(a) So Scott Adams sees his strip “Dilbert” canceled by nearly 80 newspapers, which represents a serious hit.
Now Adams has been poking fun at corporate wokebaggery for many years, and has been a Trump supporter. The latter got his lecture invitations to dry up. So what is new?
Is it simply the “banana republic without bananas” kicking into higher gear?
Or is it that his latest target have become ESG (
economic environmental and social governance) scores — which are big, big business for firms like Blackrock Capital?
My money is on… follow the money.
(b) Seemingly unrelated, the Powerline authors are mystified why what I will in code-speak call “trans-butadiene hair grooming” of young children — a policy that is deeply unpopular with the electorate — became a hill for the Brahmandarin Left to die on.
I’ve been mystified myself, and pondered many of the possibilities discussed in the comments:
- living in an echo chamber and being out of touch with people outside their bubble?
- war on objective reality: making people accept that “2+2=5” if the Gentry so desires?
- preparing the ground for normalizing evils like child molestation?
- pursuit of the “social justice revolution” by supporting anything that threatens the nuclear family?
- “the fix is in”, i.e., no matter what people will vote, it only matters who ‘counts’ the votes?
- SJWism needing a perpetual supply of “the oppressed”, so as formerly marginalized groups gain mainstream acceptance, they have to invent new ones?
- Or… is this all a “laser pointer to a cat” to distract us from their real agenda?
Lots of supernatural reflection also in the comments. But commenter “99Monica” wonder if it’s simply that the hormone treatments and surgeries required are… big business? And a source of diversification (ahem) for Planned Parenthood as abortion is no longer a growth industry? And that the said big business is a major source of campaign donations?
My money is on a linear combination of all of the above.
The paper in question was written in response to the paper in the same journal by a longtime associate of these authors, who compared the intellectual atmosphere in today’s academia to what she remembered from the former USSR.
I used to wonder how the “Gleichschaltung” [literally: switching into line] of academic institutions in the Third Reich could have happened. Or, for that matter, the tragic destruction of geneticist Nikolai Vavilov (and, more broadly, of the science of genetics in the USSR) at the hands of the charlatan (and his onetime protégé) Trofim Lysenko.
“Used to” is the operative word.
“Ten measures of hypocrisy have been placed in the world. Nine were placed in academia.” (Talmud Interneti, tractate Bubbe Meises 69a.)
(d) and this story puts me in mind of a quote from the French renaissance author François Rabelais (d. 1553), himself a physician in his day job:
Science sans conscience n’est que ruine de l’âme.[*]
[Science without conscience is nothing but ruin of the soul.]
Mais parce que, selon le saige Salomon, Sapience n’entre poinct en âme malivole, et science sans conscience n’est que ruine de l’âme, il te convient servir, aymer, et craindre Dieu, et en lui mettre toutes les pensées et tout ton espoir ; et par foi formée de charité , estre à lui adjoinct, en sorte que jamais n’en soys désemparé par péché.
[Translation: But because, according to the wise Solomon, wisdom is worth nothing in a malicious spirit, and knowledge/science without conscience is nothing but ruin of the soul, it befits thee to serve, love, and fear G-d, and to devote to Him all thoughts and all thy hope; and by faith borne of charity, be near to Him, in a manner that thou will never be lead astray by sin.]