Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #JamesLindsay
Most recents (23)
Four years ago, before he published his first #Quillette piece, before he signed on as editor to that same online magazine, #ColinWright wrote an email to #JamesLindsay in which he laid out the set of simple and basic ideas that continue to drive his anti-trans activism. 1/ 
1. You can be an academic—held to the quality of his evidence, the knowledge of the existing literature, & the soundness of his arguments—or you can be a "free-thinking intellectual." (To the point that having lousy evidence & no demonstrable knowledge shows "free thinking.")
2. Let's blame everything on the "trans activists." Let's call everyone who disagrees with anti-trans talking points a "trans activist." "Trans activists" are bad, it goes without saying. Let's claim they are in "denial of gender or sex differences."
Straw man done! And done!
Straw man done! And done!
I'm blocked on Twitter by quite a few people, for the terrible sin of trying to engage with them.
I have never blocked anyone & have no intention of doing so, because I don't want to exclude anyone from access to my wisdom.
I have never blocked anyone & have no intention of doing so, because I don't want to exclude anyone from access to my wisdom.
I expect to be blocked by the woke, with their patently insane understanding of racism, but, to my surprise & disappointment, I have also been blocked by the most prominent champions of anti-wokeism, #JamesLindsay, @ConceptualJames & @HelenPluckrose,
for attempting to engage with them on the meaning of racism.
There's the both-sidesing.
There's the, "Oh deary, I guess we'll never know how anyone uses the term once people use it a bit differently, we won't ever know what they mean, will we now" incomprehension.
There's the "some call being at work on time white supremacy!" hyperbole.
There's the, "Oh deary, I guess we'll never know how anyone uses the term once people use it a bit differently, we won't ever know what they mean, will we now" incomprehension.
There's the "some call being at work on time white supremacy!" hyperbole.
It's just a whole bouquet of vapid hackery.
Anyone correct me if I missed something: Helen is still onside with #JamesLindsay's work. When she manages to use her liberalism soapbox to criticize him and his rapid descent into further bigotry, she may yet have a point again.
“I said critical theory first!”
“No, I said it first!”
“I said critical theory and postmodernism way before you!”
“You did not!”
#Quillette vs. #JamesLindsay
“No, I said it first!”
“I said critical theory and postmodernism way before you!”
“You did not!”
#Quillette vs. #JamesLindsay
Previously.
Helen lectures on systems of power and falls on her face.
You see, it's ridiculous that "critical social justice" or "the woke" believe that there are systems of power that are hard to see. That sounds like dew-pearled faerie webs, doesn't it. You say you see them? Really??? 1/
You see, it's ridiculous that "critical social justice" or "the woke" believe that there are systems of power that are hard to see. That sounds like dew-pearled faerie webs, doesn't it. You say you see them? Really??? 1/
Balderdash, says Helen. Most people don't see such webs. Webs of power are therefore an ideological hallucination. There; done with that argument.
Now, as for racism more particularly. It does exist!, Helen assures. We'll know it when we see it is the implication, I suppose. 2/
Now, as for racism more particularly. It does exist!, Helen assures. We'll know it when we see it is the implication, I suppose. 2/
When we see racism, springing like a predatory animal into the circle, we may recognize its bloodthirsty face, unsheath our individual swords, & individually slay it for the good of all. That's liberalism! Ra ra ra!
Or, slay it because you like slaying. You libertarian, you. 3/
Or, slay it because you like slaying. You libertarian, you. 3/
I'm glad Helen is saying this.
I'll note that her ongoing confusion about the concept of free speech is concerning. Nobody is limiting James Lindsay's right to speech. What is at stake in this case is how wrong and harmful his speech is. I hope she recognizes that. That is the point I hope she's making.
I'm not glad that she's deflecting from the point that she can't condone his views anymore. She does so by implying his right to speech has been limited (it hasn't) and that her help is needed to protect it.
A few contextual notes to help you make sense of this #JamesLindsay tweet.
1) US recorded 205,000 new cases on Friday. 89,800 people in hospital. 2,100 deaths on each of the two days before US American Thanksgiving.
1) US recorded 205,000 new cases on Friday. 89,800 people in hospital. 2,100 deaths on each of the two days before US American Thanksgiving.
2) Many of James' fans and followers are decidedly or far right-wing. Anti-maskers and anti-lockdown folks among them. #JamesLindsay collaborates, intellectually and financially, with a Covid-denying organization, Sovereign Nations.
3) In the recent past, James has attacked several researchers and epidemiologists who tweet knowledgeably about Covid-19 and about measures to handle the current pandemic. I'm not aware of him saying something about Covid-19 that's knowledgeable or useful for public health.
If you still think #JamesLindsay is a secret undercover feminist for sometime in the past having helped women with math, please observe.
Observation #1: The guy can't say sorry. He's incapable of it. Everything he says, he's compelled to present himself as the top dog. 1/
Observation #1: The guy can't say sorry. He's incapable of it. Everything he says, he's compelled to present himself as the top dog. 1/
Observation #1 ctd.: Even when he makes a mistake and is forced to admit it, he'll immediately add his top dog spin. Listen, he's a big deal, he gets hundreds of messages like this and only ever makes a mistake with one of them once every month. That's how smart and big he is. 2/
Observation #2: To increase his own sense of being the top dog, he'll take the opportunity to touch his teeth to what he perceives to be one of your weak spots. Feel the slight touch of hurt. Know that he could do more of it.
Much easier for him than to argue. 3/
Much easier for him than to argue. 3/
🔥🔥🔥
While Glaude's words sink in, let's review how some fascism-adjacent critics of academia are reacting to the election results.
Spoiler: They aren't moving past white supremacy. Oh, no. Their heels are dug in. In Glaude's words, they want to do this again & again & again. 2/
Spoiler: They aren't moving past white supremacy. Oh, no. Their heels are dug in. In Glaude's words, they want to do this again & again & again. 2/
New Radical Racism: If the Democrats were just a lot more racist, they would have won more handsomely! Not incorrect, I suppose.
Also cheers on #JamesLindsay in proclaiming that anti-racism is a poison. How dare anyone suggest white people have anything to do with racism! 3/
Also cheers on #JamesLindsay in proclaiming that anti-racism is a poison. How dare anyone suggest white people have anything to do with racism! 3/
#JamesLindsay has another wild take on history. Remember when he said colonialism was about bringing the Enlightenment & liberal democracy to the Americas? Now he says the French Revolution—an uprising of do-nothing bourgeois—spawned critical theory.
Perhaps relevant: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy summarizing Nietzsche, not on ressentiment in this case, but on vengeful outbursts.
Self-alleged progressive #JamesLindsay to give talk at conservative-libertarian Federalist Society in the middle of a US Supreme Court debate were all the fascist president's nominees have been members of said society.
*where
Self-alleged progressive #JamesLindsay snickers because an article about the racist treatment Black people encounter in UK countryside locations made a point about colonialism and the slave trade. Self-alleged leftist Colin Wright snickers along.
metro.co.uk/2020/09/21/the…
metro.co.uk/2020/09/21/the…
Of course this question is worth more than $20. Let me say a few words about why.
Since we are talking about scholarship--the field of critical race theory, to be more precise--the objections I raise in the thread linked here are all, crucially, scholarly questions. 1/
Since we are talking about scholarship--the field of critical race theory, to be more precise--the objections I raise in the thread linked here are all, crucially, scholarly questions. 1/
In daily discussion, we get most of our knowledge about research fields third-, fourth-, or fifth-hand. Have I read much original scholarship in evolutionary biology? No, I have not. Do I have a lay view on the area of evolutionary biology? Yes, I do. 2/
Can I trust my lay view--not formed from reading field scholarship, but encountering summaries of summaries, watching film and video, listening to interviews, reading blogs--on evolutionary biology to make critical comments of consequence about evolutionary biology?
Hell no. 3/
Hell no. 3/
In case the small print is difficult to see.
Donald Trump retweets a #JamesLindsay tweet that says: “Literally every time I hear the words ‘peaceful protesters’ now, I assume it's a lie. This isn't correct or good.“
#WhiteSupremacy #journalism
Donald Trump retweets a #JamesLindsay tweet that says: “Literally every time I hear the words ‘peaceful protesters’ now, I assume it's a lie. This isn't correct or good.“
#WhiteSupremacy #journalism
#JamesLindsay’s response:
“I perceive that a lot of people are angry that Trump retweeted me. I am, however, profoundly amused by the whole affair.“
“I perceive that a lot of people are angry that Trump retweeted me. I am, however, profoundly amused by the whole affair.“
Who doesn’t find it anything but profoundly amusing when a reigning fascist pats them on the back, publicly signaling jocular agreement.
A windbag's manual (in whatever order).
1) Write manual on impossible convos.
2) Write badly researched anti-theory book.
3) Have book reviewed, i.e. debated, by knowledgeable people.
4) Write blog post that knowledgeable people won't debate you.
5) Block knowledgeable people.
1) Write manual on impossible convos.
2) Write badly researched anti-theory book.
3) Have book reviewed, i.e. debated, by knowledgeable people.
4) Write blog post that knowledgeable people won't debate you.
5) Block knowledgeable people.
This is what the blog post looks like. It hinges on throwing everything he's read and disliked about critical theory into one pot and ascribing it to everyone he deems "woke."
Cue joke about self-ascribed liberal #JamesLindsay listening to everyone as an intent individual, never perceiving them as a member of a group.
If only you but barely anyone else think that you're a progressive person, and only you and your logic & reason fans think there's totes nothing sexist about anything you say because at some point you encouraged some women to do math, this is what you'd sound like.
Simping, by the way.
Gonna link this thread again, just because.
If you didn't yet have enough reason to recognize #JamesLindsay as the windbag he is, consider this. He once made his career as a strident atheist.
He's now trying to make his career as an anti-critical-theorist. 1/
He's now trying to make his career as an anti-critical-theorist. 1/
In his anti-critical-theory crusade, he's closely collaborating with and being financed by a Christian white nationalist. He makes comments that are friendly to white nationalist ideas. A Christian review is published of his book, he praises it and expresses his gratitude. 2/
He says it's a sign of his integrity that he can work closely and be friends with Christian white nationalists. Somehow, his integrity doesn't extend to being friendly to those who study, teach, use critical theory.
He's bitched about every book review he got from academics. 3/
He's bitched about every book review he got from academics. 3/
Should be course planning, but I'm so easily distracted, I will comment for a moment on this Helen Pluckrose tweet. You can pass it up as a throw-away comment. But also, the implications of the throw-away comments pile up. Some obvious issues here are . . . 1/
1) If you're writing a book or blog posts or what have you about how critical theory fifty years ago is destroying current-day liberalism, I would you say you should show some interest in the way the concepts were conceived, defined, and contextualized at that time. 2/
2) But, hey, that I think that's necessary might just be me, a writing and discourse studies scholar who is historically inclined. No, wait, you are also trying to tell us academics how we should be doing our job? You better show some interest in it, too. 3/
I wrote this as postmodernist parody of #JamesLindsay.
There's a deeper point: History of research disciplines tells us that as you build new knowledge, even through sometimes aggressive critique of others' work, you need to build it with others' concepts and ideas. 1/
There's a deeper point: History of research disciplines tells us that as you build new knowledge, even through sometimes aggressive critique of others' work, you need to build it with others' concepts and ideas. 1/
Even as you build your knowledge *against* some other knowledge that you think is dead wrong, you need to build it *with* knowledge that's already around, and you need to choose that knowledge with care and scrutiny as to its quality. 2/
Part of the process is that you tell your readers & listeners what that knowledge is. Who are the sources? What are the concepts? How do you relate them together? How do see them apply to your evidence? What questions do you pick up from where, which do you leave aside? 3/
🔥
Case in point: (a) It is very cool that we can have professional mathematicians talk in a public social media forum in this intellectually interesting way about math and their philosophical position on math.
(b) #JamesLindsay, though, is not ready for that kind of accessible, intellectual exchange.
This is excellent, necessary work. #JamesLindsay #SokalSquared
#JamesLindsay’s whining never stops.
It’s clear as day why #academia and serious research are not for him.
It’s clear as day why #academia and serious research are not for him.
Or, as Ted put it.
We know that Michael O’Fallon’s blog for his organization Sovereign Nations is filled with articles on George Soros conspiracy theories and COVID-19 denial. 1/
We can note: anti-Semitic conspiracy mongering and COVID-19 denial is what #JamesLindsay is trying to wash over by claiming he is so very liberal, he can be friends with anyone, he can “walk the walk.” 2/
I’m waiting for the day when #JamesLindsay will truly demonstrate his liberal attitude and will walk the seemingly very hard walk of being a magnanimous friend to a critical theorist. 3/
Maybe it will make things easier if I start a depository thread. #JamesLindsay #SokalSquared #WhiteNationalism
I included several paragraphs about patterns of white nationalist thought in some of James Lindsay's work and writing in my piece on the recent 2+2 Twitter debate. 1/
medium.com/@KatjaT/what-h…
medium.com/@KatjaT/what-h…
My early thread on #JamesLindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose being courted and promoted by the white nationalist Christian organization called Sovereign Nations, run by Michael O'Fallon. 2/
Here's the tea.
@kareem_carr was right in pointing out how #JamesLindsay conceives of his Twitter account as a comedy account & how we can't expect serious engagement from it.
In an interview, Lindsay has offered well-known comedians mocking Trump politics as his comparison. 1/
@kareem_carr was right in pointing out how #JamesLindsay conceives of his Twitter account as a comedy account & how we can't expect serious engagement from it.
In an interview, Lindsay has offered well-known comedians mocking Trump politics as his comparison. 1/
In that interview, he wasn't speaking of his Twitter account, he was speaking of the conceptual penis hoax. #SokalSquared
Let's go with that comparison for now.
His Twitter account relentlessly tries to mock parts of academia he dislikes. That's fine as far as that goes. 2/
Let's go with that comparison for now.
His Twitter account relentlessly tries to mock parts of academia he dislikes. That's fine as far as that goes. 2/
The harassment that sometimes follows from his mocking particular, identifiable, and especially small accounts, that is not so fine.
His blog also mocks parts of academia his dislikes. That would also be fine as far as that goes. 3/
His blog also mocks parts of academia his dislikes. That would also be fine as far as that goes. 3/
