 |
| ISIR president Thomas R. Coyle and Claire Lehmann, spreading their racist propaganda at Northwestern University --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Claire Lehmann founded racist rag Quillette, which has been funded by far-right crackpot Peter Thiel, which is sufficient reason to consider her a gutter racist.
And now the gutter racist organization International Society for Intelligence Research has given Lehmann their best racist of the year award. To be precise, Lehmann received the Constance Holden Award for journalists. You can tell who Constance Holden was by the gutter racists who love her.
In his introduction to Lehmann's acceptance speech, officially entitled "A Heterodox Education," Thomas R. Coyle, soon to be ex-president of ISIR, explains how deeply allied the far-right racists of Quillette are with the far-right racists of ISIR:
Claire is receiving the award for distinguished journalism, recognizing her contributions to public discourse on intelligence research. She joins a long line of distinguished Holden awardees whose names I put on the slide. Those include Toby Young, who is currently associate editor of The Spectator, Alice Dreger, journalist and author of "Galileo's Middle Finger," Susan Pinker and Bo Winegard, who was former associate editor at Quillette, who is now executive editor, I believe, at Aporia.
Aporia is owned by neo-Nazi Emil Kirkegaard.
Lehmann herself lovingly nurtured the career of Bo Winegard from when he was but a wee baby graduate student racist. Lehmann attacked me back in 2018 for daring to point out the fact that Bo Winegard is a racist, before he became a professional Neo-Nazi, working for Emil Kirkegaard.
I should point out that Lehmann's claim is wrong - I did not "boast about getting @razibkah fired from the NYTimes" - I mentioned that some of my blog posts were picked up by journalists like Jamelle Bouie who then used the facts I provided to raise issues about Khan.
But accuracy and honesty are not requisites to receiving a journalism award from the International Society for Intelligence Research.
Being an apologist for pedophilia is obviously not a problem for Claire Lehmann. In her acceptance speech she traces her journey from her days as a sweet summer child who loved Shakespeare only to be betrayed by Academia and forced to read twentieth-century literature and even ideas she may not necessarily agree with, to being rescued from despair by famous oaf Camille Paglia, headlined in the text version of Lehmann's speech in Quillette as "Finding My Athena."
Lehmann says:
“Poststructuralism is a corpse!” Paglia declared. She described Foucault’s scholarship as weak and bloodless, imitative of Nietzsche, and lacking in rigour. But she didn’t just attack Foucault’s work, she assailed the entire academic establishment for elevating him as a guru...
Lehmann considers Paglia an antidote for Academia's love of Michael Foucault, but avoids mentioning what Paglia and Foucault had in common: a love of pederasty.
Lehmann was born in 1985, so she discovered Paglia well after Paglia had written her 1997 Salon article entitled The Purity of Alan Ginsberg's Boy-Love. Paglia was aware of Foucault's pederasty but naturally his was the bad kind:
Allen Ginsberg was the apostle of a truly visionary sexuality. Like the expansive, sensual, democratic Whitman but unlike the twisted, dishonest, pretentious Foucault, he saw the continuity between great nature and the human body, bathed in waves of cosmic energy. Seen from this pagan perspective, Ginsberg's celebration of boy-love was pure and sinless, demonstrating the limitations of Judeo-Christian paradigms of sexuality.
Rather than the virgin-goddess Athena, I would say that Camille Paglia is more like Lehmann's Zeus, who was fond of pederasty.
Lehmann doesn't mention it, but I think another likely reason for her love of Paglia is that both have a serious case of internalized misogyny.
But in spite of Paglia, it was too late for Lehmann - betrayed by the English department, she moved to psychology, where she discovered her true calling: race pseudoscience:
Jensen expressed something that is often taken for granted but rarely articulated—that reality exists independently of our theories about it, and that it can be studied honestly through careful scientific work. I realised then that critics like Gould and the poststructuralists were not offering up methodological refinements in their critiques with the purpose of furthering inquiry; they were mounting a challenge to the possibility of studying human nature in the first place.
Now I'm not sure exactly what Lehmann is up to with "critics like Gould and the poststructuralists were not offering up methodological refinements in their critiques with the purpose of furthering inquiry" other than an effort to conflate Gould with poststructuralists, but if what she means is, Gould never explained in detail why he thought Jensen in particular and hereditarianism in general were wrong, well of course he did. As in Gould's New York Review of Books review of Jensen's 1980 book "Bias in Mental Testing" for one very easily obtainable example.
It can never be pointed out enough that race pseudoscience promoters are far more impressed by psychologists, like Jensen, and political scientists, like Charles Murray and even someone with a marketing degree like Steve Sailer, than they are by a life scientist like evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould.
In her post on Bluesky in December 2024, Lehmann can be seen recommending racists for others to follow, including Sailer and Aporia.
Then, while studying for her degree, Lehmann found her people - evolutionary psychologists, cranks and gutter racists:
On Twitter, I met a biosocial criminologist named Brian Boutwell, a geneticist named Razib Khan, evolutionary psychologists like David Schmitt, Geoffrey Miller, and Diana Fleischman, and I spent time reading papers by psychologists like David Buss and Roy Baumeister.
Evolutionary psychology is an obvious pseudoscience, as explained so perfectly by P. Z. Myers - but then Myers is a biologist, and so his work and opinions are of no interest to the likes of Lehmann. And Khan is not actually a geneticist - his job these days is right-wing political operative who pals around with racist freak Curtis Yarvin. Lehmann could recently be heard on Khan's podcast.
Fun fact: Kirkegaard claimed Khan was a big influence on him.
This is the "Equalitarian Dogma" bullshit that has been around since at least segregationist Henry Garrett who published an article by that name in 1961 in the neo-Nazi funded Mankind Quarterly - a publication that is now owned by Claire Lehmann's Neo-Nazi buddy Emil Kirkegaard.
Lehmann gives credit to Steven Pinker too, which is only fair, since Pinker is basically the leading mainstream evangelist for race pseudoscience:
It occurred to me that intelligence research ventured into sacrilegious territory. It undermines a vision of human nature that Steven Pinker described in his 2000 masterpiece The Blank Slate.
Lehmann whines about being called out for being a sleazy far-right political operative.
In 2019, during the peak of the “Great Awokening,” prominent figures like Nassim Taleb repeatedly described me as a “neo-Nazi” online, and the Columbia Journalism Review called me a disinformation “villain” and listed me alongside Mohammed bin Salman and Yevgeniy Prigozhin.
Is it fair to call Claire Lehmann a Neo-Nazi? After all, she only has a friendly relationship with Emil Kirkegaard and promoted the career of Neo-Nazi Bo Winegard. And she only showed up in person to receive an award from an organization that loves to platform Emil Kirkegaard.
Just because she has no problem with allying with Neo-Nazis, how dare you describe her as a neo-Nazi.
Then in her speech, Lehmann pulls out the classic race pseudoscience lie - that critics of race pseudoscience don't care about the "science" behind her beliefs, but only its morality:
But it was obvious that attacks like these were not about specific findings or methodological disagreements. Like Gould’s attacks on Jensen, or like Katz’s attacks on sexology, the criticism rained on my young publication was moralistic in nature. Rather than focusing on what was true or false, my critics wanted to reframe the question as being one of right and wrong.
This is the "Equalitarian Dogma" bullshit that has been around since at least segregationist Henry Garrett who published an article by that name in 1961 in the neo-Nazi funded Mankind Quarterly - a publication that is now owned by Claire Lehmann's Neo-Nazi buddy Emil Kirkegaard.
Notorious gutter racist Jean-Phillippe Rushton, one of the original guiding lights of the ISIR, wrote a paper called "The Equalitarian Dogma Revisited" in 1994.
Lehmann's own mentee, Bo Winegard used the term, for the same exact purpose, in a paper he wrote with his brother Ben and David Geary, this year's ISIR annual meeting keynote speaker, called Equalitarianism and Progressive Bias. Such a perfect demonstration of the direct line between that olde-thyme Jim Crow gutter racism and today's race pseudoscience gutter racism.
The reason that race pseudoscience ghouls like Lehmann won't acknowledge the actual scientific objections to their racist beliefs is a. they're too stupid to understand real science and b. they suspect they would have their beliefs thrashed soundly, and in Lehmann's case, her racist beliefs are her meal ticket - although naturally she doesn't mention who has funded Quillette, in her speech. So why risk having an actual debate with an actual scientist when you can stay in your far-right safe space bubble and take money for an easy job like regurgitating 19th century racist "science" endlessly?
Laziness, half-truths, racist bullshit and sins of omission are what get you a journalism award from the gutter racist organization the International Society for Intelligence Research.
Especially when you are a gutter racist like Claire Lehmann.
