We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day Which is to say that I understand the importance of the causes that equal opportunity activists and progressive academics are ostensibly championing. But pursuit of greater fairness and equality cannot be allowed to interfere with dispassionate academic study. No matter how unwelcome the implications of a logical argument may be, it must be allowed to stand or fall on its merits not its desirability or political utility.
– Ted Hill
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
HERESY!!! SHUN THE UNBELIEVERS!!!
After all, The Narrative clearly states that facts, logic, and reason are all illegitimate tools of White Male Patriarchy and Oppression!
I wish I was joking, but tenured university professors are proclaiming this utter Bull Shite and are actively working to destroy not just the dissent, but all evidence of other opinions. Read the following and weep. https://quillette.com/2018/09/07/academic-activists-send-a-published-paper-down-the-memory-hole/
Same linked article George 😉
Wrong. There are no causes just pretexts to increase their power.
Following the link and reading it left me seething.
What do we do about this? Seriously, has anyone got any suggestions?
I understand the importance of the cause of truth – and truth’s importance to any cause: that which is not true, is not.
The logic of the censors’ behaviour says they do not themselves actually believe in their ostensible causes; they think dispassionate study will contradict, not confirm, what they demand we believe, so only censorship can maintain it. But I suspect the reality of their inner nature is to not to believe in objective truth – or not to believe it matters much. To them, whatever you can make people say they believe is true – or true enough for their purposes.
To paraphrase Adam Smith, “Any ‘scientific’ propaganda from the politically correct should be examined not only with the most cautious but the most suspicious attention.”
This story is absolutely appalling. By now I’m used to it in the cases of Climate Catastrophists, EnvironNutters, Feminist Goons, so forth … but … mathematicians !!!!
And in a sort of counter-utterance to Mizz Sith’s unspeakable “For the first time in my life I am proud of my country,” I say:
—-For the first time in my life I am bitterly, utterly ashamed of my alma mater.
Signed:
Julie, S.B., Mathematics, U. of Chicago ’73.
. . .
Sadly Ted Hall partly undercuts his own position – if one defines justice as “fairness” (Mommy State cutting up the “pie” into equal shares for the children) and holds such EQUALITY to be a good thing, then the argument is lost.
“But he stands for objective truth and scientific study and free debate” – SO HE DOES, but by conceding that justice is “fairness” (the “distribution” of things by some authority) and that EQUALITY is the moral objective, the left can simply turn round to Ted Hall and say…..
“To achieve equality, to achieve fairness, certain things must be taught and done – and you have already conceded that these are moral aims that you accept, so forget about pure academic study and free debate as such things are not compatible with these aims”.
And the left are CORRECT – objective academic study and free debate ARE incompatible with their aims. Which is one of the reasons that when asked “so you accept that justice is fairness?” one should reply NO – I REJECT THAT POSITION, I HOLD THAT JUSTICE IS TO EACH THEIR OWN. And when asked “so you accept that equality is a worthy moral aim?” one should reply NO – I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT EQUALITTY IS A WORTHY MORAL AIM, I HOLD THAT THAT TRYING TO ENFORCE EQUALITY OF INCOME OR WEALTH OR POSITION IS EVIL.
“But Paul that means total war with the left” – so it does, oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Practical example – the BBC and Sky News say “there are not many black and female Professors”, the correct response is “I AM NOT INTERESTED”.
If the left then take the next step (which, eventually, they always do) of saying (in some other form of words) “then we will use FORCE, the Sword of State, to have more green-with-purple-spots Professors who are also hermaphrodites” (or whatever group is “under represented”) the correct response is to use force straight back at them.
War means war – and if only one side is prepared to use force, then that side will always win. The left are always prepared to use force (the power of the state – and of “activists” such as “Antifa” who define as a “Fascist” anyone they feel like smashing over the head with a club) to get what they want – so force must be used to prevent this.
“But one can peacefully debate with the left” – can you? Try it and see what happens to you.
Short version – if the “pursuit of greater equality and fairness” is what is important to you, then forget about academic truth and free debate. For things are not compatible with scientific truth and freedom of inquiry and discussion.
One has to make a clear CHOICE – I think Ted Hall has made the correct choice to be AGAINST the “pursuit of greater equality and fairness” (for example a demand for a quota of people from the Planet Mongo in universities and “equal respect” for the culture of Ming the Merciless Emperor of Mongo, and no “hate speech” allowed against the Emperor Ming), but (if so) he should be blunter about it.
“Seriously, has anyone got any suggestions?”
There is no permanent solution, nor can there be without turning us into sheep, or worse.
Better the forever war with these malevolent fools than that.
There is no such thing as dispassionate academic study in the ‘social sciences’.
They are not science.
But . . .but . . . this was MATH.
(I understand that this was simply mathematics falling prey to the goons of the SJW social science people in the faculty lounge, but, still . . . The bastions are falling.)
Perry. 🤔🙄😔
In my defense, it was early and I was unsupervised.
The moment I hear someone talk about fairness and equality I know that white men are about to be screwed.
Asiatic(Japanese, Chinese, Korean) men too. And Jews. All naturally evil for a Marxist because they are an anathema to a society where animals should be all equal but…
Corroborating Paul Marks point: Merit-based admissions ‘reproduce inequality’
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11281
Funny to hear that from Mr Black…
Anyway, i disagree: The moment I hear someone talk about fairness and equality I know that **middle-class** white men are about to be screwed — by white men in the ruling class.
As for the article at the link, in a way it makes me sad, angry, and worried; but the silver lining is that i am happy not to have applied for positions at North-American universities.
Mathematics create apartheid.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/study-claims-gifted-math-classes-promote-academic-apartheid/
Or better knowledge creates apartheid, of course the professor is a member of an apartheidesque Marxist organization…
Actually, everyone gets screwed, although some earlier and some later than others.
Quite true. The ruling class (whatever the race, gender, and sexual identity/orientation) doesn’t get screwed until the revolution.
Yes bobby b – this was mathematics.
If objective truth is not allowed in mathematics – it is not going to be allowed in anywhere or anything.
That is why the forces of “fairness” of “Social Justice” need to be told to BURN IN HELL.