This stuff is everywhere. It’s coming from the friends and collaborators of Borysenko and co. Which phrase will be next? Maybe “Diversity is code for white genocide”? adl.org/education/refe…
Lindsay, too, is posturing against white identitarianism. Except he tweets like a Neo-Nazi all fucking day.
If you've seen Chris Rufo on your timeline over the past 24 hours, odds are you witnessed him proclaim a triumphant victory over the Washington Post, which he and several fellow anti-woke propagandists denounced as dishonest.
Buckle up folks, this is going to be a long one. 🧵
Many joined in on the dunk session. And note the tone here: these aren't quasi-neutral accusations of simple mistakes -- not even close. They're "major errors" or LIES from journalists who HATE Rufo.
Today, both Federalist & Post Millennial championed Rufo's heroic "exposé"
Here is how Rufo starts his debunking. Note the very serious-sounding, empty, bureaucratic diction: "the fabrication of a timeline" and "multiple smears that are easily proven by documentary evidence."
2/5 Rufo says the Critical Theorists “set out in search of another entry point for their politics and found it in the social and racial unrest of the 1960s.” But when that didn’t work, “they went back to the drawing board” (showing pictures of Herbert Marcuse & Angela Davis)
3/5 As Prof. Jason Stanley (@jasonintrator) explains, this kind of trope has a long antisemitic history. The Jews are said to be manipulating Black people (who, in the White supremacist ideology, are not smart enough to think for themselves) to fight for progressive values.
Can't believe the man actually agreed to debate one of his critics. In this & the clip below, Prof. @Marclamonthill gives a masterclass on elegant, respectful defenestration of fraudulent gurus such as James "World-Level Expert in Critical Race Theory" "Concepts" Lindsay himself.
@marclamonthill Lindsay was struggling to articulate an answer and he began equivocating and throwing jargon around--perhaps to appear as competent as he claims to be.
Hill's reply is so thorough that James observes aloud, "You know a lot about this." Yeah, because he actually STUDIED it, James
Chris Rufo just dropped this propaganda film, “Critical Race Theory.”
I commented with a link to my Substack post so his viewers might read my piece exposing his manipulation and lies; he deleted my comment within seconds.
I guess I’ll have to expose them here.🧵
First, the link to the video. I suggest you check it out yourself at some point; I’ll just highlight the worst bits here.
Don’t forget to leave it the thumb rating it deserves.
Rufo, like Lindsay, is now incorporating the idea that the (Jewish) Frankfurt School engineered CRT to promote division between White and Black Americans so that they could overthrow White rule and install a Communist government. This is literal neo-Nazism, plain as day.
Going through a video interview between my fellow debate participant @OfficialCWATSON and popular YouTuber @Friended4Ever. I’m hoping Christian is willing to provide some evidence for his claims! 🧵
This is pretty amazing. Because CRT emphasizes the role of white supremacy in society, the need to study institutions to understand oppression, and the need of historical analysis to understand the impact of the past on the present and future, Christian says it is “an ideology.”
The grain of truth at the end of what Christian says here is that I objected to him calling CRT a method. It is not a method. Because some CRT scholars study law, others sociology, others moral and political theory, there is no one method all critical race theorists employ.
While I was caught up with debate highlights, my friend @WLucasAnthro uploaded our 2nd conversation on his podcast. We talked about misrepresentations of postmodernism from the GS Hoaxers and Jordan Peterson, plus the CRT moral panic. A great discussion!
It seems our first discussion -- see link in the quoted tweet -- was swarmed by fans of James Lindsay and Jordan Peterson, leaving plenty of critical comments and a nasty dislike ratio. So we decided to put out another video addressing criticisms.
Here I describe how the authors of Cynical Theories engage in a strategy I think Peterson is also guilty of in his anti-pomo lectures: you take the worst possible example of a certain brand of scholarship, then project its pathologies onto all you can tenuously associate with it.