The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 101
James Lindsay, host of the New Discourses Podcast, gets asked all the time about what really got him started in his campaign against Woke Marxism. Invariably, the conversation includes a discussion of the Grievance Studies Affair, but what triggered that? Before the Grievance Studies Affair, there was “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct,” and before the Conceptual Penis, there was a real academic paper called “Glaciers, Gender, and Science: A Feminist Glaciology Framework for Global Environmental Change Research” by four researchers from the University of Oregon, writing on a significant National Science Foundation grant. In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James revisits this paper and shares with you exactly what it says, now understood in great clarity. Join him to hear how he was “radicalized” to start fighting the Woke in a serious manner, in their own words.
Subscribe to the New Discourses Podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or by RSS.
Additional episodes of the New Discourses Podcast are available here.
Follow James Lindsay: https://linktr.ee/conceptualjames
7 comments
The funny thing about a journal taking the dog rape paper seriously is the way by implication it diverts to dog psychology as if thats going to be easier to work with. The grievance thing is a kind of masterpiece good for you.
James i sense Bronfenbrenner socioecological modelling here. But would stress that once people like he are dead its simple to appropriate their work as if they were into cultural marxist social engineering – Bronfenbrenner wasn’t. However what you have suggested concerning the colonisation of the sociological architecture sounds right to me.
I find that when everything interlocks and satisfies not just itself, but manifold aspects of an engineering program – socioecology – feminism – gender – then it has THE recognisable fingerprint.
A lot of strange stuff has been going on in canada with proper empirical science into glaciers being pulled & handed over to a third party. But anyway if you look up bronfenbrenners models, at least it will show a graph related to what you have found is being sucked it.
If you are right the royal geophysical society comes under suspicion here. They have been taking part on some very dodgy stuff in recent years.
I have straight-up been sectioned under the UK mental health act for holding less ridiculous and arguably less harmful (to myself or others) beliefs than these..
@ Gideon Moss – there were times during the period between Y2K & 2012 when it didn’t take much to get sectioned. It happened at a time when there was a wave of new stakeholder partnerships in mental health. These private firms grabbing everything they could, and they clearly had the full co-operation of the public sector strongly indicating it was co-ordinated.
The multi agency of that period was a group psychotic imbecile.
This is a funny (sad?) story. But I could not stay for the entire 3 hours. Sorry.
Another 2 cents. You’re not radicalized. You’re rational. Thanks so much for all that you do!
Thank you James. Critical thinking is a skill that is rapidly disappearing. It is so heartening to be able to listen to someone who knows how to think and can clearly describe the false narrative of people like those who wrote the ridiculous Feminist Glaciology BS.
May I also say that I am deeply gratified that your discourses are not tainted by the specter of a superstitious belief systems lurking in the shadows. A rare find indeed.
Per my search engine, it appears that affirmative action was initially begun in the late 1960’s. All of the papers you have read sound like they were written by affirmative action candidates who would not otherwise have met academic requirements to be accepted to higher education institutions.
I know you don’t have time for it, but perhaps in your travels, there is someone with the resources to research this.