Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Smugnorance and Genufakery
Smugnorance (n): a state of being wholly and completely ignorant on any and all subjects, and yet feeling compelled and entitled to speak confidently upon them.
Smugnorant (adj). To be willfully and defiantly self-assured in ignorance; to persist in ignorance in defiance of facts and/or reality.
Genufake (n): 1. Insistence that something which has been proven to have not occurred, did, in fact occur on the basis that said non-occurring event is politically or socially useful in a purely negative way.
2. (v) The act of engaging in artificial solidarity with the masses in an attempt to curry favor, despite the effort being transparently false and contrived.
We have been treated to both in abundance in recent days.
Both phenomenon have pretty much the same prerequisites in order to be effective. First, the Smugnorant or Genufake must be assured to a fair degree that the intended audience of an act of either is just as Smugnorant and/or Genufake (preferably both) as the perpetrator.
Second, that a circumstance exists in which public actions or utterances will go unchallenged and un-analyzed by an intellectually-lazy and compliant audience.
A third requirement, which is not strictly necessary, but still nice to have, is that the act of Smugnorance and/or Genufakery appeals to a mass audience that is psychologically predisposed to accept the act or utterance uncritically for reasons of mental comfort, solidarity in ideology and/or emotional need to have the Smugnorance or Genufakery be true.
So, let's take a look at some recent examples of Smugnorance and Genufake, their fallout, and the unfortunate consequences each will have:
First, we begin with Alexandria Ocascio-Cortez, the living proof that Darwin was gravely mistaken.
Last week, AOC posted an outline of what she calls "The Green New Deal" on her website in which we discover that she and her political acolytes have decided that the best way to prevent Global Catastrophe is to basically kill everyone before the World comes to an end. I shan't bore you with the details concerning the prevention of bovine flatulence, the restrictions of and upon people's Freedom of Movement, nor mention that the cost of this project is pretty much equal to the entire planet's GDP just to retrofit America with windmills that don't work, insulation that is as flammable as gasoline and Trans-oceanic high-speed railroads instead of dirty air travel (because submarines, I guess, aren't cool?).
The point of the outline (which was never intended to be a serious "solution" to the problem of Climate Change, and which has since been pulled from the website for public ridicule) is NOT to lay out a workable plan to "transition" the United States to a completely "Green" energy-production regime, but rather to put an impossible-to-reach political goal on the table which can be used to keep a debate which was largely dying -- Global Climate Change -- back into play. That is to say, the purpose of the "Green New Deal" is not it's stated goals, but rather a means by which a dead horse can be continuously flogged for votes and money, with a secondary objective of creating a new regime of government control over all aspects of public and private life.
Assuming that AOC actually believes that the world is ending in 12 years (why is it the world is always ending?), and that her "plan" is workable from a financial and practical standpoint -- and to date she has given no indication that she's really very bright -- the reaction to it has evoked more Smugnorance than has been seen in many a year.
Not since "Bitter Clingers" entered the American Lexicon, another example of the denial of objective reality, has a phrase -- "New Green Deal" -- resulted in such a spirited defense of personal ignorance.
When asked how the plan is to be accomplished, AOC doesn't know; when asked how the plan will be paid for, AOC doesn't know; when asked how much it will cost, AOC doesn't know. When called to task for her lack of information and inability to understand the scope of this undertaking -- that is, confronted by the illogical, indefensible and impractical nature of her position -- the best AOC can muster in defense is to accuse her questioners of being jealous of her new-found status; of insisting that things like "facts" and "proof" and even proper spelling and grammar, don't matter, and are little more than the reflexive, nitpicking naysaying of people who just don't like her...because jealous and evil. She holds the moral high ground because she has the proper feelings on this subject.
That is to say, the reality of impossibility, the intrusion of facts into what is otherwise a very dearly-held daydream, the certainties of life, matter, energy and time, are immaterial and insignificant. The examples of where this has been tried -- and failed -- on a smaller and just-as-expensive scale, can be safely ignored. To continue to hold on to the dream, they MUST be ignored.
Because she's convinced she is right. She knows it because she feels it. There is no fact, no example, no numbers, no bottom line, not a solitary demonstration that anyone can make that will ever change her mind. She is incapable of changing her mind when presented with evidence or a counter-argument because she suffers from a mental illness that tells her (and the people who would follow this asshole off a cliff) that the possibility of being wrong is so psychically devastating that it is to be avoided by any means necessary, including constructing an alternate subjective reality which is not assailable from the outside. Anyone who attempts to intrude upon this alternate universe is worthy of nothing but contempt and is met with a sanctimonious smugness.
The result is someone who comes off as being unintelligent, lacking in the self-awareness to understand how unintelligent she appears to be, and who's final argument in self-defense is to impugn the motives of those who oppose her on shallow emotional grounds. Then she takes her outline down, alternates lies about it ever being posted in the first place, contends that it was only a rough draft, and insists that she's the victim of vicious right-wing hackers, it is all politically-motivated noise, sending out political operatives to make these cases publicly in a way that gives you the impression that they don't even believer her, and that they are willing to make themselves look stupid in her defense.
(This is the discredited Anthony Weiner Defense).
None of that matters; as stated, the prerequisite is a target audience who is pretty much in the same holey canoe, mentally. They don't care about truth or facts, either; they don't care about expense or efficacy, too, because to consider such things at all is to call into question their own mental processes and beliefs. And if they ask the questions and arrive at unattractive (but accurate) answers -- i.e. I'm an idiot -- they start to feel badly about themselves and need massive doses of Xanax because they...just...can't...deal...with the idea that Mommy and Daddy gave birth to a genetic potato salad, necessitating suicide.
The braindead masses who follow her will not challenge her; the Press, which is largely made up of similar people, will not challenge her, and it will only be through the cruel instruction of reality that we will discover how dangerously fucktarded she really is.
And by then it will be too late, and she will find a new litany of Smugnorant excuses for failure which will be eagerly scarfed down by her intellectual and political fellow-travelers, for doing so keeps the Reality of Retard at arm's length for at least one more day.
On the subject of "Genufake", the best example in a long time came down the pike in the person of one Jussie Smollet, a man so self-absorbed and ridiculously stupid that he even forgot to drop his Subway footlong during the commission of an alleged attempted lynching.
Not to belabor the point, but the whole thing smelled of "hoax" from the very beginning. When you refuse to co-operate with the police by handing over your phone, when you then comply with that request with redacted records, when your initial story has more holes in it than Diane Feinstein's head, it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out you're full of shit.
Fuck it, let's belabor the point: if you were to believe Jussie's story, you would have to believe that two white supremacists are wandering a neighborhood in the liberal bastion of Chicago, during the coldest night of the year, equipped with a noose and bleach, just on the off-chance they might encounter a gay, black man from a television show their racial animus probably doesn't allow them to watch, just so they could beat him up. They didn't even rob him...not even of his sandwich.
The dead giveaway was the "catchphrase".
Every racial hoax of the last decade has involved a catchphrase. Apparently, white supremacists -- even invented ones -- and cops, can't go about their business of mindlessly attacking and killing blacks and gays in the depths of winter without the event generating a memorable catchphrase that often makes no sense whatsoever (from the standpoint of possibly identifying the attacker and his motives).
In this case, "This is MAGA country..." (Chicago is MAGA country?)
We can add to this one such other well-worn classics like:
"Hands Up...Don't Shoot!".
"It's Giuliani Time!"
"Go Home N_______"
"Black Bitch Die"
Those are just the first five to pop up when you ask Google for "Top Racial Hoax Catchphrases". (I shit you not).
Now, of course, Jussie was so full of shit that even the Chicago PD was able to crack this case. The nature of the event undergoes a metamorphosis "was it a hoax?" becomes "even if it's a hoax, it still speaks deeply to _____". Because the people who initially believed this story NEEDED it to be true; they still need it to be true for a variety of reasons, most having to do with money (there's thousands of "Reverends" and "Civil Rights Leaders" in America who will insist it's still (potentially) true, even when it isn't, because they intend to fundraise off of it, and there's millions more who will pony up because Smugnorance).
In the meantime, Jussie Smollet is probably headed to prison, where he can meet some real White supremacists and engage in all the homosexual sex he'd like to, willing or not, and he will still be considered "a victim" by many.
A second example of Genufake is less-pernicious, but much funnier.
Kamala Harris, Senator from California and would-be Presidential Contender (she believes she can win, most likely because her previous experience in public office has shown her that getting the right job is merely a matter of sucking the right cocks) attempted to ingratiate herself to African-Americans by proclaiming that she, too, liked to smoke pot and listen to Tupcac back in her college days, and therefore, marijuana laws need to be less-severe and punitive. Besides, she's half-Jamaican, and everyone knows Jamaicans love their Happy Plant.
Of course, it would later turn out that when Harris was in college Tupcac hadn't even released an album, so she's obviously lying. In what has to be one of the great ironies of this whole kerfuffle, it has gone almost wholly unremarked that Harris has invoked a series of racial and ethnic stereotypes, that is to say, has engaged in racism, in the process of trying to make a case against what she professes to believe are racist laws; that all blacks listen to rap music, that they all smoke pot, and that Jamaicans are all Rastafarians who can't live without the ganja.
Now, why she should do this is easy to explain. Because Barack Obama had to do it, as well.
You see, in many quarters of American Blackdom, Kamala would not be considered (as Je$$e Jack$on once put it) "Authentically Black". It is a common accusation made against People O' Color by other People O' Color whom the second set of People O' Color don't really like.
For example, Je$$e remarked that because Barack Obama was raised a half-white, upper-middle-class (Communist, natch), in the island paradise of Hawaii, had been dragged by his fucktarded mother to all parts of the Earth trailing her deadbeat Muslim husbands, attended Harvard and Columbia, and used proper English, he (Obama) could not possibly have any connection to the "reality" experienced by American Blacks of housing projects, systemic abuse, degradation, poverty, violent crime, bastardy (even if Obama never saw his father, he at least knew who he was), and welfare.
Obama overcame that handicap by beating Hillary a few times in some primaries, and then Je$$e changed his tune, but the smear stuck. It led to the (in-)famous non-denunciation of Reverend Wright, the "Bitter Clingers" speech, the "we will punish our enemies" routine, and much more, as Obama attempted to burnish his "African-American" and "Oppressed Minority" credentials, despite not being "African-American" in the cultural context, or Oppressed in any objective sense.
After all, oppressed people don't get to be President of the United States.
(And here I must digress: I am not a racist -- I hated Obama's White Half, too).
This is the same thing. For Kamala is not your typical African-American; she, too, is "only" half (non-American) black, and the other half is Indian.
So, the attempt to build a mirage of solidarity with the downtrodden masses led her to appear to embrace what she thinks constitutes "blackness" in America (because she doesn't know! Like Obama, she's a product of the Upper Middle Class, the right universities, and the political system. She's not a Prole, and she has "earned her stripes" on her back, not through "struggle") .
She has performed an act of Genufakery in the attempt to portray herself as "real". And we're supposed, at that point, to forget or not notice the disingenuous parts.
Of course, it will all be quickly forgotten that Kamala is Ghetto-culture-illiterate, detached from the everyday experience of the typical African-American, if she manages to get within range of the right zippers who will...ahem....shower her with money and political support (rather than that other stuff she's been rumored to shower in).
Smugnorance and Genufake are becoming the hallmarks of our society; the contrived erudition and understanding, the manufactured manifestation of the "The Man (or Women) for All People" image that consists of focus-tested soundbites, the right hairdresser, the fashion consultant, the legions of reporters and operatives who will block for you, the effort to impress -- emotionally -- the voter who is just as stupid and phony, is a danger to our society.
It's all empty virtue signalling.
UPDATE: Corrected a grammatical issue or two.