here at this conference are not here for ourselves, but rather to preserve, protect and defend the system that has been bequeathed to us by those who have come before, to the next generation. I know that's. I'm here, people say, why don't you leave? Why don't you quit? Why don't you retire? Why do you tolerate these slings and arrows? And my answer to them is non sibi. I am here for them. And that requires a certain degree of sacrifice. So if I leave you with one wish, forlorn hope, I guess, it would be let's see more tenured professors stand up and be counted by opposing what is happening in the university today thank you. 


(Audience applauds.)

I thought the last part was especially revealing, because Amy Wax expresses an interest in the continuance of the racism she loves so much. She sees it as something to leave to the next generation.

And it's not only Amy Wax. During the questions portion of the panel, another speaker at the conference, Eric Kaufmann, asked a question.

So, yeah, just over in the Hoover Institution, Shelby Steele, who wrote a book called White Guilt, which is interesting because it's about the emergence of the racism taboo in the mid 1960s in the US and he argued that essentially moral authorities shifted from, you know, people of color having to defer to white people to then white people and American institutions have having to defer to people of color because they've lost their moral authority. So I'm just wondering to what extent you think those events in the mid 60s which led to the emergence of this anti racism taboo, from which subsequent taboos around sexuality and gender derived in a way, how important do you think that has been and do we need to revisit that taboo that emerged even though we may support, to some degree, what the spirit of of that taboo, I mean is there not an overreach that's resulted from that taboo. Do we need to question these taboos that emerged in the mid 60s in the US.
So the racist Right really does want to turn back the clock and end "the racism taboo (that emerged) in the mid 1960s." The mid-1960s was voting rights for Black people

UPDATE: An interview Kaufman gave to Isaac Chotner called A Political Scientist Defends White Identity Politics,

Later on in the questions period, Wax tries to address Kaufman's question, but the moderator cuts her off and says there isn't enough time. The mind boggles at the possibility of her saying something even more racist. 

Wax will have you know that racism does cause suffering - to poor racists like herself. But it's OK because she has found a nation-wide network of racists to be her friends.

...you have to have a high tolerance for pain, and you have to expect pain. That you know you will be attacked, you will be labeled, you will be slurred. The media is not your friend. The media is catastrophically dishonest. The mainstream media, I have learned that the hard way. It's really tragic and scary. Frankly, um I I don't approve of talking to the media because I think that you will always lose. Um the other thing is you you get shunned, you get ostracized, you get ghosted, you lose your friends absolutely by by the dozens. But you know, you make new friends, people come out of the woodwork, really wonderful people. I call them the adorable deplorables. All across the country, people contact you, they e-mail you, they send you letters, they send you invitations to their dude ranch or whatever...

I suspected, when I saw that Peter Thiel was the keynote speaker, that this conference would be a coming together of racists, especially the race pseudoscience racists, in order to brainstorm new strategies to defend and promote racism, and that's exactly what it turned out to be.

I don't think they invited Amy Wax in spite of the high likelihood she would say something extremely racist, I think they invited her to signal that Stanford is ready to accept race pseudoscience.

I will admit to agreeing with Amy Wax about one thing. She called this fight over racism a war. That's exactly what I said in January of this year when attacked by two ghouls of the Quillette/IDW industrial complex:

Colin Wright claimed I was a psychopath because that's what Colin Wright always does because I criticize his political views and his employer. Since his views and employer are indefensible, he has no option but to defame me.

Cathy Young had a vicious thing to say about me because that's who Cathy Young is.

But hey - although my conflict with the Quillette/IDW industrial complex is a war of words, it's still a war and war is hell.

That's right, this is war, Amy Wax. Two of my great-great grandfathers fought for the Union and our side kicked your side's ass. We are ready to do it again. 

Bring it on, you ornery racist lowlife.

Blog Archive