I've done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and as it turns out, we can solve all of the world's problems by making me high status

He’s done a lot of good writing on the topic, which is great for me because I can just plagiarize from him and pass off many of the theories as my own.

To be fair, I did come to many of the same conclusions independently, but I am still going to plagiarize, because I’m an autistic black scholar, and if anybody calls me out on it, I’m just going to kill myself and blame you for the “digital lynching.”

Anyways, Walt writes about the nature of plausible deniability with respect to status, calling it the “Waltine Fork.” He describes it as…

Any trait, belief, behavior, or convention carrying stable positive status coding in a given ecology should, by virtue of having survived and reproduced inside that ecology, be presumptively assumed to carry adaptive instrumental function—frequently diffuse, indirect, or second-order—even where participants sincerely experience it in moral, aesthetic, relational, or propositionally neutral terms.

Let me translate that from asperger's to retard.

Basically, people believe things, and while they might sincerely believe those things, it has the extremely convenient side effect of making them high status among their peer groups.

Which is to say, I tend to piss a lot of people off by pointing out that their worldview happens to conveniently align with their self-interest. It's amazing that they can derive all of these theories about how the world works, and that many of the problems can be solved by making them high status.

It's easiest to see with a bunch of examples.

Celeste Davis: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this cultural issue, and as it turns out, the issue is patriarchy. We can solve this issue by catering to women.”

Darby Saxbe: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this cultural issue, and as it turns out, the issue is that men do not do enough laundry at the house. They would be better served neglecting their workout regimen, lowering their testosterone, and doing more laundry.”

Eurydice: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on gender, and it turns out that women are not the problem, it’s men.”

Joe Rogan: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and I can no longer tolerate woke, and therefore I must move to a low tax state the exact same time I’m about to get 100 million dollars from spotify.”

Sam Altman: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and I think it’s extremely important that we turn OpenAI into a for-profit company right as the large language models have become extremely valuable.”

Jensen Huang: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and the way that we can compete with China is to allow me to sell as many chips as possible to China without any sort of restriction whatsoever so that they are reliant on my product instead of any other product.”

Bentham’s Bulldog: “I have this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and as it turns out, I am the only one who has correctly figured out morality, and that literally everybody else is wrong. God is real because of set theory, and we should be focusing on shrimps and bugs. Only I am capable of coming to these conclusions because I am, in fact, a great deal smarter than you.”

Manosphere dorks: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and because of this one specific aspect of evolutionary theory, I should be able to fuck as many women as possible without being held to any sort of responsibility, but women who are promiscuous in any sense should be thrown into a volcano.”

Heather Cox Richardson: “I've done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and the way that we #resist is to vote democrats, because voting Democrat happens to perfectly align with the #resistance.”

Ibram X Kendi: “I have done this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and so I’ve created a new version of racism, where I get to call you a dumbass cooncracker whiteboy, and that wouldn’t be racist, but if you do math in my general vicinity, then that actually is racist.”

Richard Hanania: “I’ve done an extremely objective analysis on this issue, and have come up with a theory of elite human capital, and as it turns out, the elites are people who exhibit many of the traits that I personally exhibit.”

Curtis Yarvin: “I’ve this extremely objective analysis on this issue, and as it turns out, we should replace democracy with an aristocracy comprised exclusively of terminally online tech dorks who blog for a living.”

With all of these worldviews, there’s always a degree of plausible deniability — which is to say, if you ask any of the above people whether they sincerely believe what they believe, they would tell you, absolutely. And, under their framework, many of the things that they espouse would be true.

So it’s not that these people are necessarily lying, it’s more so that their worldview is gerrymandered. To reiterate Walt’s terminology, their beliefs have positive status coding within their local ecology.

Or, to put it another way, there’s an implicit assumption of how the world should work, which the majority of people within that ecology all believe, so they don’t think to question.

This is where Russell conjugation is very useful, because they can use strategic language to paper over any sort of assumption in their beliefs. For example, elite institutions can say that they want to “promote diversity of representation” instead of saying that they want to replace Chinese and Indian people with black people on campus. Either way it amounts to the same outcome, but the first way of saying it allows them to continue to feel good about themselves.

Or, with the feminist stuff, there’s assumption of what I like to call timeline gerrymandering:

• A ten year old boy needs to be held accountable for his actions because he’s the beneficiary of a thousand years of privilege, or whatever

• And yet we’re not allowed to remotely ascribe the same degree of responsibility to, I don’t know, a woman who strangles her kids to death, for example.

AI is probably the best example where shifting priorities of the world have been the most apparent. It’s not lost on me that many of the same people who didn’t give a fuck about giving your jobs away to cheap quasi slave labor, and didn’t give a fuck about automation and offshoring, for now suddenly “rethinking their assumptions” about work and labor the moment their own livelihoods are on the verge of being on the chopping block.

Which I will be releasing over the course of the next few weeks, but for now here's a very important picture of a fine young African American gentleman holding a test tube.