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! (If you get that annoying...

~ PINKERITE TALKS TO ANTHROPOLOGISTS ~
The Brian Ferguson Interview
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Showing posts with label Boghossian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boghossian. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 14, 2024

Judd Legum vs. the Bari-verse

Like virtually everybody in the media, Judd Legum (in his Popular Info column entitled "The Real Cancel Culture") gives Bari Weiss too much respect, treating her as a good-faith journalist who just happens to end up on the same side of every issue as far-right extremist Republican political operative Christopher Rufo and far-right media like The Free Beacon:

NPR didn't follow the script. Rufo and The Free Press were both involved in the successful effort to oust various Ivy League presidents. Those efforts included allegations that they were captive to the far-left, insufficiently concerned about anti-semitism, and engaged in various "scandals" exposed by Rufo and others. When Claudine Gay resigned as Harvard's president based mostly on the allegations published in another right-wing outlet, The Free Beacon, Weiss said she was "green with envy." 

But instead of capitulating to The Free Press and Rufo's pressure campaign, NPR defended its CEO and its journalism and moved on. 

That's when Rufo escalated his attacks on Maher.

I think there's reason to believe that the entire "NPR is too woke" brouhaha is a coordinated attack, dreamed up - or "workshopped" - and deployed by Bari Weiss and her long-time IDW allies like the extreme loser Peter Boghossian. I think the NPR attack plan is a more-successfully funded version of the far-right media campaign attempt described in the New Yorker exposé of the right-wing grift organization FAIR

Chen and Boghossian had workshopped a pitch to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, for a project to create “a modern-day Death Star” to wage “ideological warfare” on the “enemies of modernity”; their plan involved writing coördinated op-eds and promoting anti-woke content, but it was rejected. Weiss and her friends also sought advice from Niall Ferguson, a historian at the Hoover Institution, about the best way forward.

Boghossian and Weiss have been allies since at least 2018.

I have a Google alert set for "Uri Berliner" so I'm aware that even though his charges against NPR are no longer headline news in most of the media, it's still a big story in the right-wing media network. And the underlying goal is, and has always been, ever since it was likely "workshopped" by Peter Boghossian or some similar far-right grifting ghoul, to defund public radio.

And again, I don't believe that there are as many paying subscribers as claimed for Weiss's The Free Press (which is staffed almost entirely by far-rightwingers and kooks) nor as many for far-right Substacks as claimed, because it would be far too easy to fake paying subscribers through the subscription infrastructures of the Free Press and Substack, so they could launder the money possibly coming in from far-right plutocrat monsters like Harlan "sugar daddy" Crow, Charles Koch, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen

All to make it look like their far-right views are more popular than they actually are.

And since they could do it, I firmly believe they would do it.

There should be audits of all media outlets funded by far-right plutocrats.

Thursday, February 22, 2024

A peek inside techno-fascist clown college - The New Inquiry profiles the University of Austin

I laughed and laughed at the pretentious yet oafish, resentment-driven nitwits at the university funded by fascists and techno-fascists, described in the New Inquiry's article An American Education: Notes from UATX.

But at least it contains confirmation that the "Intellectual Dark Web" has always been about techno-fascism and a "natural aristocracy." Techno-fascists Joe Lonsdale and Marc Andreessen are featured:

For all of UATX’s supposed concern about “the culture,” the soul, the ethic of America, what at last constituted its core was this limitless faith in the goodness of the free market and entrepreneurship, of accumulating capital by endlessly making new products. Integral to this faith was a conviction about who merited such wealth and the political power that accompanied it. This who came into focus toward the close of the entrepreneurs’ talk. “There’s something very scary in our society—where this idea of a natural aristocracy,” Lonsdale said at the end, “has like really fallen out of favor.” Here it was, for a flash unconcealed by euphemism: “a natural aristocracy.”

At some level, Lonsdale—who displays the verbal intelligence of an 18-year old fratboy and who, moments later, would declare that when founding a company “you want whatever unfair advantages you can get”—doesn’t care about “natural” ability. What the author of tweets claiming “average black culture” is “broken” cares about is justifying existing economic and racial inequality and those, like himself and Andreessen, who reap massive rewards from it.

By the way, Andreessen and Lonsdale are not unlikely to reap some financial rewards from their very participation in UATX. Consider it. Andreessen and Lonsdale champion AI at UATX. Two weeks later, Bari Weiss publishes an article by Andreessen in The Free Press, “AI Will Save the World.” Wait another week or so. UATX then uploads a video recording of the Andreessen-Lonsdale talk, titling it, “Will AI Save the World?” Lonsdale posts the same video to his YouTube channel, where it gets almost 45k views, and tweets a clip from it, which gets over 700k. The upshot: a billionaire and a millionaire whose VC firms have a tremendous financial stake in AI get to widely broadcast the value of their securities. In the grand scheme of business strategy, this chain of events may be minor, but it represents just one of the many channels through which UATX’s founders and friends reinforce their wealth and influence.

But Peter Boghossian was there to provide laughs:

It happened to be Father’s Day, so when Peter (Boghossian), in between lauding UATX’s rigorous admission standards, mentioned a son, I wished him a happy one.

“Oh thanks,” he said. “I got jack and shit.” Muzak dribbled out of the hotel sound system.

“Shuttle’s here!” Loren Rotner, Assistant Chief Academic Officer, soon said, looking up from his phone. We all stood.

Peter sat next to me on the bus. He was fired up. He was delivering opening remarks later that night, plus we’d begun talking about a subject that interested him: exercise. “It’s indispensable for an intellectual,” he told me. “You should be exercising. Do you?”

I’d recently started going to the gym, I said. He looked doubtful.

“You gotta get into jiu-jitsu, man. I’m telling you.” Peter did jiu-jitsu. It’d changed his life. He spun around in his seat, scanned the rest of the bus, then whipped back to laser his eyes on me. “I could murder everybody on this bus and nobody could stop me. It’s a superpower.” I thought this over.

It should be noted that Boghossian is pushing 60. What an absolutely pathetic loser he-man wanna-be. 

Boghossian shows up a little later...

Pano Kanelos, president, stood up. It was time for the opening remarks. Our chatter lulled, and he began to speak in gentle, benevolent tones. He told us that we weren’t starting a university; we were a university. This is what a university looks like: people coming together for conversations, much like the ones we’d been having over our complimentary chicken dinners. “Dia-logue,” he said. “From the Greek, logos.” Two rational beings, engaged in rational discourse. He smiled. We smiled. And with little further ado, he introduced Peter, whom the other students had not yet had the good fortune of meeting. Peter, Pano told us, was “kicking butt in the righteous name of freedom.”

Peter springs to the center of the room. The air pressure changes. A buzz, a hum, a current about us. He brims with a frenzied energy. Something is happening. He is going to give us a taste of what’s to come, he says. This is the kind of intellectual activity we’re going to experience at UATX. We’re going to grapple with big issues. We’re going to be daring, fearless, undaunted. We’re going, he says, to do something called “Street Epistemology.”

What is Street Epistemology? He’ll demonstrate. It’s one of two things he does, the other being jiu-jitsu. “I don’t have a life,” he says. “I talk to strangers and I wrestle strangers.” But before we can do Street Epistemology, Peter needs to think of some questions.

He turns his back to the audience, hunches slightly and strides, stroking his chin. He is Rodin’s thinker set in manic motion; he is a relentless logician in his study at midnight; he is a frantically philosophical gremlin … —BAM! He wheels around and stalks forward and slings his index finger out toward a student, demands of him whether climate change is real?! and how certain is he?! and why?!—BOP! He points at another student, asks whether gender is a social construct, whether trans women are women?! He cites Socrates and The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. He staggers and weaves: as a boxer dances, so Peter lectures. He is the professor you never had; he is a squall of raw intellect; he is Robin Williams in the Dead Poets Society, but ripped. He is putting a gun to the head of your most precious assumptions.

Oh man, if you created a character like that in a play, nobody would buy it.

Seth Dillon, the sociopath who funds the psychopath Chaya Raichik of LibsofTikTok was perfectly described:

Up next, Mr. Seth Dillon, CEO of The Babylon Bee, or “the Onion for evangelicals,” as New Yorker writer Kalefa Sanneh has nicely put it. (They have headlines like, “Man Caught Drinking Bud Light Insists He’s Not Gay.”) Dillon spoke about “Canceling Comedy” the evening of the second day. Scoffing at opposition to “punching down” in comedy, he raised his eyebrows and leered and smirked. He demonstrated an impressive command of alliteration: “Nothing,” he said, “undercuts lunacy and lies like laughter.” He licked Mr. Elon Musk’s boots, exclaiming that “the world’s richest man took matters into his own hands,” bought Twitter, “and declared comedy legal again.” In his beard and suit, he was a spectacular manchild.

It's so hard to decide who is more repulsive, Dillon or Boghossian. But wait, here comes Rob Henderson and Richard Hanania!

Unlike most of the previous speakers, he was not alone on stage but sat facing UATX professor Rob Henderson. This gave some unsuspecting students the impression that the two might argue. Perhaps Henderson and Hanania disagreed about something. Perhaps the “constructive debate” advertised by UATX’s website was imminent. As if conscious of this expectation, Henderson put on a funny little voice and asked Hanania if he could define the word “woke,” cleverly saying, “I think being woke just means you’re a good person.…” Hanania obliged Henderson, providing his personal genealogy of the term, before launching into a frantic invective against Affirmative Action and DEI. Following some warped line of thought whose only logic was that of racism, Hanania burst out that he’d “rather punish people for something they have no control over—the color of their skin” than because “their parents run around smoking crack!”

Other obnoxious freaks who get shout-outs include Katie Roiphe, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Jordan Peterson, Dorian "I hate feminism!" Abbot, and the queen bee of sleazy, sugar-daddy-handout hypocrisy herself, Bari Weiss.

Oh and does "liberal" Steven Pinker still subscribe to Richard Hanania on Twitter/X?

You bet he does.



Wednesday, January 31, 2024

The media finally discovers that Christopher Rufo is part of the race pseudoscience gang - Rufo defends himself using members of the race pseudoscience gang

Christopher Rufo: racist ghoul
and enormous asshole.

----------------------------------------------

I mean, Rufo is part of the Republican-Trump establishment which automatically means racism.

I've been tracking Rufo since at least 2020 because of his association with the race pseudoscience network.

But good work finally catching up, The Guardian.

The rightwing activist Christopher Rufo has links to a self-styled “sociobiology magazine” that is focused on the supposed relationships between race, intelligence and criminality, and which experts have characterized as an outlet for scientific racism.

At the time of reporting, Aporia was one of 19 Substack newsletters Rufo links to in the “recommended” section on his own newsletter, which according to Substack has more than 50,000 subscribers. Rufo also appeared on Aporia’s podcast, which has published flattering interviews with proponents of scientific racism and eugenics.

Rufo, a close ally of Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, and one of America’s most prominent activists fighting so-called “wokeism”, has repeatedly described his goal as “colorblind equality”, but his links to Aporia raises questions about Rufo’s proximity to extremists.

I'm unfortunately not surprised that the article failed to mention that Richard Haier, "mainstream" scientist is also a member of the Aporia gang.

UPDATE - you just cannot parody these right-wing racist ghouls. Rufo defends himself against charges of being too cozy with race pseudoscience by getting his dear friends, two prominent members of the race pseudoscience network, Claire Lehmann and Peter Boghossian (also Harlan Crow's sugar baby) to speak up for him. 

What a pack of assholes.


UPDATE UPDATE - Jonathan Katz weighs in on this latest example of right-wing racist extremism at Substack.

Saturday, January 27, 2024

A third citation for Pinkerite

Still a nobody, but I guess it's something.
----------------------------------------------------------

A few years ago right-wing ghoul Peter Boghossian, one of Harlan Crow's sugar babies, complained that I, a nobody with only two citations, had the audacity to write blog posts criticizing celebrity intellectual Steven Pinker.

I just discovered my article Steven Pinker's right-wing, alt-right and hereditarian connections has been cited by a paper called Intellectual dark web, alt-lite and alt-right: Are they really that different? a multi-perspective analysis of the textual content produced by contrarians - just published this month.

I'm sure it's not enough for Boghossian, but then again Peter Boghossian is a right-wing political operative funded by one of the men who corrupted Clarence Thomas, so does anybody care what he thinks?

I really have to update that Steven Pinker paper though. I've found out so much more about Pinker and the race pseudoscience network in the almost five years since I published in 2019, plus there are a few typos, including worst of all, in J. Philippe Rushton's name. 

Rushton is one of the founding fathers, along with E. O. Wilson, of contemporary race pseudoscience.

Monday, June 12, 2023

"An antiwoke organization implodes" - buh-bye FAIR!

“You have a lot of people with an extreme amount of wealth driving an extremist agenda.”

I was going to write about Jerry Coyne whining about the criticism of his little IDW grift perpetrated in cahoots with Quillette author and crackpot Anna Krylov. Best part, Coyne uses the phrase "Lee Jussim is an antiwoke social psychologist at Rutgers." Pinkerite has often noted the right-wing reactionary, vicious, race pseudoscience-loving loserosity of Lee Jussim

The second best part was when Coyne unironically describes race pseudoscience-promoting reactionaries Steven Pinker and Jonathan Haidt and Koch employee and reactionary Quillette author John McWhorter as "of the left."

Jerry Coyne and his right-wing allies live in a hermetically-sealed bubble.

Coyne was especially mad at P. Z. Myers, because Myers had this excellent response to the Krylov/Coyne grift. One of the best parts: "screw you McWhorter."

UPDATE: Myers responds to Coyne's complaints. Will Coyne ever stop embarrassing himself with his pathetic right-wing stoogery?

But there is much MUCH bigger news, which I found by looking at Coyne's website - the far-right reactionary FAIR grift "implodes!"

I had already noted how many members of the FAIR board of advisors were right-wingers, Trump supporters and Republicans.

The news comes from the New Yorker:

Professionally, Bartning had never worked on issues related to race or civil rights; he was an entrepreneur and investor who had helped American Express launch its online travel business and later helped lead the personal-care company E.O.S. One of his most recent ventures was a failed startup that sought to connect local farms with chefs. But he resolved to do something about what he was seeing at Riverdale—maybe even start an organization to counter it. He read an article in the Jewish magazine Tablet, about the rise of a new ideology on the left—a “mixture of postmodernism, postcolonialism, identity politics, neo-Marxism, critical race theory, intersectionality, and the therapeutic mentality”—and another parent offered to connect him with Tablet’s editor and with the author of the article, Bari Weiss.

I had always assumed that Christopher Rufo was the real founder of FAIR, although Bartning had been given the credit, as I noted in September 2021

But as with so many horrible right-wing reactionary projects, this one is the work of Peter Thiel's leading courtier, Bari Weiss.

The New Yorker article demonstrates what professional journalists should be doing: getting past the lies. Although the article's description of right-wing extremist Peter Boghossian was unfortunately extremely flattering.

The article, written by Emma Green, mentions so many people I've discussed on this site for their connection to race pseudoscience and/or the Intellectual Dark Web: creepy Melissa Chen; Substack's Lulu Cheng Meservey, the awful former Quillette editor Colin Wright; Hoover ghoul Niall Ferguson; Angel Eduardo; Quillette author Glenn Loury; Koch employee/Randroid Kmele Foster.

The article is long but the gist is that Bion Bartning, who is basically a normie, although "independently wealthy," decided to wade into a culture war campaign dear to the American Right and the Republican Party - preventing discussions of systemic racism. 

Bartning:

“I’d say that, in the first few months of starting FAIR, I didn’t realize the degree to which this was being politicized,” he told me. “Getting this issue tied up in a culture war between two political parties is dangerous and could end up pushing things toward a more dehumanizing approach, because people get locked into their position.” 

Bartning's tragedy was that someone connected him to Bari Weiss - Madam Culture War herself.

Eventually Bartning achieves this insight:

“There are too few in the donor class who want to bolster moderation,” he said. “That’s part of what’s happening in our culture. You have a lot of people with an extreme amount of wealth driving an extremist agenda.”

Probably the biggest get of the article is the revelation of Weiss' coziness with Supreme Court corrupter Harlan Crow:

But it was Weiss, more than anyone else, who was clearly the group’s big draw. She brought in a half-million-dollar donation from Harlan Crow, a Texas real-estate developer who, ProPublica recently reported, paid for years of undisclosed vacations and private-jet travel for the Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. 

Bari Weiss is, through and through, a right-wing political operative taking money from some of the most evil and crackpot plutocrats in the world to help the anti-democracy Republican Party make the United States a worse place, through the promotion of culture wars.

For me one of the best aspects of the article is that it provides a window into the Intellectual Dark Web Culture War issues factory:

Weiss had already been talking with a few of her friends about creating a new anti-woke organization. One was Melissa Chen, a writer and the managing director at Ideas Beyond Borders, a nonprofit that takes books about concepts such as liberty and reason and translates them into Arabic, to make them more accessible; she later described herself as a conservative who was forming her trajectory in “the anti-woke space.” Another was Peter Boghossian, a former professor best known for getting absurd papers about subjects such as dogs perpetuating rape culture at dog parks published in feminist and postmodern academic journals to expose what he saw as corruption in scholarship, and who has earned some prominence as a public intellectual defending free speech and opposing illiberalism. Chen and Boghossian had workshopped a pitch to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, for a project to create “a modern-day Death Star” to wage “ideological warfare” on the “enemies of modernity”; their plan involved writing coördinated op-eds and promoting anti-woke content, but it was rejected. Weiss and her friends also sought advice from Niall Ferguson, a historian at the Hoover Institution, about the best way forward.

Bari Weiss is truly a conscience-deficient individual. 

UPDATE: P. Z. Myers comments:

It does me good to see one of those hateful anti-woke organizations falling apart, but it’s also dismaying to see how easily radical conservative groups can suck money out of the pockets of the obscenely rich. I guess if you’re extremely wealthy you can easily throw a million dollars here, a half million there, as long as the recipient panders to the bigotry that comes naturally to bloated capitalist nepo babies.

UPDATE: Charles Murray is such a good buddy of Harlan Crow, he dedicated one of his more recent sociobiology books to him.





Sunday, May 14, 2023

Wonkette and Bari Weiss' University of Martyrdom

Peter Boghossian, philosopher of white grievance
--------------------------------------------------------------


From Wonkette:

Intellectual Dark Web Dorks Explore Deep Questions At Bari Weiss' University Of Martyrdom


...let’s take a look at their page on the school’s website. Oh look, there is one of those former professors who huffily quit writing forbidden professorial things on a whiteboard: 
 
What’s he writing? What questions of the mind is he leading his students on a deep intellectual exploration of? What are they doing with their unfettered freedom of inquiry and civil discourse?
Let us just zoom in here:
 
“Non-black people cannot use the n-word.” 
 
Oh. Okay. The forbidden word so forbidden even the people complaining that it’s forbidden won’t even write it out when in a room full of people who also don’t understand why they can’t say the forbidden word.


The professor in question, as I unfortunately knew on sight, is Peter Boghossian.

This is what ChatGPT has to say about the University of Austin and Peter Thiel:

Does Peter thiel financially support the University of Austin?

Peter Thiel, a billionaire entrepreneur and investor, has been reported to be a financial supporter of the University of Austin, a new university that is being established in Austin, Texas. However, the extent and nature of his support are not entirely clear, and Thiel himself has not confirmed or denied his involvement.
In December 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that Thiel had donated $10 million to the University of Austin, citing anonymous sources familiar with the matter. The report also stated that Thiel was one of the university's initial backers and had been involved in its planning stages.
However, Thiel has not made any public statements regarding his involvement with the University of Austin or his alleged donation. It's worth noting that Thiel has been known to support controversial causes and has faced criticism for his views on various issues, including higher education. Therefore, his reported support for the University of Austin has generated some debate and scrutiny.
Overall, the exact nature of Thiel's involvement with the University of Austin remains unclear, and there is no official confirmation from either Thiel or the university about his alleged donation.

 However, this must be investigated further, since ChatGPT is known to be factually unreliable.

We already know University of Austin has a Koch connection.

And the Majority Report has plenty to say!

Wednesday, August 10, 2022

James Lindsay, banned from Twitter for being a neo-Nazi


A tweet by James Lindsay,
darling of the Intellectual Dark Web
and a neo-Nazi


Anybody could see that James Lindsay was a right-wing extremist kook.

I first mentioned his extremism back in 2019. I mentioned him a few times since then, the most prominent was when he came for me, which gave a nice little boost to this blog, and a good chance to talk about his insane "your mom" hypocrisy.

(His partner in grift, Peter Boghossian, also came for me.)

So I'm not surprised Lindsay rode the right-wing extremist grifter gravy train to its logical conclusion: anti-Semitism, as reported in The Daily Beast


Finally, Twitter gave him the boot for hateful conduct.

But this blog could not call itself Pinkerite with any self-respect without spending a moment to mention how much Steven Pinker loved and supported James Lindsay. Along with Andrew Sullivan and Jerry Coyne.

Ending, one hopes, at least by the time Lindsay went full neo-Nazi.










Pinker praising Lindsay's book Cynical Theories.




Tuesday, November 9, 2021

IDW University


Well it looks like the usual IDW gang has started a new grift.

From the Bari Weiss substack:

But we are done waiting. We are done waiting for the legacy universities to right themselves. And so we are building anew. 

I mean that quite literally. 

As I write this, I am sitting in my new office (boxes still waiting to be unpacked) in balmy Austin, Texas, where I moved three months ago from my previous post as president of St. John’s College in Annapolis.

I am not alone.Our project began with a small gathering of those concerned about the state of higher education—Niall Ferguson, Bari Weiss, Heather Heying, Joe Lonsdale, Arthur Brooks, and I—and we have since been joined by many others, including the brave professors mentioned above, Kathleen Stock, Dorian Abbot and Peter Boghossian.   

We count among our numbers university presidents: Robert Zimmer, Larry Summers, John Nunes, and Gordon Gee, and leading academics, such as Steven Pinker, Deirdre McCloskey, Leon Kass, Jonathan Haidt,  Glenn Loury, Joshua Katz, Vickie Sullivan, Geoffrey Stone, Bill McClay, and Tyler Cowen.

We are also joined by journalists, artists, philanthropists, researchers, and public intellectuals, including Lex Fridman, Andrew Sullivan, Rob Henderson, Caitlin Flanagan, David Mamet, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Sohrab Ahmari, Stacy Hock, Jonathan Rauch, and Nadine Strossen.

So basically, if you support race pseudoscience, are on the Koch payroll or are a grifter, you are welcome to teach at The University of Austin.

Of course Pinker is part of this. You can't escape Pinker.

And you can't have an Intellectual Dark Web scam without a connection to  Peter Thiel:

At present, UATX is fiscally sponsored by Cicero Research, which is an exempt 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

Joe Lonsdale is listed as an officer of Cicero Research. Lonsdale is a longtime associate of Peter Thiel:

Lonsdale, after all, spent much of his early career in Thiel’s footsteps. He served as an editor of the Stanford Review, the provocative conservative student publication that Thiel co-founded, years earlier; interned at Thiel’s PayPal before it became a Mafia; and eventually became a right-hand man to Thiel, himself. Lonsdale would become one of the first employees at Thiel’s first investment shop, Clarium Capital, and then in 2004, helped him found Palantir, the data-mining, terrorist-hunting software company that made them both fabulously wealthy. That kickstarted a meteoric career—interrupted by a too-tangled-to-quickly-explain personal scandal—in which Lonsdale struck out on his own, founding the wealth management platform Addepar and a venture capital firm, 8VC.

Although race pseudoscience supporters are already listed as part of the Austin University team: Pinker, Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Haidt, it is inevitable that even more extreme, more obviously racist people will be brought in to teach "Forbidden Courses" on race pseudoscience.

Noah Carl and racist Bo Winegard are ready.



Monday, November 1, 2021

The right to make money as a racemonger?

I rarely hear directly from the people associated with the Intellectual Dark Web and race science, whom I criticize on this blog. Mostly I get an indication of their opinion of me indirectly, as when grifter and former non-tenure track professor Peter Boghossian expressed his indignation that I, with almost no citations to my name dare criticize Steven Pinker, who has many citations.

Boghossian's belief that Steven Pinker should not be criticized by his inferiors is likely a common attitude, and one of the reasons why Steven Pinker is a sacred cow of the media establishment, with rare exceptions.

But there are some direct encounters, as when Quillette's managing editor Colin Wright demonstrates the IDW's fabled love of civility by suggesting I'm insane for my criticism - or even a question - and then doubles down on that insult.

I don't believe he believes anything - let alone everything - I do literally exudes psychopathy. But I imagine he finds my behavior inexplicable: from his perspective, all he is doing is making money by giving racist plutocrats what they want: "scientific" claims that the failure of some Black Americans to thrive is not the result of a long legacy of anti-Black brutality and legal and extra-legal discrimination, plus current systemic racism, but rather, their own damn inferior genes. And I dare to criticize him for it.

Quillette, acknowledged by Bari Weiss as a mouthpiece of the Intellectual Dark Web, hired Razib Khan to write a review of Charles Murray's latest book in which he makes it screamingly clear what the Intellectual Dark Web thinks of Black Americans:

The book’s thesis is that American society faces disaster if it is not prepared to confront certain politically uncomfortable facts about race—Murray has described it as a cri de coeur...

...But why read a book on this topic when you can discover these facts within a few minutes? Tables on SAT scores by race are available in the Journal of Blacks In Higher Education, which pointed out in 2005 that “whites were more than seven times as likely as blacks to score 700 or above on the verbal SAT.” Wikipedia, meanwhile, has an entry entitled “Race and Crime in the United States,” which plainly states that a bit over 50 percent of victims and offenders in homicides are African American. The same website tells us that African Americans are about 13 percent of America’s population. Would you also be surprised to face the reality that the perpetrators of homicides are overwhelmingly young and male as well? These dots are there for anyone to connect if they like.

And yet very few choose to do so. Indeed, the failure—refusal, even—to connect the dots has become a vaunted feature, not a bug, of 2021’s regnant culture. Acknowledging unambiguous patterns of this kind will often result in the rebuke that some beliefs are divine mysteries, to be accepted on faith rather than analyzed more deeply. Which is precisely why Murray wants to inject these taboo realities into the intellectual bloodstream of our society. Despite being a brisk read, Murray’s short book lays out all the inferences and conclusions that remain lacunae in our public discourse. Without these facts on the table, the contemporary American debate has had to rely upon the ether of social science and nebulous theoretical explanations of “systemic racism” and “white supremacy.”

That Quillette pays Khan to write this, and that people with establishment media credentials are not bothered by this but rather have friendly relationships with Khan tells you all you need to know about what an incredibly anti-Black, racist country we still live in.

Imagine, instead, if Murray had written, and Khan had agreed, that we needed to face the reality about Jews or face disaster. Would feckless media dullards finally wake up to the menacing implication there?

But it's probably better for me if the people I criticize dismiss me as crazy. If they took me seriously, they might attempt some form of retaliation. 

And it's possible this happened the other day, when I signed onto Twitter and found a Twitter troll accusing me of being responsible for some rando Twitter account. I followed the trail from there and soon found other Twitter trolls attacking me, often in crudely personal ways. 

It was a complete mystery for a half-hour or so as I reported the various personal attacks to Twitter.

Then I saw who was apparently responsible for the falsehood. The day before, Razib Khan, who has over 43,000 Twitter followers, suggested that I controlled the rando Twitter account. 



I don't need an anonymous Twitter account to criticize Razib Khan. My Pinkerite1 and Pinkerites Assistant accounts both include information that would lead anyone who was curious to the "Who is behind Pinkerite?" page on this site.

I am not ashamed of the work I do, and I do not publish anything known to be false. But just telling the truth about the careers of people like Razib Khan may be enough to embarrass them, outside of the bubble of the rightwing media. 

I may not have a huge impact opposing the IDW project of mainstreaming race pseudoscience, not with the attitudes of media people like Gideon Lewis-Kraus, and not with the vast quantities of money behind that project, including Koch money, but it's possible I could help make careers in racemongering slightly less pleasant, if not any less lucrative. That could be enough to trigger vicious pushback from racemongers. Although it's possible I am shielded somewhat by the threat of the Streisand effect - if racemongers came for me, the resulting publicity might have worse implications for them than for me.

Pinkerite is certainly not the only source of criticisms of racemongers. Other sources include:
And Razib Khan has been criticized for his racemongering by other sources too:
There is certainly no legal restraint against making money as a racemonger. But racemongers should not expect to avoid all criticism for their racemongering, unless and until Trump is reelected and makes himself dictator for life.

Friday, October 1, 2021

Is FAIR the FOX News of anti-Critical Race Theory? Or: deja vu for Megyn Kelly

I've been talking about the organization FAIR (Freedom Against Intolerance and Racism) over the past several months. It has a right-leaning board of advisors, full of race pseudoscience promoters, Trump supporters and Megyn Kelly.

Speaking of Megyn Kelly, she was the star of the movie Bombshell, which was about how disgusting Fox News was in sexualizing its female employees, making women feel they had to cater to the sexual desires of disgusting pig Roger Ailes (and others) to get ahead.

And now we see FAIR advisor Melissa Chen on Twitter publicly offering sexualized images to FAIR advisor Peter Boghossian.

FAIR is an organization that presumes to lecture the world on the proper way to educate children and young adults (by forbidding discussions of racism) and this is how a member of its board of advisors acts in public. 

I have never had any respect for FAIR advisors, to be sure, but even I would not have guessed that Melissa Chen, also a member of the board of an organization called Ideas Beyond Borders (with, inevitably, Steven Pinker) was capable of behaving in public with so little dignity.

And it's unlikely any male member of the FAIR or Ideas Beyond Borders boards would do this.

The fact that it's to service a truly loathsome, sleazy grifter like Peter Boghossian, makes it even more grotesque.

It must feel like deja vu for Megyn Kelly.


Thursday, February 18, 2021

The logical fallacy of non-tenure track assistant professor of philosophy Peter Boghossian

Poor bitter Peter Boghossian


I haven't paid much attention to Peter Boghossian, one third of the Sokal Grift, mainly because James "your mom" Lindsay is such an attention hog. 

I've mentioned Boghossian a few times on Pinkerite but never as the main subject. I wrote about him in his connection to Lindsay; his business connection (along with Lindsay) with Christian nationalist / Soros conspiracy obsessive Michael O'Fallon; and when I noted that he appeared on alt-right racist Stefan Molyneux's show at least four times.

So imagine my surprise when I found Boghossian attacking me on Twitter for daring to criticize Steven Pinker when only one of my three papers on Google Scholar got any citations - only 2  (the article about the intellectual property lawsuit I was involved in)  compared to "celebrity intellectual" Steven Pinker's more than 100K citations.



I'm not sure what his point about verified accounts is - to be verified on Google Scholar you basically have to have an email address.

Now Boghossian is a professor of philosophy, albeit a non-tenure track assistant one, so he must be acquainted with the logical fallacy known as "appeal to accomplishment" described on the web site Logically Fallacious as :
When the argument being made is sheltered from criticism based on the level of accomplishment of the one making the argument. A form of this fallacy also occurs when arguments are evaluated on the accomplishments, or success, of the person making the argument, rather than on the merits of the argument itself.
Several people I follow on Twitter immediately pointed out the problem of Boghossian in particular using this approach, since Boghossian criticizes others who are far more prominent and more often-cited than Boghossian.




I'm not the only person who has noted what utter hypocrites James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian are. In this review of Impossible Conversations, Oliver Traldi writes
Imagine if Donald Trump wrote a book advising you on how to avoid drawing attention to yourself. Or if Antonio Brown wrote a book advising you on how to keep your job as a professional athlete. You might feel an initial rush of puzzlement — you might even feel a little resentment at their gall, their presumptuousness. You might ask yourself: “What do they take us for? Don’t they know that we know who they are?” These are the sorts of thoughts that might cross your mind.
And there is this issue: if Boghossian's point is that I am an under-accomplished nobody, who should dare not criticize a prominent and accomplished celebrity intellectual, why is he talking about me at all? What possible interest could my "relentlessly publishing hit pieces" have for anybody?

And as if Peter Boghossian making a fool of himself on my behalf wasn't enough, Evan Marc Katz jumped into Boghossian's thread.


Men win you over by giving to you. We ask you out. We call you. We pay for dates. We initiate sex. We ask for commitment. We propose marriage. We give. You receive. Reverse this order by asking him out, initiating sex, asking for commitment, or proposing marriage, and a masculine guy will feel, well, emasculated. Thus, if you want a masculine guy, your greatest move is to embrace your passive feminine side.
Katz has clearly been harboring bitter resentment towards me for years, because although he uses present-tense "writes about me" as if this is an ongoing thing, in fact the last time I wrote about Evan Marc Katz was in 2017 in a post on my personal blog which is entitled, with obvious justification: Evan Marc Katz is a right-wing snowflake who can't tolerate criticism. So although in Internet time my criticizing Katz is ancient history, he is unable to let it go and fails to take his own advice: "all you can do is ignore."

Apparently all it takes for Evan Marc Katz to label a woman a "loon" is for that woman to criticize a man. Maybe Katz should write his own book lecturing others on how to be civil in public discourse.

This latest Katz incident has convinced me that not only was I right all along about Katz being a right-wing misogynist asshole, I may have underestimated how misogynist he is. What a freaking creep.

Blog Archive

~