I can see only one reason to rouse myself into the state of outrage various people are prodding me to flare up into. It's ironic, but I think the failure to get outraged can be interpreted as evidence that you are a white supremacist. But I'm not going to perform in the theater of outrage just because I can see why failure to emote makes me look like I'm too secure in my whiteness, too sure of the strength and power of white people to feel hurt by the fuck-white-people taunts— as if the white people are elephants and the fuck-white-people tweets are from tiny little birds.
Animals!!!
Posts
129 comments:
Nobody is outraged by Jeong's tweets. They are frustrated and angered by the shameless double standards. The Times has gotten so habituated in its hypocrisy that it no longer bothers to hide it.
People also recognize that Trump's critics are one of his greatest assets. The Times's hiring of Jeong should count as a contribution to the Republican Party.
Walter Duranty would understand.
This is just the Times setting our it's brand.
Althouse is in tag-mania thralls again, what with this Jeong stuff.
It don't look secure and confident to me: (to me) looks wild and loose, afraid of moderating encumberences.
1) Outlaw all affirmative action programs.
2) Make sure that the black and Hispanic communities understand that this is in response to Sara Jeong and the New York Times.
3) Fill the popcorn popper, turn it on, and enjoy the show.
What tim maguire said.
I'm not outraged at all by the silly woman's tweets. But I get the anger that people feel towards the media double-standard.
I'll repeat what I just posted in the other comment thread: Hiring someone who, based on her twitter feed, gives the appearance of being a white-hating racist will cement the idea that the left-leaning media hates white America. The hatred and anger the media receive from this is not something they can blame on President Trump. They are bringing it on themselves.
I believe in the Occam’s Razor of morality: the simplest outrage is the correct one. The fact that we no longer sense outrage at such behavior as Jeong’s is a testament to the success the Left has had in rewiring the American mind.
What Tim Maguire said
Your little blue birds are obviously male and female. Disgustingly heteronormative.
And the male is chasing the female.
When Obama spoke of transforming the United States, he meant replacing Judeo-Christian culture with something he preferred. Many people rightly interpreted his goal of transformation to be of a piece with Reverend Wright. After all, why would one replace and transform what one holds dear?
The NYT is not breaking new ground.
Tim nails it in comment 1.
Hey, give her a break. Over the centuries it’s been tough for Koreans.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/02/world/asia/02race.html
(PS Has anyone else run into problems recent embedding a link in a comment.)
What I don't get about this woman is how she could think that her tweets were even marginally okay to publish to the entire world?
Flip it. What if Paul Krugman or Frank Bruni tweeted, "Fuck young South Korean women" or "I enjoy jerking Asian minorities around?"
Her worldview was such that she felt her tweets were perfectly okay and justified. And the NYT agrees with her.
This is bad for America. Tribal warfare coming.
I do not think, whenever I look upon, or think of, the naked human body, "How right it is that the parts and features of the body are all just where they are!" I may of course from time to time be struck by this fact. I may also from time to time be struck not by the rightness but by the dumb fortune, or irony, of certain placements of the parts and features of the body, as Yeats was, for example, by love's having pitced its mansion in the place of excrement. This anatomical fact is something Freud found a natural, incorrigible limitation upon the purity or satisfaction of desire. (It is a fact he emphasized from almost before the beginning. Cf. The Origins of Psychoanalysis, p. 147) Certainly any changes I can dream of in the arrangement strike me as quite insane. It is so human a fortune. Not the fact of it is so humsn; the fact is shared by other animals. What is so human is that we share the fact with other animals, that animals are also our others. That we are animals. Being struck by this is someting one might call "seeing us as human." It is a feeling of wonder.
Stanley Cavell, The Claim of Reason p.411
,
Birkel said:
The NYT is not breaking new ground.
Is that really true?
It's not often you see a business knowingly hire and then defend an employee who hates just about every one of its customers.
True, the Times has gathered unto itself a commentariat that gratifies the previously held opinions of its readers every day of the week. But is it launching itself into brave new territory here -- sackcloth and ashes to be distributed to white and especially male employees at company events, say -- or this a death wish?
Let you enemies speak.
You're better off knowing what they really think.
I have no problem with the NYT hiring her and not firing her. But, I wonder why the famous "macaca" moment was such a bad thing now that we know if someone gets pestered they're allowed to say racist things.
Phil 3:14: "Hey, give her a break. Over the centuries it’s been tough for Koreans."
.....because "Truuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmpp!"
"What I don't get about this woman is how she could think that her tweets were even marginally okay to publish to the entire world?"
-- She was right though, and they were. That's why she still has a job.
It took 15 minutes, but I finally figured out why this post title was familiar.
But ya are Blanche. Ya are! (Link)
Sidenote: On what would happen to Krugman? A first-pass answer is a public apology followed by a Mass Forgetting.
The NYT's dog-eating pet gook believed the fake rape stories:
1
2
Melissa Chen says about the NYT's bogus claim that "being a young Asian woman" caused "harassment":
"The fact of being a "young Asian woman" isn't what made Sarah Jeong a target of online harassment.
I don't buy this appeal to identity.
This is about reciprocal outrage: if you are nasty and treat people or any class of people with contempt, expect nastiness in return."
Not sure if she is more of an embarrassment to HLS or the NY Times; also not sure I have seen NY Times' explanation for the F the police and police are all assholes strain of tweets from this spoiled, juvenile, spiteful twerp. Tim's correct of course. Just a gift to Trump. And as Tim Pool notes, she is a gift to the red pill movement.
One of the things that has been a benefit to our society is that white people have not allowed their race to define their politics and their outlook on life.
The mainstreaming of Intersectionality will change that.
Millions of white heterosexual males are being told that their skin color and how they prefer to derive sexual pleasure (both of which are uncontrollable characteristics) should be the central organizing principles of their lives.
When that though takes hold I do not think the props will like the results.
"Not sure if she is more of an embarrassment to HLS or the NY Times;"
-- The NYT. She paid HLS to go there, so HLS can just be pretty mercenary and say: "Whatever." The NYT is paying her to come there.
"One of the things that has been a benefit to our society is that white people have not allowed their race to define their politics and their outlook on life."
-- Well, except for the KKK.
The 2 bird images are the old logo and the new logo. Here's an article about the change, which happened in 2012.
""Our new bird grows out of love for ornithology, design within creative constraints, and simple geometry," writes Twitter's creative director Doug Bowman in a blog post. "This bird is crafted purely from three sets of overlapping circles — similar to how your networks, interests and ideas connect and intersect with peers and friends.... Whether soaring high above the earth to take in a broad view, or flocking with other birds to achieve a common purpose, a bird in flight is the ultimate representation of freedom, hope and limitless possibility.""
And now I know the bird has a name: Larry!
So by hiring a racial bigot, the white folks who run the NYT show how secure they are in their position— thus demonstrating their belief in white supremacy. I like that logic.
(“So if she weighs the same as a duck . . Then she’s made of wood. . and therefore. . A Witch!”)
I’ve detected a new phase in the MeToo Wars: Resistance. Resistance to accepting the mob’s verdict, that is. Les Moonves is Resisting. In Indiana, Attorney Genrral Curtis Shill is resisting. Al Frankenstein is wishing he had resisted.
Ms. Jeong’s and her new employers the NYT are learning from this. While I find her tweets and the defense of them idiotic and repugnant, I cheer them in resisting mob justice. It’s time for due process to return.
"What I don't get about this woman is how she could think that her tweets were even marginally okay to publish to the entire world?"
Because she is surrounded by people who think the same way, is my guess. This guy, for example. Or this person. Or these people.
Damn, I wish I had previewed my comment above. Al Frankenstein? Curtis Shill? Damn you, auto-correct, to hell.
I'm not outraged (it's far too common a sentiment) but I entirely understand the reason for outrage. It's an oppressor move by Jeong. She's an oppressor. She has power and privilege, everything in life has given her voice and power. How does she use it?
Now the problem is that some white people, like NY Times readers and retired professors, really do have privilege and comfort and security. They, like Jeong, have a good, safe life, so her comments are entirely nonthreatening, seen as a corrective to rhetoric of past eras.
But people really don't exist as neatly into racial categories, and so her rhetoric is an oppressor move because there are many people, of every race, who are struggling to make it through the day and the week. They lack real privilege but are then weighted down with the rhetorical triumphalism of Jeong. The oppressors make the oppressed bear the weight for the sins of the oppressors. Jeong plays her part well, saying that which the elites can only whisper, doing the bidding of continued oppressing for the sake of her own fame, advancement, and power.
Comment #1 and #2 nailed it. In the Age of Trump, the NYT has gone full retard. They don't even bother to pretend.
Walter Duranty stood on the bodies of over 3 million Ukrainians starved to death, and saw the glory of Stalins new society. Won a Pulitzer too.
NYT is doing the heavy lifting when it comes to the #walkaway movement.
Long long way from their bubble to where most of us live. Both the NYT and WaPo are held up by billionaires, so I don't think they care about the income, as much as they care about publishing good propaganda.
I'm not outraged, except for the double-standard and hypocrisy. I feel sorry for the Times' readers who are funding this propaganda outlet.
The NYT published David Brooks' article calling various people wolves.
======
Donald Trump Is Not Playing by Your Rules
by David Brooks
.... Those who lost faith in this order began to elect wolves in order to destroy it. The wolves — whether Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orban, Rodrigo Duterte, Recep Tayyip Erdogan or any of the others — don’t so much have shared ideology as a shared mentality. ....
Wolves perceive the world as a war of all against all and seek to create the world in which wolves thrive, which is a world without agreed-upon rules, without restraining institutions, norms and etiquette.
=====
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/opinion/g7-trump-north-korea-kim-jong-un-foreign-policy.html
Tribal warfare coming.
The Lefties started the war at least a decade ago. Up to now, the White population has basically ignored it. That will not go on forever.
I think it will be quite illuminating for most white people to have it clearly explained why hating them is perfectly reasonable behavior. Therefore I can only see this as a positive development.
Woman good, man bad.
"of color good", white bad.
LBQT??? good, straight (sorry, cis normative) bad.
It's all so easy to understand.
The only complicating factor is the whites applying the color test. Then you have to change it slightly:
Woke (and by "woke" I mean ME!) white good, all you hillbilly/other whites bad.
It's gotten so universal my reaction tends more to chuckling than anger.
"I can see only one reason to rouse myself into the state of outrage"
I can think of another: fake outrage just like progs, take everything as a tool in the struggle, throw their BS right back at them, make them squirm just a little, if only to expose them for the scum they are--while we can.
Of course, it depends on what the meaning of "state of outrage" is.
And since, as conservatives, we have some historical awareness--you know, like, of stuff that happened in Korea in the 50s, or in North Korea the day before yesterday--it is a little harder for us to fake it.
The real danger in people like Jeong continually telling white people that they are awful, dangerous and IN danger of being attacked by people like Jeong.....is that we will accept this labeling.
I am awful? Ok. This gives me license to act in awful ways.
Dangerous? Fine. Check THIS out if you want danger.
IN danger? Coming to get us? Thanks. Forewarned IS forearmed. We are getting ready.
Don't poke the whitesnake :-D
@Phil : (PS Has anyone else run into problems recent embedding a link in a comment.)
You have to delete the "https://" and just use "www." when you create a link. Then it should work.
As to the post- I agree it's the double standard that is the root of the anger. Myself, I'm past caring. I don't pay attention to the MSM any longer.
Anyone remember Frank Fanon. Me, I barely do, but I think his philosophy went something like this: If the oppressed said something taunting or mocking to the oppressors, the mask of civility would drop and the oppressors would reveal their true ugliness and the brute power that keeps society civil........Maybe she's trying to Fanonize us. But here's the problem, I have zero, zip, nada negative feelings about young Asian women. I suppose you could translate my benign feelings into sexism, but who on God's green earth is prejudiced against young Asian women. She really has to work it to generate racial prejudice....,..It's as a daughter that she truly sucks. Her parents were Korean immigrants and evangelical Christians. They must be dutiful parents and good people. She mocks their faith and seems totally ungrateful for the sacrifices they made to advance her life and education.
But I'm not going to perform in the theater of outrage just because I can see why failure to emote makes me look like I'm too secure in my whiteness, too sure of the strength and power of white people to feel hurt by the fuck-white-people taunts— as if the white people are elephants and the fuck-white-people tweets are from tiny little birds.
That's the way I'd bet, if I had to bet about what's going on in your inner life. The fact that you tend to take ginned-up race-related "outrages" seriously, at face-value, worthy of attention and respect, whenever it's not whites being "outraged", suggests that it's a reasonable speculation. In general I think what you write above is a fairly accurate description of the mindset of a certain class of (clueless) white people.
Btw, who's "hurt" by fuck-white-people taunts? I certainly have a negative, serious response to them, because I don't share the standard "educated white person's" parochialism and delusions about human nature, but it's an adult response. That you insist on thinking about it within so jejune a frame tells us something about your own unseriousness, but not much about what's motivating the "outraged".
Had an episode of HBO’s animated series “Animals” on TV while I cooked a late dinner last night.
Found myself laughing as the voice overs were quite funny. Want to actually sit down and watch some episodes.
The HBO show on after that named “Random Acts of Flyness” was probably the most divisive and racist show I’ve ever seen.
A constant anti-white drumbeat that probably appeals more to white HBO executives (like those at the NYT) than any actual racial minority.
In that way a perverse minstral show of sorts.
The Twitter logo has a name. Didn’t know that. Wonder if they pay Larry Bird any royalties. Greatest white basketball player ever. And that’s an achievement that will never be broken.
I wonder if she makes common cause with Japanese Americans to fight against white oppression?
JAORE:
You left one out:
Judeo-Christian culture - bad.
Non Judeo-Christian 3rd world shithole culture - good.
"The Twitter logo has a name. Didn’t know that. Wonder if they pay Larry Bird any royalties. Greatest white basketball player ever. And that’s an achievement that will never be broken."
Yeah, that must be the origin of the name. I just guessed that there was someone at the company named Larry. But you must be right. I do think the newer logo looks female, though.
I'm not outrages by Jeong. I am finding the whole thing massively entertaining.
Remember "Alice in Wonderland?"
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”
The Left redefined the word "racism" to make it mean exactly what they chose it to mean. They declared that non-whites expressing anti-white hatred could not be guilty of racism because whites control the power structure of the West. Academics have been preaching this drivel for decades. Jeong thought it was acceptable to tweet what she tweeted because the sentiments expressed never bothered anybody at Berkeley or Harvard - in fact, she was applauded and praised for them. Now she (and the NY Times) are discovering that the world outside their sheltered little bubbles does not accept their redefinition of the word.
Now the left's Humpty Dumpties are finally being called out - and it's great fun to watch them sputter and howl as they realize that they're not dealing with a huge classroom of compliant undergrads.
It's also quite entertaining to read her tweets bashing her present employer. The NY Times leadership - who consider themselves the smartest Thought Leaders on the planet - have put themselves in a hell of a bind, and it's glorious to watch. They couldn't fire her because admitting that she is an ugly racist would have contradicted their own worldview, so now they have to deal with this nasty little pit bull and the blow to their own reputation.
@DBQ: "we will accept this labeling"
This gets at the real dilemma for white conservatives, perhaps for whites generally.
Of course, in principle we reject the politicization and racialization of everything, we favor color-blind equal justice under law, we want all races to flourish in a free society, and we despise the endless tribalization progs are using to transvalue our values and seize power.
But we have been told that we practice white supremacy, that color-blindness is racism, that our political positions stem from racial rage, and that our opposition to anything doesn't count: we must be canceled.
Of course, we could take the comfortable above-it-all Althouse position of not participating in the "theater." But the theater is invading our reality, and the prog script is taking over. Indifferent equanimity is nice for rich retirees, not so nice for people who think about the future of their families and country.
But giving in to prog aggression means falling into a trap and giving up principle. It is the fundamental evil of prog hegemony, that to beat them we must become like them. If "beating" still has any meaning.
This sort of thing matters - not directly in any individual case. Its like individual temperature readings, or a single thunderstorm, in attempts to make sense of climate.
The overall result is visible though. The best places to see it aren't on twitter or even the NYT editorials, but in US K-12 and colleges. Gramsci's hegemony is real.
And it does cause damage. It is designed to suppress ambition and enterprise and above all resistance among the targets of the barrage.
The principal targets are children.
Border collie she don't care.
Of course, we could take the comfortable above-it-all Althouse position of not participating in the "theater." But the theater is invading our reality, and the prog script is taking over. Indifferent equanimity is nice for rich retirees, not so nice for people who think about the future of their families and country.
I wonder about this too. How do I prepare my children ~ who have been thus far raised as I was, to be color-blind ~ to cope with this new turn of the screw in which their race is being shoved in their face as a negative everywhere they turn?
Okay, I'll admit it. I am outraged. It'll pass. Already has, pretty much. But I won't forget. The end result is that I have moved further toward a place she, and people like her, really don't want me to go.
The best places to see it aren't on twitter or even the NYT editorials, but in US K-12 and colleges
On her college tours at Arizona schools last week, my daughter was treated to sermonettes about 'diversity' and 'abolish ICE.'
Crazy Jane:
I am suggesting that President Obama was just and only more clever than Sarah Jeong in his couching of anti-white-culture. But his position could also be explained as anti-white.
The reference to his own grandmother was a tell. Michelle Obama's comments dripped with the same feelings as Sarah Jeong's. And the Reverend Wright made his feelings relatively explicit -- MSM cover-up notwithstanding.
...
I'm suggesting that the Sarah Jeong comments are typical of political opponents who see middle class American voters as the impediment to their exercise of political power. I'm not even sure it qualifies as racism, per se, so much as an exercise in raw political power. Imagine that a person is so powerful that they can excoriate an entire class of people and get away with it!! Imagine how liberating it must be to throw off the white, middle class constraints of decorum in pursuit of power!
And why not act this way? There is no punishment for Sarah Jeong within her bubble. Hers is a route to career success, at present.
...
And, yes. I am alluding to the Leftist Collectivists' tendency to act like fascists. They believe they are on the side of good and right, fighting against - shall we say? -- under-men?
exiled: The NY Times leadership - who consider themselves the smartest Thought Leaders on the planet - have put themselves in a hell of a bind, and it's glorious to watch. They couldn't fire her because admitting that she is an ugly racist would have contradicted their own worldview, so now they have to deal with this nasty little pit bull and the blow to their own reputation.
I don't think the NYT leadership looks at it this way at all. People err in projecting their own view of "oh the hypocrisy!" onto them. They obviously don't think that she's a "nasty little pit bull", they think she's talented and fine and noble and a put-upon victim of white racists. Their reputation? Their reputation is intact among people who matter, and that they may be in financial straits is an indictment of their ignorant, bigoted critics, not their fine noble selves.
IOW, if the first million instances of pointing out the hypocrisy, bad faith, and shoddy thinking of the left didn't faze 'em, why does anybody think that the million -and-oneth is going to have any effect on them at all? They're the elect, they possess the Truth, and anything that suggests an error in their map of the world must be a falsehood, and rightly just ignored.
This is obvious from a quick survey of the prog defense of Jeong.
A-D,AB
People who righteously believe they are on the side of good, right, and true are to be feared and treated at arm's length. They're dangerous.
They're not dangerous in and of themselves (I'd wager every penny I have that if it came to fisticuffs between me and Hitler, I would have punched, kicked, broken, or choked him to death.) but they can motivate others to act dangerously.
The most dangerous people are those who believe their own press clippings while their fellow travelers control the newspapers.
The best places to see it aren't on twitter or even the NYT editorials, but in US K-12 and colleges
On her college tours at Arizona schools last week, my daughter was treated to sermonettes about 'diversity' and 'abolish ICE.'
My youngest daughter, at U of A ten years ago, was taught that "The Silent Majority" was made up of white people who refused to accept the 1964 Civil Rights Law. That was in "US History Since 1877." In her finals study guide. Once she got into her major it was OK.
She was also taught that white settlers in the West were taught how to farm by the Indians. The Plains Indians, of course were hunter gatherers, except Zuni.
This should not be allowed to pass. Other people have had their lives and livelihoods destroyed for far less. I think the New York Times, as the leading news source of Progressivism and the official media outlet of the deep state should be pressed on this relentlessly. As should Harvard Law School. Make those sonsabitches explain their new racial code in detail and insist it cover all permutations.
Oso Negro,
They have explained it.
You are the other and unworthy. They occupy full value as human beings and you, less so.
I'm not sure how that is unclear at this late stage.
M Jordan said...
Damn, I wish I had previewed my comment above. Al Frankenstein? Curtis Shill? Damn you, auto-correct, to hell.
Yeah, but how do you explain Attorney Genrral?
Hehe!
Sebastian: Of course, we could take the comfortable above-it-all Althouse position of not participating in the "theater." But the theater is invading our reality, and the prog script is taking over. Indifferent equanimity is nice for rich retirees, not so nice for people who think about the future of their families and country.
But giving in to prog aggression means falling into a trap and giving up principle.
If your "principles" have led you to a place where you stand in fretful passive indecision while your children are being be beaten down - spiritually and even physically - then you made an error at some point in deriving your principles. There's a fundamental flaw in there somewhere. No valid system of morality requires sacrificing your children to the projects of misguided and/or immoral people.
It is the fundamental evil of prog hegemony, that to beat them we must become like them. If "beating" still has any meaning.
I think not letting them abuse your children and burn down and salt the earth of your culture is a pretty damned unambiguously meaningful way of "beating" them. I fail to see how it's "becoming like them" to protect your children from other people's pernicious racism. My recognition that "non-racism" can't work if only one player isn't racist doesn't make me a prog. I would suggest that anyone who thinks that "we have to become like 'em to beat 'em" has already unknowingly absorbed and accepted a lot of progressive premises.
"They obviously don't think that she's a "nasty little pit bull", they think she's talented and fine and noble and a put-upon victim of white racists."
Angle-Dyne, I agree that they are perfectly fine with the anti-white and anti-cop tweets. It's the anti-NY Times tweets that I was referring to. I mean, it's one thing to say whites should be "cancelled" and cheer on murderers of cops, but isn't this blasphemy:
sarah jeong @sarahjeong
NYT Opinion = Thought Catalog for Baby Boomers
5:05 PM - Jun 17, 2015
and:
Hannah Rosin shatters ceiling by proving women writers can be as hackish as Tom Friedman, too
11:16 AM - Sep 11, 2013
She really can't stand Friedman.
I happen to agree with her assessment of the NY Times and its' writers. But I suspect Friedman, Brooks, Kristof, Rosin and Krugman do not. What sort of simpletons hire a person who trashes their product and despises their big-name "talent" to sit on their editorial board?
@ Birkel - yeah, I guess the NYT did anyone. Boggles the mind. Increases likelihood of civil conflict.
I dont know who this crazy dragon lady is, but I stand for 2 propositions:
1. You should be able to express opinions, even off-color, stupid opinions on Twitter
2. You should not be fired for any such opinions - even if they are stupid opinions.
The larger point is that the modern Left is filled with racial hucksters who believe in the American Experiment. They want more "people of color", more socialism, much less Christianity, more women in power, more bisexuality and gender bending.
It's actually kinda refreshing to have some ditz clearly express what they are thinking.
Birkel said:
" ... political opponents who see middle class American voters as the impediment to their exercise of political power. I'm not even sure it qualifies as racism, per se, so much as an exercise in raw political power."
I sorta get this, but this woman was educated at Berkeley and Harvard Law. The only way she could be more elite would have been if she been admitted the law school at Yale. She's won the meritocracy marathon and has more influence/power than anyone I know. Why so angry?
And as for the NYT, what's the upside in telling most of your subscribers that they are bad because of their skin color? The company's largest shareholder, Carlos Slim, didn't get to be a billionaire by being a jerk -- he did it the normal way, with a government-protected monopoly. If he'd been raised in Russia, he'd be an oligarch with a 200-foot yacht and billions stashed in bolt-holes around the world.
The definitions of winners and losers in our country are getting so crazy that I can't keep up.
I would hate Sarah Jeong-un, or whatever she's called, but she's real purty, even when she's appropriating white people hair.
I mean, it's one thing for Sarah Jeong to hate white people, because we, the enlightened people of pallor at the NY Times, recognize that she's talking about those subhuman deplorables in flyover country and we hate them too and want them to die. But....wait? She hates Friedman and Krugman and Rosin? She hates US? Doesn't she get that we are the good white people, the tolerant, the enlightened, the educated? And we hired her?
Well, this will certainly make the next Festivus party awkward.
Ann, you fail to take into consideration the power of rhetoric. There are more than a few people out there who would like nothing better than to see whites and their "cherished" Western Civilization wiped from the face of the earth. It is not unreasonable to believe that some of these people, already convinced that all Caucasians are nothing but vermin, will be so taken by this racist woman's rants that they will go out and randomly begin to execute white people. As one of your commentators pointed out, she is talking about your children and your grandchildren.
"The NYT's dog-eating pet gook believed the fake rape stories:"
Fake it till you rape it.
As this has dragged on longer, (what is this day 3 of this self inflicted wound by NYT?) I am enjoying the contradictions and contortions the left needs to go through to justify this minority hire. I think it's fantastic and hope they continue this self destructive path. They are showing who they really are for those of us in fly over country that were former democrats, finally waking up like my brother in-law. It's really not o.k to be racist against white people and its being duly noted. This will not help democrats in the areas of the country they really need to be competitive in to take back the house. And you have to know Trump and his allies will keep picking at this self inflicted wound at every opportunity. Nice job Brownie!
exiled: Angle-Dyne, I agree that they are perfectly fine with the anti-white and anti-cop tweets. It's the anti-NY Times tweets that I was referring to. I mean, it's one thing to say whites should be "cancelled" and cheer on murderers of cops, but isn't this blasphemy:
I have faith in their powers of rationalization. As long as she doesn't materially affect the status or remuneration of the likes of Friedman, Brooks, Kristof, Rosin, and Krugman (and she won't), they'll be happy to tolerate and justify her personal criticism. In fact, they'll pat themselves on the back for being so woke and understanding and validating of her anguished oppressed victim's totally valid anguish.
They're not actually the Privileged Whites against which she rages. The Privileged Whites are "out there". But they understand her rage, and why she confuses them with the real PWs. They really have the same enemy and are fighting the same fight. She'll come to understood, too, the dear. You'll see.
I'm not outraged. It's pretty obvious that the NYT thinks this way. I'm glad it's now out in the open for everyone to see. What I can't understand is how so many people can look at the example of Yugoslavia and want to go down that path.
1. You should be able to express opinions, even off-color, stupid opinions on Twitter
2. You should not be fired for any such opinions - even if they are stupid opinions.
Ok for 1, but I would not want to hire someone for a high-level job who had revealed herself to be a complete fool. And if she did that after being hired, she'd be gone in a New York minute for the PR damage.
As for outrage, agreed that it's for the double standard, but also for further evidence that colleges are doing the complete opposite of what they ought to be doing.
I have not looked to see if David Brooks (who I still somewhat like and respect) has commented on this yet. But if you can define racism to expressly exclude expressing hatred of a group in power and control by a less powerful tribe, then you are basically saying its OK to espouse pure anti-Semitic rhetoric and hatred if you are AA or Muslim. And, indeed, I think that's where the left is now, albeit not openly (they keep coming up with excuses for Ellison, Sarsour etc.). Is Brooks on board with all that?
Where others see a loud mouthed bigot I sense opportunity to re define the NYT. And they so have it coming.
There’s no reason to get upset about another silly woman making a name for herself by dumping on things white, male or cop. She’s just a face in the cretinous crowd to normals.
It is troubling that the mediaswine and their disciples have found her misbehavior worthy of approbation. As for the NYT: What else is new?
The mediaswine think they are raceless and sexless, just as they think they are honest and objective. They are wrong on all counts.
They ARE enemies of the people.
As I understand it, the defense that Jeong and the NYT jointly are offering is that her utterances were satirical. She was writing in a parody of what she takes to be the style of white racists, and she does not actually hold those views, or feel those emotions.
I am prepared to believe that is probably true, regarding white people. Given her background, I am fairly certain that most of her best friends are white people, and she gets along very well with the white people she knows. The stuff about the cops is another matter, but she probably doesn't know any cops. And the attacks on the overpaid, under-talented, antiquated phone-it-in blowhards at the NYT are actually hilarious. Those poor bastards are reading the Times' defense of Jeong and thinking, "So, what am I, chopped liver?". The writing is on the wall, assholes. Carlos likes his writers young and cheap, not old and boring.
Such indignation! Oh, what a miserable existence to have low self esteem while living in unprecedented luxury and comfort. You people lounge on the shoulders of giants and complain about how tough life is for you poor oppressed deplorables who are intimidated by some foolish, childish Asian chick.
Beyond pathetic and explains the psychological void that Trump fills with vomit and hatred. You cowards suffer a thousand deaths every day... the horror the horror
Re "white folks who run the NYT", let's get real. (((Gregg Sulzberger))) , (((Joseph Kahn))), (((Rebecca Blumenstein))), (((Clifford Levy))), (((James Bennett)), (((Michael Slackman))), (((Jake Silverstein))), and (((Pamela Paul)) may be white, or whitish, but are probably not overly concerned with protecting the goy polloi.
I would love to read what Maureen Dowd thinks about Jeong. How do you like your new colleague, Maureen? She yellow enough for you? And are you yellow enough for her? And what does little Gail Collins think about her? Did you see how she stuck it to those old white people, Gail? Really warms those cockles, doesn't it. Hey, she didn't say anything about old, white bitches, now did she? So don't take it personal. She's not talking about you, just everyone you know. Yessiree, it's a bright new day here at the NYT. Youth will be served.
You people
Which people, exactly? Can you clarify?
Howard, Howard
You people lounge on the shoulders of giants and complain about how tough life is for you poor oppressed deplorables who are intimidated by some foolish, childish Asian chick.
We are the giants, Howard. And our ancestors who built this country that all these immigrants are fighting to get into.
Do you think they could do as well ? If they could, why are they here ?
The foolish, childish Asian chick is just one sample out of 20million or so exactly like her - most of them white. This Asian chick isn't that way because she's Asian, its because she has been taught to be that way by white people.
Out of these 20 million or so, the largest number are entirely responsible for teaching your children, or creating media for them.
Which you would know if you've recently had kids in school.
Your way out of this is to first destroy the system that indoctrinated this woman.
Burn down your universities. That should be your first priority.
"you poor oppressed deplorables who are intimidated by some foolish, childish Asian chick."
"intimidated"? You misspelled "amused."
What I don't get about this woman is how she could think that her tweets were even marginally okay to publish to the entire world?
How could she not think it was OK?
This is who they are.
While I find her tweets and the defense of them idiotic and repugnant, I cheer them in resisting mob justice. It’s time for due process to return.
This is where you're mistaken. Due process won't be applied uniformly. We already know this.
Nope. The only way this shit stops is if the left is bludgeoned by the same rules they wish to impose upon the rest of us. And not a minute before.
Howard: You people lounge on the shoulders of giants and complain about how tough life is for you poor oppressed deplorables who are intimidated by some foolish, childish Asian chick.
Disease-carrying mosquitos are a serious public health menace, but it would be stupid to describe people who are aware of this as being "intimidated" by mosquitos.
But I guess it makes some kind of sense when you see that some people's grasp of the issue is the sociological equivalent of pre-germ theory understanding of infectious disease.
I feel contempt, not outrage.
It’s the obvious double standards that are infuriating, not her weak taunts. For instance, today I learned that you can be on the editorial board of the New York Times and still be too disconnected from the power structure to be honestly termed a racist.
The taunts are nothing, but the charges if racism, when the definition has no fixed meaning, are deadly serious. Just ask Rosanne.
"As I understand it, the defense that Jeong and the NYT jointly are offering is that her utterances were satirical."
Sorry, not buying that. She may not genuinely deep down believe what she tweeted literally, but that doesn't make it satire. Listen to her here, for example. She means what she says.
buwaya said...
"Burn down your universities. That should be your first priority."
As you have no doubt noticed, universities tend to be extremely non-flammable. I think they saw us coming. The universities are the bones of our civilization, and this cancer is deeply lodged in the marrow. It is not clear how we can eliminate it, without killing the patient, but you are correct that it is the highest priority. We are having a degree of success destroying the lying media. It seems we need to attack their sources of funding.
Finally, something everybody can agree with @sarahjeong about!
Your way out of this is to first destroy the system that indoctrinated this woman.
Burn down your universities. That should be your first priority.
They are imploding on their own. Student debt will kill them off. Already the small liberal arts colleges like Oberlin are closing.
Next will come state colleges like U of Missouri, which is down 25%.
CalTech and MIT will be fine. Purdue is seeing the inroads of the looney left in their "Engineering Education" school that is Social Justice pretending to be science
the world's first engineering education doctoral program, for students who wish to pursue rigorous research in how engineering is best taught, learned, and practiced.
"Studies" courses come to STEM.
It seems we need to attack their sources of funding.
This is always an effective strategy for those who can't make their own fire.
buwaya: Burn down your universities. That should be your first priority.
There's a lot of useful physical plant there that it would be a shame to waste. Looks like a job for a neutron bomb.
What’s funny is Blacks consider her White.
"It is not clear how we can eliminate it, without killing the patient, but you are correct that it is the highest priority."
Start new ones. Tap into the over-production of PhDs, there's a crazy amount of adjuncts out there who need full time positions. Create contexts of ideological diversity, keep the student-teacher ratio low, and the administrator/staff to a minimum. Charge less tuition accordingly.
It'd take a crazy amount of money to get this going but there's a lot of people who would help fund something like this more than give to their bloated alma maters.
Don't fight the cancer, don't burn them down, just bypass them with competing structures that aren't dependent on the status quo.
Already the small liberal arts colleges like Oberlin are closing.
I had assumed it was the lack of alumni donations, not student debt.
I had assumed it was the lack of alumni donations, not student debt.
I think students and parents are deciding what Oberlin sells is not worth the price.
The state colleges are looking at legislators who are unhappy. That is what happened to Missouri.
buwaya: Burn down your universities. That should be your first priority.
There's a lot of useful physical plant there that it would be a shame to waste. Looks like a job for a neutron bomb.
Charter schools are growing rapidly in Arizona. The TUSD was trying to sell a vacant school to a developer so the charter school can't buy it.
I don't know if they found a buyer. Tucson teachers are on a suicide mission called "Red For Ed."
They were picketing and closed down the schools before the end of the school year in May to protest.
They got a 20% pay raise but it wasn't enough.
Everybody I know in Tucson sends their kids to private or charter schools.
All:
You cannot understand the situation until you accept the Leftist Collectivists believe, WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE, that they are on the side of angels. As such, they are right in a way that allows themselves great latitude to abuse the other. If they destroy an entire city and turn enemies to pillars of salt, they do so with a clear conscience. There is no remorse when they destroy the other.
They need no reason to punch Hitler because they have metaphysical permission. Theirs is righteous. Yours is contemptible.
Deplorable seas not a punchline. It was an accurate description of their innermost feelings.
Accept this and much will be clear.
Maybe this will some how get people to see what a big scam all these charges of "Racism" and "White Supremacist" are.
The Left has dropped the Mask. Racism is ok, if its against white people because blah, blah, blah. But "white racism" is the worst thing ever. Oh, and set asides and quotas are OK, as long as the only people hurt are Asians (sometimes) and White Men.
The fact that so many well-to-do whites think this is OK, makes me think this is just "Class Warfare" dressed up. Certainly, its hard to take Wall Street/Democrat's love of "the poor immigrants" as anything but that.
rcocean has declined my invitation to reality.
Michael K: The state colleges are looking at legislators who are unhappy. That is what happened to Missouri.
Not sure when the original land-grant state universities started to turn away from the purpose they were established for - providing affordable higher education for the local population - and decided that they were ends in themselves. That is, that they existed to provide positions for university employees, particularly administrators. The new mission of serving the educational needs of well-heeled Chinese apparently merely being a means to that end.
To listen to these people defend their existence is to hear Clown World at its finest. They swear up and down that no qualified local kid is being denied a place in favor of a foreign student - completely evading the problem that the locals can no longer afford to take the offered place. Then they offer advice on how to manage debt - as if taking on crippling debt is a perfectly reasonable thing for a prudent young person to do, and the necessity for doing so, well, the insane, ever-escalating cost of higher education is just an act of God, a force of nature, just one of those things that we all just have to reconcile ourselves to.
Then when people express concern about the universities spending millions to set up recruitment centers in China as the locals are priced out, the clowns tell us that they have no choice, because the local student pool is shrinking, and gosh darn it, we have to keep enrollment numbers rising or at least steady. Because we have to. But why? If the purpose of the university is to provide affordable higher education for locals, and there really are fewer locals seeking this, then doesn't it follow that cutting back, closing departments, reducing offerings, etc., in proportion to the actual population would be the thing to do?
Yes, I know, I'm being silly. That way lies unemployed fifth assistant deans of diversity and a severe shortage of students with doctorates in Wokeness Studies. Next up - the annual whine about how terrible it is that state legislators, not understanding the purpose of a state university, are cutting their funding again.
I'd laugh like hell if Carlos Slim shut the NYTimes down and sold all the assets. I can dream, can't I?
Two lessons. One, don't normalize or operate in your competitors' frame of reference. Two, don't sacrifice your own people and interests in service to your competitors' frame of reference for light and casual causes. They are Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic, and congruent. We are not, which requires us to be smart and consistent about our principles and framing (e.g. context).
NYT reports in the spirit of civility bullshit, diversity bullshit, and politically congruent bullshit.
It's ironic, but I think the failure to get outraged can be interpreted as evidence that you are a white supremacist. But I'm not going to perform in the theater of outrage just because I can see why failure to emote makes me look like I'm too secure in my whiteness, too sure of the strength and power of white people to feel hurt by the fuck-white-people taunts— as if the white people are elephants and the fuck-white-people tweets are from tiny little birds.
What makes it feel like "theater" or fraudulent, is that so much of this hostility is internet-based.
Out in the real world, or at least my world, I meet and greet people of all colors and creeds. And if anybody is feeling racism they are keeping it to themselves. There are happy people all around me, and I am happy. The birds are singing--real birds, not twitter assholes--and it's a beautiful day.
I think there's a cognitive dissonance, that people are more racist on the internet because everyone you are talking about, or to, is a phantom that you can't see.
It's possible that Sarah Jeong goes around hating the white people she sees on the street, or at the offices of the New York Times. But I doubt it. Maybe she has these fucked up conversations with white people, who aren't offended because they assume she's talking about other white people. But more likely she does this internet-speak, which is different than who she is in the real world, with real people. I would hope, anyway. I can't imagine what the New York Times break room would be like if she talks in there like she does on the internet.
Sarah Jeong, by the way, went to Berkeley and Harvard law. I think it would be a good idea for all her professors and all the other people who taught her to stand up there with her. Take a bow, Ivy League.
Saint Croix, in schools this sort of thing is ubiquitous, in person and in teaching materials. It often really is as bad as this persons tweets, but in real life, person to person.
As I said above, if you have not had kids in school recently you can have no idea.
It is far worse than you think.
The new mission of serving the educational needs of well-heeled Chinese apparently merely being a means to that end.
Our secret weapon. The Chinese students pay through the nose and don't learn crap.
Meanwhile America students are taking apprenticeships and learning fix things and build things.,
byways,
Unless you experience the administrators, YOU have no idea how bad it is. The students are pawns.
The administration thinks we are the other. And they believe they are on the side of angels. They have perfectly clear, respective, consciences.
Saint Croix, in schools this sort of thing is ubiquitous, in person and in teaching materials. It often really is as bad as this persons tweets, but in real life, person to person.
No, that's not exactly right.
They don't teach white people are dogs
But, obviously, some people come out of that system thinking, white people are dogs
Her racism is embarrassing to the NYT. That's why they felt obligated to disavow it.
I don't think her professors would be happy, either. Maybe a few. Nobody in the law school would be happy.
It's the same reason liberals routinely censor abortion photographs.
They have an ideology. But the reality that comes about from their ideology often upsets them, and they can't deal.
See also Stalin and the Ukraine.
buwaya said:
And it does cause damage. It is designed to suppress ambition and enterprise and above all resistance among the targets of the barrage.
The principal targets are children.
Racist rhetoric like Sarah Jeong's does affect impressionable young minds. Even if you buy her defense that it was satire -- only she knows if that is really true-- the very young, and even quite a few adults, don't understand satire.
Buwaya is correct. I can see the effect in my family. I've mentioned before that the very young "hispanics" in my family get upset if you label them as white. And a "white" niece has complained that darker classmates made fun of her pale skin by calling her "pasty-faced".
These were kids all under 12. Another generation tainted by racism that's coming primarily from the left.
At Sailer's : Young Asian "Guardian" Writer Explains How Anti-White Tweets Are Career Path to Staffer Job
byways,
Unless you experience the administrators, YOU have no idea how bad it is.
Birk, you seem oddly intent today on trying to pick fights with people who aren't disagreeing with you about anything, or missing any of your points.
There's a whole internet of people out there who really disagree that you could be brawling with.
A-D,AB:
Not really. I think buwaya understands my frame of reference. I think he is aware. And he knows I am not disagreeing with him.
If you want to disagree, let me know.
Buwaya and I disagree, at most, about degree. We disagree almost never about type.
Althouse, you would have been a good Jew in Germany in the run up to Hitler, burying your head in the sand and convincing yourself you will come to no harm because you are above it all and Hitler doesn't really mean it.
These people do hate you and wish you were dead. You're just playing along with them. I suggest getting some self defense training to be prepared, just in case--after all, you live in "woke" Madison.
At a point in time, violence (spoken and kinetic) will beget violence. Republican congressmen being shot at while playing ball, Republicans and Trump supporters receiving death threats to themselves and their families, being harassed in public as senior left wingers egg the rabble on, having their cars rammed because they have a bumper sticker supporting Trump, black shirted Antifa fascists' days of rage and destruction after the election, destroy ICE occupations--these things all build up.
Just as there was a sudden and overwhelming backlash in the ballot box to the contempt, abandonment and identity politics inflicted on middle and lower class whites by the so called "elites", you can bet that if the escalating violence and open bigotry towards whites, Christians, males (especially straights), Trump supporters and pro-lifers continues, the backlash will get physical. Some elementary math: whites still make up 70% of the population. Bad idea for those on the left. Not everyone is an Althouse who rolls over and assumes you're not serious.
I know you're smarter than this, Althouse. Think things through more seriously. You won't always be able to indulge yourself in your ephemeral pursuits if things get out of hand.
And would people stop talking about "Asian Americans".
What a scam that is!
Tell a Vietnamese or a Filipino that they are just like the Chinese. Tell a Chinese they and the Japanese are the same.
Tell a Korean, he's just like a Japanese, and he'll beat the shit out of you. (They're fighters).
Dumbo Americans. I know "they all look alike" - but that's because you're stupid.
It's always a matter of whose ox is being gored. Always.
There are no principles.
buwaya,
I owe you an apology. I have never heard of whiteness studies. Jonah Goldberg talks about it at that link. Unbelievable stuff.
He quotes a scholar and historian, Noel Ignatiev...
the key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race
There's even a journal called race traitor, which, as Goldberg points out, is a concept and an idea pioneered by Nazis. But instead of ranting about Jews, it is ranting about white people. Race Traitor defines itself as an intellectual center for those seeking to abolish the white race.
It's Stormfront for liberals. Wow.
And, like the Nazi party, this is driven by highly educated people. For instance, in 1967, Susan Sontag said…
“The white race is the cancer of human history.”
Describing human beings as cancers is what mass murderers do. Not to call Susan Sontag a mass murderer. Karl Marx wasn't a mass murderer, either. But his followers certainly were.
I knew it was bad, at the university level. I didn't realize it was that bad. Thanks for the clarification.
Post a Comment