“Those who are most sensitive about ‘politically incorrect’ terminology are not the average black ghetto- dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any ‘oppressed’ group but come from privileged strata of society.
Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.” Kaczynski, Industrial society and its future 12 (1995).
“Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)” Id. at 13.
“Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.” Id. at 17.
Thence we realize that so-called humanitarianism is, for those many leftists for whom such analysis applies, simply a form of art (and a masturbatory form at that). Thus, we rewrite Kaczynski’s 17th point as follows:
“Humanitarianism that appeals to modern leftish intellectuals tends to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.”
Moreover, as Psychiatry becomes more and more openly autocratic (Psychiatry has always been entirely autocratic, but needed to establish its nose under society’s tent in order to survive being openly autocratic), many former fumes of Psychiatry’s fatuous and anti-freedom flame have critiqued the Psychiatric snowball at the bottom of the social hill. See Allan V. Horwitz and Jerome C. Wakefield, The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow into Depressive Disorder (Oxford University Press 2007); Joel Paris, Overdiagnosis in Psychiatry: How Modern Psychiatry Lost Its Way While Creating a Diagnosis for Almost All of Life’s Misfortunes (2015).
But just as booksmart, hypersocialized Kaczynski first decried, then bombed, the rabble for its wrongthought—even as Kaczynski’s vanity compelled him to posit a system mostly of well-meant bumbling (framed by Kaczynski’s expediently simplistic assumptions about leftist motives: that they are typically pitiful hypocrites—yet well-meaning); so too the Horowitzs and Wakefields of Psychiatry’s autocratic gauntlets and guillotines omit the “often”: Psychiatrists—all but all of them—”mean well,” even as they create and leverage chaos under the impossibly thin guise of solving other chaos.
Thus, we revise the entire foundation of Kaczynski’s thesis, which is, “The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives.” Kaczynski, supra, at 15. For this, we first revise Kaczynski’s aforementioned contentions about hyper-sensitive leftists who intensely identify with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak, defeated, repellent, or otherwise inferior.
And we find that revision simply by applying Sowell’s conception of “the vulgar pride of intellectuals.” See Thomas Sowell, The vision of the anointed (Basic Books 1995). Sowell articulated that, far more than never, such leftists cling to those so-called “victim classes,” not out of a desire to help whatsoever, but out of desperation; since, in a world without victimhood (real or imagined) that has been strategically accelerated by the imagination from swaths of witless, wisdom-proofed, knowledge-laden knaves—something close to all of those intellectuals would be entirely worthless; and they would need to “learn how to code,” so to speak (i.e. the meme).
Moreover, the pride of these intellectuals may be vulgar—but it is indeed strategic: a quick listen to a young black fraudster embarrassingly trying to ingratiate himself to Peter Schiff at Occupy Wall Street (watch it, starting at 21:20), so that Schiff would fund the fraudster’s professional-bragging ambitions—such an exchange illustrates what most everyone (and certainly all leftists “intellectuals”) eventually learn: the less desperate someone is, the less easily you can con them.
Thus it is obvious to see that these leftist parasites prioritize their hosts based simply on which fruit hangs lowest for the fraud: desperation is obedience. And while a society (or system therein) is free to reward whatever behavior it prefers, and to call that behavior “merit,” and to thus label itself a “meritocracy;” still, in such cases as the leftist “intellectual,” it is a “merit” which is manifestly nothing short of highly specialized mediocrity. So as the hollow Harvards and yelping Yales (and all the rest) can wrest victimhood from the jaws of opportunity, and commodify their hosts as victims of another sort—still, it amounts to “intellectual” mediocre fraudsters mystifying and justifying less “merited” fraudsters (those addicted to such mind-numbing slogans as “diversity and inclusion”), in a symbiosis of pitiful, doomed vanity.
It is for reasons such as these that, for example, Yale is one of the world’s premiere “intellectual meccas”—even as it is located in crime-ridden shithole New Haven, Connecticut; and that the premiere political puppets of the country chatter talking points for USA’s shadow government from their strongholds in Washington D.C.—a region infested with black people so self-destructively desperate (obedient) that they overwhelmingly re-elected Marion Barry as D.C. mayor—after Barry was jailed for smoking crack with prostitutes.
As of this writing, these leftists have set aside desperation-levels of even D.C.-black proportions, and now focus their “humanitarianism” on people whose very presence in the country is a criminal act—”undocumented immigrants.” And this is done for one of two reasons: (1) The immense concern and love which frantic, pro-death leftists feel for illegals; or (2) The fact that only such immigrants provide, to those leftists, the level of social and political docility to which the leftists have addicted themselves. (Moreover, that addiction has atrophied leftists’ sense and sensibilities to the point where only an illiterate, hopeless immigrant is desperate enough to tolerate leftist stupidity.)
Those stupid enough, or inattentive enough, to give such leftists the benefit of the doubt—it is a matter of math: mailing a tiny stipend to helpless Mexicans (etc.) who remain in their own country would do manifestly more good—for the Mexicans, themselves—than to leash them to socialist crumbs in our country as a slave caste. But, to say the least, the vulgar pride of intellectuals does not exist to help desperate Mexicans—no more than the vapid pride of Ted Kaczynski existed to usher in an era of reason in society and harmony with nature.