this morning after posting an article disparaging fellow linguists for our paper about his practice of disparaging linguists, Pinker retweets this with his own comment, guess what, disparaging linguists
Let's start with Pinker. One of his favorite things to do is take something he doesn't like, and use racist, colonial imagery to paint it as irrational. He calls the students' misunderstanding a result of "primitive word magic" casting "a dreadful curse"
Of course the fact that the offended students were Black renders even more disturbing the fact that he's conjured up these particular metaphors that bring to mind racist caricatures of voodoo and swamp witches. Very cool.
The phrase "mindless wokism" is another case where he lets his affiliations slip. He's talking like his IDW acolytes here, people like James Lindsay and Chris Rufo, the ones actively bringing McCarthyism back like they're crop tops and chokers.
To the "cornerstone of linguistics" - to say we have abandoned this and refuse to interpret meaning in context is a blatant lie, especially ironic since he refuses to consider the reaction of the students in the context of having to live in a system that is racist against them
while at the same time it pretends to have solved racism. I refuse to judge those kids for getting a weird familiar feeling in their stomach and reaching out to their school to discuss it. It might not be what I would have done in their place, but I've never been I'm their place.
To the meat of the argument: the article's title is a fun trick, "if the US can punish Greg Patton..." framing it as an if-statement is clever because the USC didn't punish Greg Patton at all. As the National Review was eventually forced to admit:
Students misunderstood Patton, they brought it to the school. The school responded in a way that upset some other students with its treatment of Mandarin, and responded again to honor the second group of students. At no point was Patton punished.
Why did the students get upset in the first place? I can't say, but probably it is quite jarring to hear something that sounds like what people usually say only when they mean to do you violence. Maybe over zoom it's harder to follow what examples are being used and why.
Maybe it's easier to assume nefarious intent when you know you live in a country where this kind of thing happens:
So why do Pinker and McWhorter keep acting like he was punished when he wasn't? Because they have to scrounge and hunt for tiny crumbs of oppression to feed the victimhood complex on the right, because conservative grievances are what drive their sales.
Because the culture war is an old tactic of the right to fool people into thinking the excesses of the left (getting offended too easily sometimes) are as bad as those of the right (nazi rallies, murder, concentration camps). And the tactic works, not just on people on the right,
but on people in the center/center-left. If you're willing to dismiss calls to fight fascism and white supremacy because it feels like sometimes it goes a bit too far, it's because your perception is being manipulated by people like Pinker who cherry pick, exaggerate, and lie.
Not to mention conflating linguists with a group of students bringing a complaint to their school. Why are those random kids responsible for the downfall of linguistics?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
i do think it’s kind of a problem for your theory that “wokeness” has taken over all our institutions that the second a professor who works on “woke” stuff acts on her theories, the university lets the cops drag her away in zip tie cuffs
if nothing else this week has been very instructive for anyone who was wondering whether to take any of these people seriously when they say the university is captured by wokeness
this is the kind of thing you do if you *didn’t* want open inquiry in science unimpeded by political pressure
the tagged ppl are: a politician, an activist, a blogger, a journalist, ex-spider biologist/activist, a lawyer, and a popsych author who is publicly aligned with zucker’s conversion therapy approach. they are offended by a letter by zucker’s peers that finds his work substandard
those expert peers are exercising their right of free association, a core tenet of academic freedom, to cease associating with a journal that has demonstrated that it is unable to execute its mandate for unbiased peer review and produces unscientific work asbopenletter.com
there are 1.5 million faculty in the united states, which puts your likelihood of experiencing a “cancellation attempt” at some point over 23 years at a whopping 0.072% chance. scared yet????
145 attempts in 2022 would mean 0.009% chance. and even if you’re one of the unlucky few to experience a “sanction attempt,” you’ve got a ridiculously good chance of keeping your job anyway lol
3/4 of the attempts were on untenured scholars?? ah well then @TheFIREorg you must be laser focused on labor protections, precarity, adjunctification, that kind of thing.
oh what’s this? are we out of touchy? no!! it’s the children who are wrong!
today i am thinking about the time jerry coyne and richard dawkins argued against viewpoint diversity
you see, when the available evidence overwhelmingly supports one side and not the other, you don’t have to invite the incorrect idea onto your campus for everyone to hem and haw about, obviously!
jerry coyne and richard dawkins: you see, proponents of invalid theories are trying to get legitimized by appearing in educational contexts despite their lack of substance. we shouldn’t allow them a platform lest people be fooled into thinking they’re worth considering!
we’ve spent nearly a century telling cons that liberal profs r indoctrinating students into marxism, that they’re unable to recognize facts bc their ✨feelings✨ are too strong, that they’ll discriminate against cons. anyway my big plan is for con students to listen to lib profs
how about you work on your contempt for your students and colleagues first!
a master class in self-victimizing deflection, truly he is the best to ever do it
no mention of the many accounts of jamie reed lying to patients/prospective patients to prevent them from accessing healthcare. just a bunch of whining that people made jokes about why he deactivated that didn’t strictly comport with his earlier statement!
i won’t be rebutting the criticisms of my reporting and behavior because the people making them are ghouls