The headline got my attention, but the rest put everything right, far right. Why do writers like Wilson make it so easy to know that they haven't read the book? I haven't read the
Guardian in years but it is quoted often enough that I know that not reading the book or looking up the facts is the main technique used by the Guardian in labeling anything to the right of Gramsci, far right wing. This old conservative has his paperback, and a Kindle edition so does that make me 2X far right?
Maybe. But I feel that they didn't really changed, just that the gloves are off now. They don't have to pretend anymore that they are objective or neutral. That's how I feel about the NYT with whom I'm more familiar.
When you say the decline of the Guardian echoes the economic stagnation and cultural decline of the UK, do you mean that the two things are linked or that both coincidentally happened to decline at the same moment?
Speaking of Jason Wilson, here's the first tweet of a thread by Obhishek Saha that summarizes Jonathan Rauch's views on how Cancel Culture differs from a culture that values constructive criticism (e.g. criticism in the service of a search for truth).
Saha ends with an anecdote from Charles Murray that Sailer has recounted, but that could bear repeating.
--- begin excerpt ---
The Bell Curve is a controversial book by Murray and the psychologist Richard J. Herrnstein. Herrnstein passed away in 1994, shortly before the book was published. The excerpt below is from an obituary Murray wrote the following year:
"About four years ago, shortly after Dick and I had begun to collaborate on a new book about intelligence and social policy, we were talking over a late-evening Scotch at his home in Belmont, Mass. We had been musing about the warning shots the prospective book had already drawn and the heavy fire that was sure to come. The conversation began to depress me, and I said, 'Why the hell are we doing this, anyway?'
"'Dick recalled the day when, as a young man, he had been awarded tenure. It was his dream fulfilled -- a place in the university he so loved, the chance to follow his research wherever it took him, economic security. For Dick, being a tenured professor at Harvard was not just the perfect job, but the perfect way to live his life. It was too good to be true; there had to be a catch. What's my part of the bargain? he had asked himself. 'And I figured it out,' he said, looking at me with that benign, gentle half-smile of his. 'You have to tell the truth.' There was no self-congratulation in his voice, just an answer to my question.'"
"Rosy-cheeked children, the footsoldiers of patriarchy and white supremacy? Our ace reporter Jason Wilson has gotten intimate with a group of prepubescent newspaper boys to catch the far right with their pants down..."
That’s it. I’m going to order Noticing. I like books (actual things with pages), I like far-right, extremely extreme extremist Steve Sailer’s writing, and I like intellectual engagement. Things that make me think. Something I wouldn’t get from a Jason Wilson.
Wilson’s writing reminds me of a teenage girl telling her friends how much she *really* doesn’t have a crush on a particular boy.
They're never gonna let up with “white supremacist” and “proponent of scientific racism”, so whenever they do this just say, "...but in a good way".
Me, I'm just peachy with "scientific racism".
Perhaps Sam Francis acolyte would be a kinder label.
He's so far left everyone else looks to be far right.
The headline got my attention, but the rest put everything right, far right. Why do writers like Wilson make it so easy to know that they haven't read the book? I haven't read the
Guardian in years but it is quoted often enough that I know that not reading the book or looking up the facts is the main technique used by the Guardian in labeling anything to the right of Gramsci, far right wing. This old conservative has his paperback, and a Kindle edition so does that make me 2X far right?
Amazing that he actually got paid for writing that. Clearly some people must still be reading the Guardian but who those people are boggles the mind.
Other parts of the Guardian are not bad but it peaked in the early 2000s in the Blair era.
The UK has been in economic stagnation and cultural decline ever since. The Guardian echoes this.
Maybe. But I feel that they didn't really changed, just that the gloves are off now. They don't have to pretend anymore that they are objective or neutral. That's how I feel about the NYT with whom I'm more familiar.
When you say the decline of the Guardian echoes the economic stagnation and cultural decline of the UK, do you mean that the two things are linked or that both coincidentally happened to decline at the same moment?
I think claims about causality are not wise!
You will at times see them glued to asphalt. How this occurs, who knows.
The Guardian “has been described” as proof of the effects of soy estrogen on already weakened minds.
I deeply resent the final image in the post, as my office is not equipped with a chem lab eye-wash station. Reparations, you scoundrel!
I don't understand. Why would The Guardian of all papers be promoting your book?
They’re not promoting it. It’s a pretty negative review.
Speaking of Jason Wilson, here's the first tweet of a thread by Obhishek Saha that summarizes Jonathan Rauch's views on how Cancel Culture differs from a culture that values constructive criticism (e.g. criticism in the service of a search for truth).
https://x.com/ObhishekSaha/status/1933228740991238173
Saha ends with an anecdote from Charles Murray that Sailer has recounted, but that could bear repeating.
--- begin excerpt ---
The Bell Curve is a controversial book by Murray and the psychologist Richard J. Herrnstein. Herrnstein passed away in 1994, shortly before the book was published. The excerpt below is from an obituary Murray wrote the following year:
"About four years ago, shortly after Dick and I had begun to collaborate on a new book about intelligence and social policy, we were talking over a late-evening Scotch at his home in Belmont, Mass. We had been musing about the warning shots the prospective book had already drawn and the heavy fire that was sure to come. The conversation began to depress me, and I said, 'Why the hell are we doing this, anyway?'
"'Dick recalled the day when, as a young man, he had been awarded tenure. It was his dream fulfilled -- a place in the university he so loved, the chance to follow his research wherever it took him, economic security. For Dick, being a tenured professor at Harvard was not just the perfect job, but the perfect way to live his life. It was too good to be true; there had to be a catch. What's my part of the bargain? he had asked himself. 'And I figured it out,' he said, looking at me with that benign, gentle half-smile of his. 'You have to tell the truth.' There was no self-congratulation in his voice, just an answer to my question.'"
--- end excerpt ---
I think he needs to make sure his readers understand that you and Passage Publishing are FAR RIGHT. I'm not sure he emphasized that point enough.
"who has been described as"
The universal get out of libel suit free card.
Books? Books! Those diabolical bastards! Always one step ahead of the guileless left.
Next hit piece: The far right dominates in going to the park, standing on a box and yelling.
We can't rest on our laurels though, where is our sinister network of young males shouting "extra, extra, read all about it!"?
"young males"? I'ver exhausted myself trying to unpack that, and to imagine the meeting at which the left tries to figure out their counter.
"Rosy-cheeked children, the footsoldiers of patriarchy and white supremacy? Our ace reporter Jason Wilson has gotten intimate with a group of prepubescent newspaper boys to catch the far right with their pants down..."
" "The Guardian" Promotes "Noticing" for Father's Day "
As the Good Book says "ברצות ה' דרכי איש גם אויביו ישלים אתו" "When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him."
Audiobooks are great. Glad you produced one for Noticing.
That’s it. I’m going to order Noticing. I like books (actual things with pages), I like far-right, extremely extreme extremist Steve Sailer’s writing, and I like intellectual engagement. Things that make me think. Something I wouldn’t get from a Jason Wilson.
The Guardian, which had been described as a “pompous, left-wing, anti-free-speech rag,” really doesn’t like Steve Sailer.