As I was listening to this podcast, I thought to myself, “Wow, these descriptions of our current social climate are highly articulate, accurate and on point.” But the more I nodded in agreement, the more I felt exhausted by the conversation. It then occurred to me that all this fantastic dialogue basically amounted to an overblown conversation about how people are behaving as badly as they ever have, just in new and increasingly nuanced ways.
I began wondering if much of this poor behavior is symptomatic of the need we all have for more time and space to exist as ourselves in this busy and cramped world of ours. If it helps to identify as a furry and file an HR complaint with your company because there aren’t litter boxes in the restrooms [!] then more power to you! If a man with a penis (because now this needs to be qualified) can feel better about his life by claiming he is a lesbian [!] and then have his claims legitimized by others [!!], way to go! If throwing somebody else under the bus for a minor social gaffe helps prevent your own character from ever being drawn into question, hell yeah—go for it!
The more things change, the more they stay the same. There is a certain kind of person right now who has more easily adapted to society’s current round of shuffled priorities: this person masks his or her own poor behaviors by going on the offensive and preemptively attacking everyone else for their own mistakes and shortcomings.
American philosopher Peter Boghossian and mathematician James Lindsay expose how non-STEM academia publishes papers in academic journals where conclusions are made first and then data is invented to support and advance progressive narratives.
Yesterday, UC Berkeley posted a news article on its Berkeley News website titled Berkeley Law dean: I signed letter against Kavanaugh ‘without hesitation’ . This occurred around the same time that the FBI reported that it had failed to substantiate claims of sexual assault/misconduct made against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, claims which were an attempt to interfere with and possibly derail his appointment to a lifetime seat on the supreme court.
It’s hard to see how this is news. In fact, the only thing that’s even remotely remarkable about it is that somebody felt like this was news. A UC Berkeley law dean publicly stating her opposition to a republican supreme court appointee is like a stoner proclaiming to the world his profound affinity for Krispy Kreme donuts —it’s just a declaration of the obvious and is silly and unnecessary.
It would be like if I posted a press release on ChadSpace with any of the following headlines:
Blogger Chad Philip Johnson finally updates site after almost two full months of preoccupation
Engineer at Anacronist Software espouses Linux and Open Source technologies
General Manager of Redding Ringtails announces team will play baseball and have fun next season
Progressive music aficionado Chad Philip Johnson buys new album “The Wake” by heavy metal band Voivod, hurts neck
You know what would be news? If a UC Berkeley law dean publicly stated her support for a republican supreme court judge nominee (and to be fair, let’s say it’s one with a less questionable history of hard drinking and reckless partying). It is impossible that this would ever happen though. Or if it somehow did happen, this make-believe person would certainly not be working at the university for much longer.