For a sociologist to label social conditions with thoughtlessly reductive tags such as “fascism” to explain economic and cultural conditions which lead to success for some failure for others is lazy or cowardly or worse, calculated for prestige. It’s really the last. She is not a real thinker but a careerist, and we see them everywhere. Whether they are sociopathic to boot, who knows; but their actions have socially pathological effects.
I think the reason for all this garbage rhetoric is slowly, over time, people who use extreme language to blame and shame have succeeded in dominating those who would argue with expertise and nuance. And recognizing the pathological power and media reach of these usurpers, the real thinkers shied away from engagement: a real point of shame. Social media has helped these careerists in their pursuit of power, making it widely unacceptable to demonstrate hard data and cleaner thinking. Intellectual binaries serve the usurper. And that’s how we get all of these problems from academic collapse to unmitigated immigration: we have reached the point in time when those willing to exploit problems in morally simplified terms, creating an obvious dichotomy between good and evil, prevail and the armies they have built in the para-public sphere maintains their authority. I call it The Never Not Yes—
For a sociologist to label social conditions with thoughtlessly reductive tags such as “fascism” to explain economic and cultural conditions which lead to success for some failure for others is lazy or cowardly or worse, calculated for prestige. It’s really the last. She is not a real thinker but a careerist, and we see them everywhere. Whether they are sociopathic to boot, who knows; but their actions have socially pathological effects.
“The head of infectious disease medicine at my hospital privately told me that he was working with the state government to restrict the civil rights of unvaccinated people.” - James P. Miller, MD