Sorry I’m late. I’ve been on a Netflix marathon today, and I actually got to play a little vidya earlier as well. So it’s been a pretty great day. Also a there’s lot of drama with the /gamergate/ board on 8chan that I’m thankfully not a part of. Other than that, there’s not much going on this evening. But there is something I wanted to talk to you about, namely, the perils of SJW thought. It’s illustrated clearly by looking at the case of none other than Arthur Chu, the noted rape apologist (we broke that story..thanks Chu, for the Daily Beast archive shout-out).
Let’s take a look at some of his old work, contrasted with more recent stuff.
I’m going to say something no one else I’ve talked to personally has openly said, in so many words, so far:
I not only think the Danish cartoonists had the *right* to put up their cartoons, I think they *should* have done it. I think that putting them up was the right choice. If I were in that editor’s place, I would have done exactly the same thing. If I were in the place of any high-ranking government official I would not only *protect* the cartoonists but openly align myself behind them, stand by their message, and rally with it. And I consider every single person who fired somebody over this, or stopped buying goods because of this, or accused the cartoonists of being “insensitive” or “inappropriate” or whatever as an ideological enemy.
Why? Because I believe that anyone who can’t submit their deepest beliefs and feelings to public criticism, satire, and scorn — who can’t take a joke — should be forced to do so. I believe we can’t live in a truly open and free society if we are enslaved to the sensitivities and concerns of those whose beliefs we do not share. I believe that the free market ideas is about beating people up verbally and intellectually and opening oneself to be beaten up verbally and intellectually without fear of physical violence or legal repression. That is the whole point of free speech, and if someone feels they’re getting the short end of the stick — that they’re being unfairly maligned, that they’re less popular, that they’re the ones being oppressed by the hegemony — well, tough rocks. Speech codes and hate-speech protections and cultural sensitivity training are to free speech as government bailouts and subsidies are to free markets. Fuck them.
I believe this very strongly. And I hate hypocrisy and doubletalk. And I would rather openly exercise free speech and have it *openly* smacked down by violence than keep my mouth shut and be implicitly smacked down by the threat of violence.
And this transcends any feelings I have or don’t have about Islam, Muhammad, religion, Europe, or anything. It doesn’t matter whether I think Islam the religious tradition has any validity, or whether I think Muslims are terrorists, or whatever — what offends me is being told I’m not *allowed* to say that Islam is bullshit, or that all Muslims are terrorists, or that Muhammad was a dirty pedophile. It’s the exact same deal as flag-burning — I won’t do it until you tell me I’m not allowed to, and then I’ll be the first one dousing Old Glory with kerosene, or using the ethnic slurs, or drawing the picture of the turban with the bomb in it, or writing the word “blob” five hundred times.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
That was certainly a breath of fresh air, wasn’t it? What happened to that guy? I could stand to have a few beers with him. He’s nothing like the sex-starved maniac who showed up on The David Pakman Show. He was well-reasoned and stood up for what he believed in…and what he believed in wasn’t utter shit.
Contrast that with his current take on Charlie Hebdo:
Charlie Hebdo is also a crap publication and people need to stop celebrating it and making martyrs out of its staff.
The editors, writers, and cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo were human beings with families, friends, and loved ones. Their deaths should be mourned for that reason. But no more so than the Sodexo building maintenance man or the two cops who were also killed in the crossfire.
I join with those who call for grief at the deaths of twelve human beings—but I’m not down with mourning the work that Charlie Hebdo was doing or standing up and saying “Je Suis Charlie,” like what they did was a holy mission. If anything the work the two cops and the maintenance guy were doing deserves more respect and probably helped a lot more people…
There’s no particular merit to being an “equal-opportunity offender”—indeed, it’s lazy and cheap, a way to avoid being held accountable for anything you say because none of it is part of a moral worldview or to be taken seriously…
I wonder if this whole media blitz of unconditional support for Charlie Hebdo and its “message” is exactly what the terrorists wanted, in the first place.
Now that’s another a level of irony indeed—all the more so because it’s a level of irony that escaped the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo.
Disgusting finish to a disheartening article. Nice job shitting on their memory by portraying murderous terrorist thugs as somehow smarter. No, they were killers and they were scum. Anything more is over-thinking it. Just a couple of weeks ago, he wrote a column intimating that Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris were racists for harshly criticizing Islam. SJWism…not even once. It fucking rots your mind.
Look at the Chu we had before. He seemed happier, wasn’t afraid of free speech, and thought anyone who couldn’t take a joke should go fuck themselves. I’d like to think of myself as the exact same way. This is the true “liberal tradition,” not some idiotic victimhood quest that isn’t even the slightest bit coherent. It’s like a mad cash grab without any heart and soul. Where is the movement to free Muslim women? You won’t see one. Instead, rich and privileged white women, and water-carries like Chu, sit online and cry into their lattes all day like anyone gives a shit. Get the fuck over yourself, and work on something that actually matters. Dawkins said it best himself: