Thýmarchy

Thýma is Greek for “victim.”

I was looking for a way to encapsulate an idea I named the ‘Victimhood Competency Hierarchy’ in a 2019 post. I suggested development of a spreadsheet to clarify who has the biggest claim to victimhood, and therefore power, in such a hierarchy. This is important to white, heterosexual, males who need to know how hard to tug on the forelock.

For a few seconds, I thought I’d coined a word to describe the politico-cultural regime being urged upon us by the Axis of Woke. But a search revealed one example from 2013. Oh well. Is there a participation prize?.

This came to mind because a very good Areo article I noted last Friday used the term ‘Matrix of Domination.’ A way of rank ordering oppressors and victims. I like the term, but it clearly grants too much agency to oppressors. In practice, the dominators could remove victims from power by simply oppressing some other group more than the incumbents.

That’s hardly the only problem in establishing the Thýmarchy, though. I pointed out many difficult to define variables for the Grid of Grievance in the post on VCH.

Today, I found David Bernstein examining a few of them in an article at Reason, using Kamala Harris as an example.

He notes that we have a government here to help – with some official guidance for developing the VCH into something that can replace the Electoral College.

The guidance only helps with race classification, however, and not all of those.

And for scoring we would still have to depend on BLM, Antifa, the SPLC, LBGQT activists, AOC, Big Bird… et. al..

In 2000, OMB [Office of Management and Budget] provided guidance for civil rights monitoring enforcement regarding individuals who check off more than one racial category as follows:

• Responses that combine one minority race and white are allocated to the minority race.
• Responses that include two or more minority races are allocated as follows:

• If the enforcement action is in response to a complaint, allocate to the race that the complainant alleges the discrimination was based on.
• If the enforcement action requires assessing disparate impact or discriminatory patterns, analyze the patterns based on alternative allocations to each of the minority groups.

I’ve misplaced the citation, but I recall that other federal guidelines state that if a person checks black/African American and another box, she is deemed African American for statistical purposes.

In short, under American law, no one could deny Harris’s right to assert that she is half-Indian and less-than-half of African ancestry, but so long as she considers herself, and is considered by others, to be African American, for legal purposes she is black. The major exception would be if she filed a discrimination complaint based on her Asian ancestry. In that case, she would be considered considered legally Asian for purposes of resolving the complain [sic]. What, at least at this point, she cannot be is legally Indian, legally mixed-race, or legally no race at all.

That’s the government ‘helping’ to employ more government workers.

Casteing call

This article is worth reading, maybe more than once.
Intersectionality in India: Caste-Based Identity Politics

“caste-based identitarianism is in complete contradiction to the aim of abolishing caste…

This is the teleological and practical end of the politics of intersectionality that now dominate the political conversation in the United States. The idea that one’s politics must be based on one’s position within a “matrix of domination” has been put into practice in India for over seven decades now, with few positive results, and little progress…

The politics of intersectionality makes it exceptionally vulnerable to exploitation by unscrupulous political elites—because it is usually accompanied by a postmodern rejection of universal values, reason and even objective truth; and because it reduces social justice to struggles over identity. The result, as Professor Martha Nussbaum puts it, referring to the relativism of the postmodernist Judith Butler, is this: “For every friend of Butler, eager to engage in subversive performances that proclaim the repressiveness of heterosexual gender norms, there are dozens who would like to engage in subversive performances that flout the norms of tax compliance, of non-discrimination, of decent treatment of one’s fellow students.””

India cast off colonialism 73 years ago and has been experimenting in the effects on Democracy of identity group politics since. US politicians have been at it longer, and now this same experiment is being urged upon us – as policy – by BLM, deconstructionist academics, and race-baiting politicians: Race/ethnic/gender identitarianism is caste identitarianism.

The struggle in the US is over figuring out a ranking system to accommodate the invention of thousands of cross-pollinating victimhood classifications. Indians had theirs set in stone long before democracy reared its head.

Postmodernists tell us the sum total of culture, philosophy, and politics is power. And that rationality merely confuses this ‘truth.’ Social justice theory is not about preventing the social construction of hierarchies, and it does not care whether any given hierarchy is tyrannical. It’s simply that its proponents propose to be the tyrants they project.

Last year, I proposed a rudimentary spreadsheet for scoring what I called the “victimhood competence hierarchy.” I am considering whether “matrix of domination” is a better term, but my initial reaction is that VCH more accurately describes the US situation than MoD. We’re still learning, from BLM and Antifa, how a tyrannical mega-hierarchy might be constructed in a nearly 250 year old Republic.

We’re still building our default cultural spreadsheet. Something the Indians haven’t needed, for perhaps a thousand years, to track the 3,000 caste hierarchy already established. It is embedded in their culture.

Isn’t it cultural appropriation to institute the idea here?

Grammatically incorrect

Propagandists in the classroom are a luxury that the poor can afford least of all. While a mastery of mathematics and English can be a ticket out of poverty, a highly cultivated sense of grievance and resentment is not.

-Thomas Sowell

Jeff Jacoby has a piece worth reading at Jewish World Review on the Rutgers English department debacle.
Is English grammar racist?

A slice (but RTWT):

Today, of course, Rutgers and its champions of “critical grammar” would regard Churchill’s emphasis on acquiring “the essential structure of the ordinary British sentence” as a primitive abomination. John F. Kennedy said of Churchill that he “mobilized the English language and sent it into battle”; there is little question that the power of Churchill’s well-wrought English rhetoric helped save Western civilization in one of its darkest hours. (The power of that prose also earned Churchill the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1953.)…

“In short,” observes David Bernstein, a university professor and head of the Liberty & Law Center at George Mason University,

the Rutgers English Department wants to make sure that students who come to Rutgers with a poor grasp of standard written English not only remain in that state, but come to believe that learning standard English is a concession to racism. I remember when keeping “people of color” ignorant was considered part of white supremacy.

Churchill’s majestic command of English was due, in part, to rigorous training. Training of the sort that instills discipline, perseverance and clear thinking; whatever the subject. Rutgers charges over $900 per credit hour to willfully deny this opportunity to its students. Because those virtues have been racialized.

Churchill’s profound grasp of rhetoric didn’t merely serve him well during Question Period, it played a critical role in keeping all of us – including Black, Indigenous, People of Color – from slavery under a global racist tyranny. Countless LBGTQ people live today because a virulently anti­gay totalitarian was defeated.

At Rutgers, though, it is no longer enough to vilify Churchill with slipshod fantasies of racism, sexism, and colonialism: Now add to his sins an exemplary command of language.

It might be useful to bring the news to Rutgers that among those who shared that facility are Frederick Douglass, Ida B. Wells, and Martin Luther King.

Can’t say that

Yesterday, I wrote about Rutger’s efforts to eliminate grammar from English language studies, providing a couple of examples of how that might go askew:

“[Writing] “Protest, shootings, and arson,” rather than “Protest shootings and arson,” might pass in an Applied Critical Theory class where there is only one possible meaning…”

“A Masters (A word on the way out, and I don’t think we can use “He da man,” either.) in English is now a purely political credential.”

There is a long and growing list of words which are being assigned purely political application. One must be cautious in finding alternatives.

Here’s someone who wasn’t:
Why I decided to take the word ‘chief’ out of my CEO title to respect Indigenous people

Catherine Roome, the former CEO in question, is now is president and lead executive officer of Technical Safety BC.

I fear she didn’t take enough time to think this change through, even as a team formerly known as the Redskins provided an example of careful consideration by relabelling themselves as the Washington Football Team while working their way through the critical race linguistic minefield.

Ms. Roome’s new title of Lead Executive Officer has a couple of problems. First, the very concept of leadership presumes merit-based anti-egalitarianism. Second, and most damning, LEO is also a widely used acronym for Law Enforcement Officer.

Since we are allowed only one political meaning per term, I’d say law enforcement officer wins on seniority.

Now. On to “executive.”

One who can make significant decisions on their own authority. A position that coordinates and governs the action of others; supervisor

And “officer.”

One who has a position of authority in a hierarchical organization, especially in military, police or government organizations. A respectful term of address for an officer, especially a police officer.

These words would seem of limited use in our new woke world, and subject to banning at any moment.

One might think congratulations are due future holders of Rutgers English degrees for having improved job prospects as English Sanitation Clerks, except they will never have heard the words they’re trying to sanitize.

For once…

…an appropriate use of “shredded.”
An Anonymous Berkeley Professor Just Shredded BLM’s Injustice Narrative

It’s worth the read.

He mentions Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. It’s also worth checking
Glenn Loury & John McWhorter
Walter Williams
Shelby Steele

These are all black men Joe Biden would say aren’t really black.