Authors James Lindsay, expert on Hegel and math

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
This is mostly right but strikes me as it needing said that I don't think the left or the intelligentsia have the slightest idea how low institutional trust in anything coming from a left mouthpiece is now. Except in-network, the best heuristic is "the opposite of what they said"


If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.

Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.

They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.

There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable
I dare anyone to read Critical Race Theory: An Introduction for themselves and try to believe this idiotic distortion. The book is both horrifying and laughably shallow. Read it yourself. You'll see. Last time I read it, I literally laughed out loud repeatedly at how stupid it is


I have screenshots of some choice material, but I have to admit that I stopped taking them because it's virtually all of the book that's transparently bad and ridiculous. Maybe I need to start sharing them anyway.

You can read the whole book for yourself in about four or five hours. It's neither long nor difficult. It's transparently awful and stupid, and it makes a person wonder what people like Bradley Mason are on about trying to bullshit you away from recognizing that.

Here, they say they're skeptical of rights.

This is after saying in the first paragraph that they diverge from the Civil Rights Movement and oppose the liberal order, equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.


Look at how stupid the questions for deeper exploration are. It's literally making the case for propaganda over truth and then accusing white people of being the only people who confuse the two.