An underappreciated dimension of the Woke problem today is that underemployed journalists and freelancers, who have been overproduced by universities, have brought us literary criticism, the most useless of academic endeavors, writ large.
Nobody really needs to know or think about the problematic hidden messaging in every conceivable cultural artifact. Vox needs content, though, and underemployed freelancers with overpriced and mostly worthless degrees need fifty bucks and a dripfeed of pathetic social clout.
Literary criticism is just an academic way to suck the joy out of basically anything that can be considered literary so the person doing it can feel smart (and morally superior). It adds virtually nothing to anything.
Talk about "bourgeois values"... Just go read some literary criticism. Hilarious how many of them have Marxist bents, but that would be the relevant variant of the Iron Law of Woke Projection again, wouldn't it? Critic! Criticize thyself!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with James Lindsay, sits very, very strongly

James Lindsay, sits very, very strongly Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ConceptualJames

1 May
This isn't really making history anymore. People mostly stopped caring about these little symbolic victories a decade or two ago. They're just cringe now when people try to milk them as a type of virtue signaling or whatever this is.
Literally nowhere in history has anyone ever sat down and said, "we won't have true equality until the entire crew of a Navy helicopter is gay, and I'm going to work to see this through" and then met with resistance to this. Civil rights LARPing with a fake expectation to cheer.
So far as breaking barriers goes, I could have got behind the "first woman president" thing, but that's basically irrelevant now too. The real barriers have all been broken, and everyone knows it. It's just circumstance now, and nobody cares. It's all civil rights LARP.
Read 4 tweets
28 Apr
If I were making a recommendation to people with the power to do something about it, say legislators, governors, mayors, etc., I'd encourage actions that offer support to keep police officers in departments and as duly moralized as possible.
This is what's actually going on now in (dumbass leftist) cities that have defunded and effectively castrated the police, including through DAs who just release arrested offenders. Think something like a match toward Antifa inside/as the police.
I see a lot of libertarian types jumping on the "yeah, but cops DO suck" bandwagon, and I see those in similar orbits encouraging police to retire or resign due to the risk and indignity of their jobs right now in these insane conditions, but I promise you: you're being played.
Read 4 tweets
27 Apr
The Democrats constantly tell us they're the ones fighting to end systemic racism, but when given a simple opportunity to stop ongoing (not "historical") discrimination happening TODAY against Asian-Americans, Senate Democrats did a party-line vote to maintain systemic racism.
What you're looking at here (repeated) is the vote breakdown on the so-called Cruz Amendment to the #StopAAPIHate bill. Republicans nearly all supported it. Democrats rejected it to a person. Stop "AAPI hate" performatively while maintaining anti-Asian discrimination explicitly.
The further context of this bill and this amendment is that many American colleges and universities discriminate against Asian-Americans in the name of equity (aka Affirmative Action). Senate Democrats want to maintain that and use taxpayer money to try to maintain it.
Read 9 tweets
22 Apr
Wokeness is nothing but word games. Malicious word games. Subversive word games. Destructive and poisonous word games. But just word games. No substance! No understanding! Just manipulative words.
Call pregnant women "pregnant people." Achieve "antiracism" by changing how people speak and identify themselves. Achieve "justice" by saying how nothing achieves justice. Achieve "change" through vague boilerplate.
"Create positive change" by empowering mouthy malcontents who aren't particularly good at anything except complaining about things they don't like because they don't understand them and bullying people who might dare to point this out with psychologically abusive techniques.
Read 4 tweets
21 Apr
The media has spent most of the last ten months (but also most of the last five years) inducing a rather profound functional mental illness in the majority of society, as you can see here.
The entire systemic racism narrative that has been being pushed full-tilt since Trump started running for president in 2015 has amounted to, whether intended or not, a huge psychological operation on much of the American public that made them unable to cope with real life.
The question "Does systemic racism exist?" isn't even a well-posed question. The right answers are "obviously not" or "obviously so" depending on your frame of reference. What it really means is "some statistically disparate outcomes by race exist." The rest is interpretation.
Read 8 tweets
20 Apr
Fact check: False. Method matters. Criticism is possible without adopting Critical Theory, which, at a minimum, demands (1) an idealized vision of society, (2) speaking only about shortcomings against that utopian vision (no perspicacity), and (3) social activism on its behalf.
Critical Theorists like to pretend they have the only criticism game in town, but this is another manipulation of language. Lots of criticism exists that doesn't require a utopian vision or "wedding theory to praxis" in order to fundamentally remake society and its systems.
Critical Theorists like to invoke "free speech" to defend their right to critique, which is correct, but simultaneously reject free speech under a doctrine of Repressive Tolerance, which calls for censorship and precensorship of views that disagree, including other critiques.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!