James Lindsay, anti-Communist Profile picture
Aug 1 1 tweets 7 min read Read on X
We need to talk about the "elite theory" at the center of Woke thinking, particularly Woke Right thinking. Here's the bottom line: All you grassroots conservatives and MAGA who have fought like hell for this country are NOT ELITES and NEVER WILL BE to the Woke Right. They hate you. They want to rule over you. Just like the Woke Left. To the degree that they're nice, kind, or helpful to you, THEY ARE USING YOU to gain power for themselves, and YOU WILL BE DISCARDED.

The Woke Right is overwhelmingly invested in the idea of "Elite Theory," which they always try to present like it's some high-minded idea that's just a simple fact of political and social life, like it's the background we all just have to accept. Elite Theory, they'll insist, "just" means "society is always run by elites."

The "just" there is doing all the work in that description. It does not just mean that except in the strict and boring philosophical technical sense. Elite Theory does not stop with the banal observation that the people who are in positions of status and power are elites so the elites are the ones who run things. It goes on to suggest other things as a consequence.

For those of you who know the language, Elite Theory just meaning elites run things is the MOTTE position. The BAILEY position is that the elites should run things, and the Woke Right subscribes to this theory too, just like the Woke Left does, though differently and with fewer lies involved.

The idea that the elites (not the grassroots) should run things is sometimes called elitism. The Woke Right (and Woke Left) are elitist in this way, not merely "descriptivist" Elite Theorists. They believe elites have some right to rule that we plebs do not. They believe people want and/or need to be ruled, and they say so frequently.

Wokes subscribe to an even deeper, more self-serving elitism than just that, though, too. They believe that THEY THEMSELVES are the rightful elites (either in power or in infuriated exile) and that the real problem with society is that we have the WRONG ELITES in charge. That is, they go on to grant themselves not just right to rule (over YOU) but also right to depose the existing elite in some kind of coup or revolution. Their whole social theory is built around this.

The Woke Right bases a great deal of its thought on the "counter-revolutionary" (reactionary, proto-Fascist) thinker Joseph de Maistre. They do not try to hide this. de Maistre wasn't just elitist in this way; he literally believed that the sovereign executive (not you, the sovereign, self-governing individual in a free state) rules with the worldly authority of God and that he is therefore the representative of God on Earth. They do not hide their heavy reliance on de Maistre or this specific belief of his.

Woke Right propagandist "Auron MacIntyre" references de Maistre's ideas in detail (as solutions to our current problem) a dozen times in his short book The Total State. He's a fan.

The Woke Right also bases a great deal of its thought on the "crown jurist of the Third Reich" Carl Schmitt, who outlined the legal basis for the "total state" in Nazi Germany. They are openly proud of this. Schmitt, in his book Political Theology, imports this belief of de Maistre and claims that the sovereign executive (not YOU) performs secular "miracles" by making executive decisions, which he alone is rightfully given to be able to do. Virtually every character on the Woke Right is a Schmittian (though they downplay his Nazi era, lol).

Woke Right propagandist "Auron MacIntyre" affirmingly mentions Schmitt and his political philosophy twenty-five times in that same short book. He's a huge fan, and is relatively famously identified as a "based Schmittian."

Among the ideas from Elite Theory presented on the Woke Right regularly, we have the idea of the so-called "circulation of elites," which comes from the Italian Elite theorist and statistician Vilfredo Pareto (yes, the 80-20 rule guy), another darling of Woke Right thought. The circulation of elites describes a theory of REGIME CHANGE (see: Woke Right philosopher Patrick Deneen's most recent book, titled Regime Change).

The idea behind the circulation of elites is that any given set of elites in power can become sclerotic, incestuous, corrupt, or just weak, or maybe it already is that without having to "become" it, and "regime change" occurs by a "new elite" arising from below and replacing them. As the "new elite" gains standing, the "old elite" loses it in a rather zero-sum fashion, and eventually people decide to be led/ruled by the "new elite" rather than the crappy "old elite," and so the elites circulate like the water in a jacuzzi tub.

For all their flapping appeals to "populism," the Woke Right isn't populist at all. It's elitist, and in this worst, self-serving, entitled, bratty, bitchy, WOKE way. They see themselves as the "new elite" that is growing its status (especially with young MAGA) that will displace the current "managerial elite" that's running things. Because they like state power and tyranny, they'll not break the back of the evil statism crushing us but co-opt it to their own purposes. Many Woke Right figures (as well as the current Vice President) have articulated their intentions to claim and weaponize big state power and its EXECUTIVE administrative apparatuses rather than getting them out of the way (so, no Milei-style afuera, just new rulers).

So, my dear grassroots friends and real American patriots, YOU ARE BEING USED.

You must understand where that model leaves you. You are NOT elite; they are elite. They understand all the specialist theories, and you don't. They want to be philosopher kings, and you just want to live your lives with no desire to be philosophers at all. You want or need to be ruled, and they want to rule. But they need your energy, your work, your insights, your efforts, your blood, your sweat, your tears, your cancellations, your bodies, your sacrifice, and YOUR CHILDREN to make this coup ("circulation of elites") work.

You are disposable. Your children are disposable. They're your new masters, and you're supposed to love them because they hate your enemies and claim to love you. They don't.

They don't even hate your enemies. They ENVY them. They want their elite power and status, but it's not actual dislike for the evils they represent. They don't want to defeat them. They want to BE them. And they need YOU and YOUR CHILDREN to accomplish it.

One of their idiot philosophers of the current day (again, one JD Vance likes and upon whom many lean, including Peter Thiel in many ways) is Curtis Yarvin, code name "Mencius Moldbug" (the guy who called the Vertically Integrated Institutional Apparatus on the Left "the Cathedral," which you might have heard of). How does he characterize this situation? You, grassroots, are HOBBITS. The world is run by ELVES. The current elites are the awful, turned bad HIGH ELVES. The Woke Right are the renegade DARK ELVES who want to rule in their place. These "dark elves" require the manpower of you "hobbits" to take over, but they have absolutely no interest in letting you "hobbits" lead or even to have seats at the table. Elves rule, not hobbits. Leave it to them. He literally says that.

Yarvin: "The goal of the dark elves is to win the culture war—but not with hobbit power. In fact, the less a dark elf smells like a hobbit, the better. Just let us take care of it."

Another contemporary Woke Right "thinker" and activist, Aaron Renn, co-founder and senior fellow at the hoaxed-and-disgraced American Reformer, explains what he thinks of you everyday American patriots in similar terms.

Renn: "Today’s populists tend to come from subaltern backgrounds and do not have a track record of running large organizations or high level leadership in elite domains. This cripples their ability to make changes or even run the office they were elected to effectively. The result is often a circus."

That means YOU, grassroots. He's saying that when normal patriotic Americans take power, "the result is often a circus." You can't lead effectively. He writes this in an attempt to get conservatives to "reclaim FDR," whom he praises for his ability to execute specifically because he's an ELITE, not a PLEB like us.

Renn: "This ability to execute grew from his [FDR's] upper class background. He had lots of training and experience in leadership, and a vast network of high capability people to draw on in carrying out his work."

Renn is not criticizing FDR for this, as you might think. he's listing it as a central reason why FDR was actually much greater (from a "conservative" perspective) than we usually appreciate.

Why would he do that? Because he is a Woke Right elitist! Why would Yarvin call himself a "dark elf" and you a hobbit who he doesn't even want to smell like? Because he's a Woke Right elitist.

My grassroots and patriotic friends: the Woke Right hates you. They hate even the aroma of you. They less of you and your stink they have on them, the better, they insist. Do you think they're going to let you lead when they take power (if they take power)? Hell no, they won't. But they need your work, your sacrifices, and your children so they can take power to RULE OVER YOU.

They are elitists. They have slightly different expressions of them, but they have exactly the same values as the tyrants on the Woke Left and in the global tyrannical machine. Those values are power, right to rule, entitlement, envy of all who are above them, and disgusted resentment of all who they believe are beneath them. Which is us.

Like them all you want, I suppose. It's a free country (for the time being). You should like them knowing what they really represent, though, and it's UGLY.Image

• • •

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

Keep Current with James Lindsay, anti-Communist

James Lindsay, anti-Communist 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!

PDF

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

Dec 7
From my Woke Encyclopedia, an explanation of the "friend-enemy distinction" of Carl Schmitt, which is the Woke political logic. Link at the end!🧵

(1/13) The friend-enemy distinction refers to the cornerstone object of the political and judicial philosophy of a German theorist named Carl Schmitt, who wrote a number of works of right-wing political philosophy and thought before becoming such an enthusiastic Nazi in 1933, just after Adolf Hitler took power, that he earned the informal title “the Crown Jurist of the Third Reich.”

Though most of his significant political thinking was done both before and after he was a Nazi, during the years when he was a part of Hitler’s National Socialist movement and Party, he contributed strongly to the legal theory that justified the Nazi “total state,” including writing the 1933 piece that gets rendered in English as “The Legal Basis for the Total State,” which is significantly based upon the friend-enemy distinction.
Friend-enemy distinction:

(2/13) Schmitt’s thought is primarily of interest on the Woke Right, where he is a favored thinker and model political mind. He is vigorously forwarded for a handful of his political concepts, perhaps most visibly his “friend-enemy distinction” as the essential criterion of what makes politics political. This idea is first presented and developed in full detail in his 1927/32 book The Concept of the Political.
Friend-enemy distinction:

(3/13) For Schmitt, what makes the politics political is the distinction between (public) friend and (public) enemy, where enemies are defined as those who are interested in destroying one’s way of life and friends are defined as those who are willing to band together in its defense.

Schmitt specifically compares the essential nature of this distinction in politics to the distinction between good and evil in morality, beautiful and ugly in aesthetics, and profitable versus non-profitable in economics.

That is, politics is only political to the degree that it recognizes the possibility of factions that exist in mutual enmity underwritten by the potentially existential threat of violence. Of course, that means that Schmitt believes the essential criterion of politics is war, which he reveals also in part by making his point by completing the identity contained in von Clausewitz’s famous remark that “war is politics by other means.”
Read 13 tweets
Nov 7
All radical movements find themselves in a pinch: they can only really advance when people don't know their true intentions, but they can only really advance by going public with what they're doing. It's an intrinsic dilemma that only rare figures in rare circumstances can win.
Mamdani is a good example of a rare figure (extremely good at presenting himself disingenuously while looking real) in rare circumstances (terrible primary opponent, then running against a terrible combination of Cuomo/Sliwa, then still not winning by huge margins).
The primary reason NYC got Mamdani isn't something to do with the electorate, the climate, or anything else. Mamdani, with tons of weird money, ran a very strong campaign (rare figure) in very weird circumstances, most of which were candidate-specific, not conditional.
Read 9 tweets
Sep 25
The United Nations is a lot weirder than you think. A short thread of podcasts about it.
newdiscourses.com/2024/04/occult…
Like, it's really weird.
newdiscourses.com/2024/06/the-gl…
Read 10 tweets
Jul 3
Fun fact: If you had a time machine and could go back in time to this day in 2019 but couldn't take any physical evidence with you, you could not convince almost anyone to take the Woke Left threat seriously and would get mocked and yelled at for trying, even by friends.
Your left-leaning friends (if you have any) would make fun of you for not getting it. Your right-leaning friends would laugh at you for making a mountain out of a molehill. No one really understood there was a serious problem with the Woke Left until after summer 2020.
The reason I know this is because I was there and doing this full time already by that point in my life.
Read 5 tweets
Jun 26
Introducing to you two of the "intellectual" Woke Right's favorite contemporary thinkers: Patrick Deneen (left) and R.R. Reno. Here, they demonstrate their inability to see what is plainly in front of them—a Marxist insurgency through Leftist elitist capture—because of their preference for theories of cultural rot and decay.

These kinds of theories about why we are where we are aren't just dangerous misdiagnosed; they're also self-flattering humblebrags, saying in effect, "things got bad because everyone went to shit except people like us who are better than that." Typical Woke virtue signaling except in "modest" conservative form.
Yes, they are popular with Woke Right propagandists. Image
Image
Like fr Image
Read 4 tweets
Jun 21
It's Saturday, and the world is a mess. Perhaps it's a good time for a little humor with a point. To that end, allow me to reintroduce the "Grievance Studies Affair" to the world. This will be a longer thread (20+ posts) introducing every single paper of the Grievance Studies Affair individually in a new, never-seen-before way.

The Grievance Studies Affair (or, "Sokal Squared") was an academic hoax project done seven years ago by @peterboghossian, @HPluckrose, and I with the help of @MikeNayna, who also produced a documentary (The Reformers, 2023) about what we affectionately named "the project" as we did it.

It involved writing 20+ academic hoax articles and sending them to peer-reviewed journals in the "theoretical humanities," things like gender studies and sexuality studies, to reveal a kind of ideological academic rabies we now refer to as "Woke (Leftism)". In the end 7 of these papers were accepted, 4 were actually published, 1 received recognition for excellence in scholarship in the field of "feminist geography," and 7 more were still under peer review on October 2, 2018, when the Wall Street Journal blew our cover.

What we learned from the project is ultimately that peer review is only as good as the peers. If the peers are corrupted in some way, that corruption will be validated as "knowledge" and passed into the intellectual foundations of society through the existing system. The implications are vast. Of course, while we revealed a form of ideological corruption in academia, there are other forms as well: political, economic, corporate, etc., all of which matter in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reasons.

While the Grievance Studies Affair itself is now over six and a half years old and thus an article of history, I don't think it has ever been more relevant. To this day, it still has not been reckoned with in the slightest. Our knowledge-producing institutions have ideological rabies and corporatist cancers that will be our undoing. Until we see complete reform or replacement of much of our research, higher-education, and primary and secondary education institutions and apparatuses, we are at risk of complete societal collapse. It really is that serious, and absolutely none of it has been stopped yet.

This thread isn't just a reminder of the Grievance Studies Affair, however. It's also an introduction to a Grievance Studies Portal I have published on @NewDiscourses through much effort of my team. In this thread, each of the 20+ papers will be introduced individually with direct links to their new home on New Discourses so that you can read them and laugh (or cry, or be horrified) and share them with ease. I hope you appreciate them and all the hard work that went into them and their publication here.

For my part, it has been a great opportunity to take a day to reflect and reminisce about one of the most challenging and most fun times of my entire life. I don't think I will ever be blessed with the opportunity to work so hard while laughing my head off ever again, nor will I ever regain the innocence I had going into this project. I thought it was funny when I started. By the middle, I realized it wasn't just serious but a legitimate threat to civilization. I changed my entire life as a result, and not a lot of that has been so funny.

I hope you enjoy this thread. Below, you will find the release video Mike Nayna produced that we put out on October 2, 2018, minutes after the Wall Street Journal outed us. It has been seen millions upon millions of times now and legitimately has changed the world, just not enough. It will serve as your reminder and introduction to the absolute insanity you'll find in the posts below.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Like I said from the start, mostly I hope you'll find this at least as hilarious as it is terrifying, and maybe you'll share it with your friends.

The Grievance Studies Affair has never been more relevant.
The New Discourses Grievance Studies Affair portal is located at the link below. In it, you'll find information about each of us, our motivations, our original write-ups and analysis about the project, as well as every single paper and its peer-reviewed commentary, as available (not all papers made it to peer review).

I hope you will find it a useful and sharable resource about the plague of ideological rabies that has taken over our institutions.
newdiscourses.com/grievance-stud…
What became the Grievance Studies Affair began with a trial-balloon paper that @peterboghossian and I wrote in late 2016, hilariously titled "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct." It's one of the funniest things I've ever written, rivaled only by a couple of the later Grievance Studies Papers (YMMV).

It is not housed on the Grievance Studies Affair @NewDiscourses portal, but perhaps it should be, because it wasn't part of the Grievance Studies Affair properly. It might be its second most-famous contribution, however.

In the paper, Peter and I took inspiration from a real paper that had been published in the highest-ranking gender studies journal, Gender & Society, characterizing menstrual blood as a social construct. We argued that penises are not best thought of as male reproductive organs, in part because "pre-operative trans women" also have them (which was effectively repeated in the Supreme Court argumentation this week in the Skrmetti case). Instead, they should be thought of as social constructs that create toxic masculinity and rape culture and cause all the problems in the world, especially climate change.

This paper was ultimately accepted by means of a related but passed-over academic publishing scandal in a (likely) predatory journal called Cogent Social Sciences after a clear sham peer review process after being rejected and transferred from a masculinities journal called NORMA.

Because of the low quality of the journal and the one-off nature of the stunt, it was left ambiguous if Peter and I had proved any point about gender studies and related fields ("Grievance Studies" fields) at all. We were admonished to write more papers, target serious journals, and be more accurate in our claims, and we accepted this challenge happily.

"The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct" was published in Cogent Social Sciences on May 19, 2017, and by June 7 Peter and I had resolved to start the Grievance Studies Affair to do the job right.
skeptic.com/content/files/…Image
Read 55 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(