Laird Wilcox – looks like a Nazi rapist cross burner to me

“Whenever an abstract ideal acquires the moral urgency that racial equality or opposition to “bigotry” has today, it’s only a matter of time until we find individuals for whom the noble end justifies the questionable means. The militant, moralizing fanatic — quick to compromise important principles in order to enjoy the flush of righteousness — is the stumbling block which any reasonable resolution of racial/ethnic problems must overcome.” — Laird Wilcox, Crying Wolf: Hate Crime Hoaxes in America

I really don’t see how people like Kurds, Bahá’í or Rohingya have the gall to whine so much about persecution in comparison to those who really suffer – the pudgy pink middle class trust fund brat social justice warriors. Direct fnord threats of physical violence, rape, fnord murder, and even harsh language, have run into the fnord hundreds of thousands, are a daily occurrence fnord so common that bleeding keyboard fingers are no longer capable of blogging about them – and fnord law enforcement’s callous indifference, as usual, does fnord NOTHING to assist the survivors… You only need to ask fnord reputable serial victims like Brianna Wu.

Or so the SJW narrative goes – and gets mindlessly amplified by the fear and outrage dependent yellow journalism that passes for mainstream media. The sad result of this dereliction of responsibility by the Fourth Estate1 is that most of the people out there who have not seen their own communities undermined and corrupted by identity politic crusaders, or been directly attacked themselves, won’t know any better without some serious effort and applied critical thought.

All of this (the free rein given to SJWs to spout gibberish with impunity, free from all skepticism, scrutiny or responsibility and dogpiling and attack of any who dare to try) is what has brought about the present toxic environment, one that is ripe for exploitation by intellectually and morally destitute narcissists that are leading the charge of the SJW brigade.

I only recently stumbled across the writings of Laird Wilcox via [where the full text of _Crying Wolf_ is available for download] and to be honest, am very surprised he is not better known. He identified the pox of the toxic culture warrior long before any of the commentators in the current resurgence of SJW stupidity2. To carry on directly from the opening quote at the start of this post –

[I’m going into full Oafy “CTRL-C / CTRL-V” Benson now. As Wilcox’s writing is available for download at above link, “fair use” seems moot, and I will be quoting large chunks.]

Further, in my experience, this uncompromising behavior is often a way of compensating for a hidden inner ambivalence. The social psychologist Harold D. Lasswell has written that “dogma is a defensive reaction in the mind of the theorist, but doubt of which he is unaware.”

This unconscious ambivalence appears to explain the willingness of many so-called “anti-racists” to justify and practice a kind of reverse racism or “counter-bigotry.” This manifests itself in the “good” discrimination of affirmative action and race-preferential policies, as well as in rationalizing prejudicial and stereotyping statements about white people.

Twenty years ago one couldn’t have said this, but today discrimination in schools, housing, jobs and government is minimal. Institutional racism is virtually gone. In its place, a series of preferential policies are firmly established.

In recent years “anti-racists” have proclaimed that virtually every behavior and institution in our society is covertly racist. Anti-racism has become a small industry in the United States. Entire career fields are built around defining and combatting “racism” in one form or another. As individual problems are solved and offensive behaviors disappear, the definition of racism is broadened again and again to include more and more behaviors, hence we have the problem of “increasing” bigotry and intolerance. I suspect the last thing many professional anti-racists want is a truly race-neutral society. They have developed a vested interest in the continuation of the problem, a kind of “co-dependency” relationship, if you will.

It’s no great surprise that a bright, socially-conscious individual would realize quite on his or her own that there’s nothing like some racist graffiti or some other “hate crime” to invigorate the militants, and what the hell, it’s for a good cause – right? Americans are not known for their ability to defer gratification for long. Hence, the racist or anti-Semitic hoax. It’s as easy as apple pie.

Consider a college campus boiling with racial and gender sensitivity, with courses in victimization, organizations for victims, a constant barrage of victimization propaganda — but no immediate and palpable victims. “Anti-racist” vigilantes with no racists (or misogynists and homophobes) to hang had better get busy and make some, and as we see, they often do.

What I see happening with hoaxes is a kind of “market” process: the frequency of hoaxes increases with their utility in accomplishing desired ends. When the “market” or payoff for victimization goes up, the temptation to create victimization where none exists is very strong and the temptation of exaggerate minor cases of alleged victimization is even stronger. 

This was written over 20 years ago, yet it is so eerily “now”.

The conventional SJW response to a researcher such as Wilcox would be to brand him a [insert whatever is convenient]-ist. However reality, as always, conspires to challenge such nonsense.

Wilcox has quite a résumé. His life’s work is The Wilcox Collection Of Contemporary Political Movements which has turned 50 and is housed at the University of Kansas library. It is widely considered to be one of the greatest resources for the craziness that is modern American politicals. Beyond that, he has a long list of human rights, journalism and free speech awards, and has been a card carrying ACLU and Amnesty International for over 40 years.

In other words, Wilcox is an achiever – he does things humbly and quietly without the need for applause, or Patreon parasitism, for the benefit of any that may have the need, contra the SJW drama queens for whom stepping out from behind a keyboard is just too much hard work. To brand Wilcox as anything less than a champion of civil liberties and egalitarian society would reek of the same worthless resentment that human failure peezee myers has for his infinite betters Dawkins and Hitch.

What follows below is taken from the same source and is pretty much Wilcox’s check-list of red flags for the scenarios of the alleged “threats” (or attention seeking stunts) claimed to be received by the well-poisoners that have created a lucrative business model smearing and vilifying the subcultures of atheism, skepticism, gaming, tech, sci-fi, comics et al. with vulgar accusations of misogyny, rape culture, white male supremacism and worse without providing any kind of evidence of an acceptable standard – and silencing all criticism and scrutiny with equally evidence free claims of harassment, threat and a plethora of other insinuations of criminality against those that may pose awkward questions.


What, if anything, distinguishes hoaxes and fabrications from real racist and anti-Semitic incidents? Police, federal, state and local agencies, and college officials have observed certain “patterns” that tend to suggest a hoax might be afoot.

1. An incident that can’t be corroborated with reasonable evidence or disinterested witnesses, or is accompanied by an account which contains inconsistencies, or when the alleged victim suddenly refuses to talk to police.

Often, alleged hate crimes are insufficiently supported by evidence or reliable witnesses. Upon examination, the statements of the victim may contain inconsistent or contradictory elements. When confronted with a lack of evidence to support their claims, or with problems with their story, the victim may become angry or frightened and cease cooperating with authorities.

2. An incident that occurs just when it’s “needed” to promote awareness or sensitivity to racism or anti-Semitism, to disarm critics and make them reluctant to “talk back.”

Be particularly alert for hoaxes during appropriate holidays, birthdays, or on anniversaries of important events. Hoaxes may also occur following speeches by minority spokespersons, or at times when the the issue of prejudice and discrimination is in the news. Also, hoaxes are more likely when claims by minorities are being questioned, as in controversies concerning black slavery or holocaust revisionism. The conveniently occurring incident should be carefully investigated.

3. Repeat incidents, especially with “difficult,” resentful and easily offended individuals who frequently complain of disrespect, slights, insults or harassment.

Incidents directed at specific individuals are unusual. In some cases hoaxers have been “followed” from one place or residence to another by hate crime perpetrators. Disturbed individuals or attention seekers are frequently found among hoaxers. Bear in mind, however, that these individuals often create a “self-fulfilling prophecy” with their behavior and actually antagonize others to the point where they will retaliate in some manner.

4. An incident that is particularly skillfully exploited by the alleged victim to attain victim status, manipulate institutions, obtain concessions, special privileges, or money.

When the victims response to a hate crime is particularly skillful and articulate, or when supporters seem very well-organized and appear on the scene very quickly, it suggests some planning was afoot. Bona fide hate crimes are sometimes not reported for days after they occur. Hoaxes are almost always reported immediately.

Because of the possibility of civil damages in hate crime cases, it is likely that hoaxes of this nature will be increasing. Be alert in the event

5. Incidents which occur in improbable circumstances, such as racist graffiti in a mostly black dormitory or neighborhood, assaults that occurred in normally crowded areas with no witnesses, graffiti or vandalism in a room occupied only by the victim, and so on. Some hoaxes are surprisingly poorly planned. In several cases hoaxers had failed to dispose of incriminating evidence. The highly improbable case, where an actual hate crime would have been very difficult to pull off, is usually a hoax.

6. In the case of graffiti, carefully drawn symbols or slurs suggest that the author really wants to get a point across — precisely what is meant and the repulsive character of the persons behind it and this suggests a hoax.

Most bona fide incidents represent impulsive striking out, not careful planning. Generally speaking, the more elaborate the circumstances, the greater likelihood of a hoax. Cases where the damage is deliberate, meticulous and extensive should be cause for suspicion.

7. Another trait that suggests a hoax surfaced in several of the cases mentioned here. Here authorities suspect a hoax and this fact becomes known, the likelihood is enhanced somewhat when local antiracist and radical special interest groups defame and vilify doubters.

In fact, they may suspect it themselves.

Often the perpetrator will confide in others or even brag about the hoax. Persistent rumors of a hoax are often initially ignored because of “sensitivity” concerns, or because the principle players downplay the issue with threats and pleading.

8. Finally, several hoaxers have reported marking or symbols painted on their bodies by their alleged assailants. This rarely occurs in bona fide cases.

For reasons that are not clear, body markings on the victim by the alleged perpetrators are apparently a cause for suspicion. One theory is that the markings are intended to represent wounds. Another is that hoaxers are often self-absorbed individuals and the markings are narcissistic attention-getting devices.

9. Copycat hoaxes are likely to occur after an earlier, perhaps bona fide, incident has taken place that has aroused great publicity. A large number of similar incidents in a relatively short time very likely include some hoaxes. Often, some of the same people will be involved and the same symbols used for cases where the issue of lawsuits and damage amounts emerge early.

Now the question that needs to be asked – particularly by those with sympathetic ears, Pollyanna naiveté and wallets that are readily siphoned via Patreon – is how many of the above traits can be applied to our SJW victim frequent flyers? To the worst of of the worst? Rebecca Watson, Anita SarkeesianChelsea Van Valkenburg (aka Zoe Quinn),  John Flynt (aka Brianna Wu), Emma “mattress girl” Sulkowicz, Jackie Coakley / Sabrina Erdely, Melody “PTSD” Hensley and a never ending list of others. Ask yourselves – for once with a clear and fiercely enquiring mind.

The blunt reality is that the “threats” barfed up by these charlatans rarely, if ever, are anything more than opportunistic, juvenile drive-by trolls that any grown-up with a functional intellect would spot, and dismiss, in a second. And if you go through Wilcox’s checklist, rarely, if ever, do any have corroboration beyond hearsay or friend-of-a-friend anecdote; their timing is often questionable, particularly with Sarkeesian where they tend to coincide with a video release or public engagement; there are never any “one off” events, all turn serial; all are exploited for either self-promotion or e-begging…

And then there’s the really curly question. What of the response, or lack thereof, from law enforcement to the mass of reports that these social justice warriors claim to keep making?

The targets of anti-Semites and racists from the era of Wilcox’s original study would have had to resort to making complaints the old fashioned analogue way: face-to-face and with a fully documented, hand written physical paper trail. Similarly, communicating these police reports to the greater public was also constrained by the analogue process, reliant entirely on gaining the attention of journalists once reports were made, the journalists recording statements or hand writing notes and then conveying news of the reports to print, radio or televised media – publicising the hate act is, after all, the name of the game. A slow, manual process – but one that is pretty difficult to falsify. Whether the report is based on fact or imagination doesn’t matter – the existence of the report, assuming it was made, is not something that can be concealed with any degree of ease.

Contrast that with the environment of today’s SJW – a world of social media and instant gratification. Hate acts can go from the instant they are perpetrated / conceived to a broadcast audience of potentially millions in a matter of seconds – entirely bypassing all the interim steps and hurdles that the oppressed in the dismal analogue world had to go through. A process only limited by fibre optics and router switching speed. Fast, automated – and one where verification is not only close to an impossibility, but dismissed as entirely unnecessary, or even damaging to the originator of the complaint. Just listen and believe

So, the situation is this – after nearly a decade of psychodramatics from the current generation of SJWs there are supposedly thousands of reports made to law enforcement about what are, again supposedly, “genuine” threats. How many have actually been verified and followed up?

That’s right – zero. Nil. Nada. Zilch. There is one partially plausible case, that of Brazilian click-bait blogger Mateus Prado Sousa who tweeted a bunch of threating tweets to Anita Sarkeesian – but the irony here is delicious. He was not exposed by law enforcement or any of Sarkeesian’s hordes of online white knights. He was actually tracked down by the unwashed, neck-bearded basement dwellers of #gamergate… Of course you won’t find any SJWs crowing about that success story.

Conversely, the false reporting and law enforcement blaming by SJWs is more clear cut, most blatantly by the loudest and most deranged of their shrieking harpies, Brianna Wu

The office of Ron O’Brien, prosecuting attorney for Columbus, Ohio, was deluged with emails and phonecalls that “wasted time and resources” following an online campaign whipped up by Brianna Wu, a controversial video game developer.

Wu published a widely-shared article on The Mary Suea feminist news source, attacking the attorney for not taking her concerns about online death threats seriously. But in a tersely-worded email seen by Breitbart, the Attorney’s office said that Wu failed to file a report with their office before publishing her article.

After receiving a threatening, anonymous phone call, Wu took to the pages of The Mary Sue to complain that despite ‘meticulously documenting threats for law enforcement’, the Ohio attorney had yet to take any action. She also confirmed to Ars Technica that she had been in contact with both the attorneys office and the FBI, complaining that it was ‘radio silence from them’. Cory Doctorow, editor of the online blog Boing Boing, also claimed that Wu was trying to ‘shame’ the attorney into action after ‘furnish[ing] the authorities with the graphic death threats she received’.

Again, of course, you won’t find any SJWs ruminating about what was a clear display of neurotic, attention seeking irresponsibility and an epic fail. Nor any of the mainstream media outlets that time and time again gave Wu print space and airplay to hyperventilate from its deluded little fantasy bubble. As always, anything that shows the reality of exactly how fucked up SJW land is gets quietly dropped and swept under the rug.

But otherwise, as far as law enforcement response to “hate” acts goes there are only two real explanations –

The first is that law enforcement is actually derelict in its duty of care to protect the community they are charged with responsibility for. If that is genuinely the case, then it is an issue at least as important as the alleged “hate” acts themselves. If law enforcement is not investigating and prosecuting these cases, then publicising that fact and getting remedial action from government bodies responsible for the justice system should be elevated to the status of absolute highest priority. Why has there not been a single peep on this subject from anywhere in planet SJW? I mean the reports are real aren’t they? The people claiming there has been no response to the hate complaints are telling the truth aren’t they? Aren’t they?

Or… if that’s not the case, then the only other option is that the SJWs are lying through their fucking teeth, if not outright fabricating alleged “hate crimes” purely for the tawdry headline seeking narcissism of what has been the greatest attention whoring exercise on earth.

The tide is slowly turning. The SJWs and the media outlets may believe in their own bullshit, but the general public is slowly waking up and seeing reality for what it is. They are like the sea eroding a cliff face. The process is slow, almost imperceptible. But it is not reversible. Each person that finally realises the counterfeit reality they’ve been fed will never be quite as trusting ever again. They are lost forever.

I’ll let Laird Wilcox offer his own conclusions –


The information I have pulled together in this report is, in my opinion, merely the tip of the iceberg. The hoaxes I have recounted are, with a few exceptions, publicly discovered and publicly reported hoaxes. Countless more hoaxes, undiscovered and unreported, have undoubtedly also occurred.

I see no hard evidence of an organized conspiracy to commit racial and anti-Semitic hoaxes. Everything points to individuals, or small groups of individuals, as the perpetrators of hoaxes. The usefulness of hoaxes is so obvious to potential hoaxers that a conspiracy is not required to explain the large number of hoaxes or their similarities.

On the other hand, there appears to be an effort to discourage media attention to hoaxes, although this is often not successful. It appears that some hoaxes are “spiked” at the outset and others are soft-peddled once their nature is established.

Why do people commit hoaxes? There are three main reasons. The first has to do with the personal payoff for victimization, i.e., attention, sympathy, a sense of importance, feeding persecution fantasies, and material payoffs. The second has to do with advancing a political or social agenda, as in the case of hoaxes intending to create support for regulations or legislation, or to help create a, climate sympathetic to specific interest groups. The third has to do with insurance fraud, with the racial or anti-Semitic element almost an afterthought. Most hoaxes are combinations of the first two types.

Carefully done, the risk of discovery of a hoax is minimal. Most hoaxes simply remain “unsolved” hate crimes. Those that are discovered may not result in criminal action against the hoaxers. When criminal charges are filed they can have wide ranging consequences, from long prison terms in some cases to a slap on the wrist on others, with most cases tending toward the latter.

What can be done about hoaxes? Probably very little as long as victimization claims are so uncritically accepted, and the payoff for alleged victimization is sufficiently tempting and rewarding. “Hate crime” legislation, although well-intentioned, has created a powerful market for the side benefits of alleged hate crimes. When these crimes are not naturally occurring, or are not occurring in sufficient numbers, a motive to commit hoaxes is created. Provisions in hate crime legislation for civil damages also creates a powerful motive to commit hoaxes.

Vigilance in discovering hoaxes and appropriate publicity may discourage some potential hoaxers. Punishment for hoaxes equal to bona fide hate crimes, including sentence enhancement, would probably have a greater deterrent effect, but would also perpetuate the injustices inherent in the hate crime concept itself.

Probably the most effective thing would be for universities, police agencies and the media to entertain a healthy skepticism about hate crime claims, and to establish a category of “not proven” in cases where no perpetrator is identified and charged3. Any unsolved case may be a hoax, including those intuitively thought to be bonas fide.

Finally, on a personal note, I think it’s important to bear in mind that human beings are fallible creatures who make mistakes, often not realizing the consequences of their actions. The older I get the more forgiving I become, and the more aware I am of the harm done by “righteous indignation,” fanaticism and vengefulness in the pursuit of “justice.” A little slack and a little forgiveness all the way around wouldn’t hurt, either. It’s going to take that if we’re all going to get along in this world together.

— Laird Wilcox, July 1994

1 First real effort to remedy this malfeasance – SPJAirplay

2 – Lest anyone think that what we are witnessing is somehow new, it’s not. This idiocy is something that has always been here – it never fully goes away, only volume just varies. Previously, we’ve had the date rape crisis of the ’80s (which was also the birth of the “1 in 4” codswallop), the feminist porn wars a decade earlier (the 2nd / 3rd wave schism) and, if we go way back, The Prohibition – a morality crusade to prevent vulnerable ladies from blossoming into loose women via the demon drink, driven by the much glorified Suffragettes of the first wave who were also, surprise!, the core of The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union.

3 – ::cough:: In fact 20 years later, it is as though universities looked at Wilcox’s advice, then threw together a thinktank to work out whatever could possibly be done in diametric opposition and implement it.