SneerClub

Keep in mind the author isn't just (or even primarily) counting ultra wealth and establishment politicians as "elites", they are also including scientists trying to educate the public on their area of expertise (i.e. COVID, Global Warming, Environmentalism, etc.), and sociologists/psychologists explaining problems the author wants to ignore or are outright in favor of (racism/transphobia/homophobia).

Really manning that steel bro. It must have taken a lot of effort not to put the echo symbols on (((DEI shibboleths))). Out of spite, I'll now proceed to somehow incorporate the idea that white people cause earthquakes into my worldview.

He’s such a complete moron. He doesn’t want to recite “DEI shibboleths”? What does he even think that would refer to? Why shibboleths?

To spell it out, that would refer to an antisemitic theory that the reason (for example) some black guy would get a medal of honor (the “deimedal”) is because of the jews.

I swear this guy is dumber than Trump. Trump for all his rambling, uses actual language - Trump understands what the shit he is saying means to his followers. Scott… he really does not.

Yeah if the author had any self awareness they might consider why the transphobes and racists they have made common cause with are so anti-science and why pro-science and college education people lean progressive, but that would lead to admitting their bigotry is opposed to actual scientific understanding and higher education, and so they will understood come up with any other rationalization.

The first part of that sentence is such a great example of what is wrong with Slatestarcodex style rationalism. It instantly fails the "Victorian Sufi Buddha Lite” comment policy (it is neither kind, charitable, nor backed up by evidence, also it is culture war). But that is only if think SSC is grey tribe, and these rules are rules. It is more rules in the way of how conservatism has rules. “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” (quote is by a Frank Wilhoit, just not the one people attribute it too). (I know it isn't directly posted in the ssc comments, but isn't that a nice way to get around the comment policy).

The culture war far right has an extreme hateboner for Taylor Lorenz, it is one of those really crazy things (they have a lot of hateboners for random people, which they keep for decades, and as you said almost always women).

E: on that note, apparently culture warrior rightwingers are still mad about the 'choose man or bear' thing, and in a way that justifies the points made by the org thought experiment on how men are more likely to be malicious and unpredictable. Holy shit we suck so much at listening to people when we think the source is a woman.

At its heart I think that the real problem. The right has built up "wokeness" into this all-consuming conspiracy theory that is responsible for everything, which was an effective way to take power by offering simple plans that hurt people that large swathes of the voting public already believed had it too good, but now that they're in power they need to actually do something about this fictitious issue they've convinced themselves is at the heart of all problems, and this is what that looks like. There is no simple common-sense policy that would protect people from "being forced to say DEI shibboleths" or whatever they're whining about because nobody is forcing you to do that in the first place, but you can't sweep in on a wave of "antiwokism" and do nothing about it.

I'm actually reminded of the similar bizzaro push against "color revolutions" that seems to animate Putin and some of the other crazies in international politics. Like, it's pretty obviously bullshit if for no other reason than because it it was possible to culturally mind control a people into overthrowing their governments by throwing a relatively tiny sum of money at some artists and shouting a lot there's no way that the CIA would have gone after Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine but not Russia itself. But a lot of Russian foreign policy, including the invasion of Ukraine, seems to be at least partially in response to this imagined threat from a nonexistent conspiracy, and the blood flowing down the Dnipro is the cost that the world is paying for that delusion.