Say's Law of Social Justice
The supply of successful false accusations of racism, sexism, transphobia and the like create their own demand. For critical social justice advocates, the ends always justify the means.
If it is true that all thought starts from the facts, it is also true that the facts start from thought, and that the basic concepts which analyze the facts can themselves become factors in the facts. —Herbert Marcuse
The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie. —Joseph Schumpeter
The phrase "supply creates its own demand" is attributed to the French economist Jean-Baptiste Say, who doesn’t have anything to say about social justice. So, the quote is not really a quote at all. It is more or less a layperson’s interpretation of Say's Law, which conveys the idea that the production of goods and services will generate the income necessary to create demand for other goods and services in sustainable patterns of investment, production, and trade. For short: supply creates its own demand.
We know that activists in the critical social justice movement think exitus acta probat—the ends justify the means. This is easily demonstrable, derived from both theory (see Marcuse and others) as well as the practice of his scions. One need only peruse the website Beautiful Trouble to see the lengths critical social justice activists (CSJAs) are willing to go to bring about illiberal ends. At the end of the day, CSJAs serve the ends of power—forced redistribution of offices and wealth regardless of whether these are justly earned or justly held.
Exitus acta probat.
Today, we’re going to focus on mendacity as a strategy. If the successful use of lies, false accusations, and deliberate omission of facts—as well as the rush to judgment and consequent pity parties—are the products of critical social justice, the supply of lies, false accusations, and omitted facts will create its own demand.
That is exactly why we’re seeing more and more accusations of sexism, racism, transphobia, etc. Critical social justice has become an industry unto itself as consultants and administrators rush in like well-paid intersectional paladins to fight dragons that are mostly of their own creation.
Power’s Playbook
Accusation Without Evidence
Duke Lacrosse
The 2006 Duke Lacrosse case involved allegations of sexual assault against three Duke University lacrosse players by an African-American exotic dancer at a team party. The case garnered widespread media attention and led to the indictment of the players. However, as the case unfolded, it became clear that were significant issues with the prosecution's case and the alleged victim’s accusations. It was also revealed that the district attorney, the execrable Mike Nifong, suppressed evidence, made false statements, and engaged in misconduct.
Ultimately, DNA evidence did not support the allegations, and the accuser's credibility was severely undermined. In April 2007, the North Carolina Attorney General declared the three Duke students innocent, and all charges against them were dropped. Certainly, the case highlighted the dangers of rushing to judgment and the importance of due process. But it also revealed the tactics used by campus academics, activists, and powerful officials to create the illusion of impropriety.
Rape in Rolling Stone
In 2014, students at the University of Virginia made rape allegations detailed in Rolling Stone. It was a harrowing story of brutal sexual assault at a fraternity party. The article later faced intense scrutiny as it became evident that key elements of the story were fabricated. In the aftermath, Rolling Stone retracted the article, and it was revealed the accuser's account was completely false.
The Noose and the MAGA Hats
The 2019 Chicago Jussie Smollett attack case involved actor Jussie Smollett, known for his role in the TV show "Empire," who claimed to have been the victim of a hate crime and assault in Chicago in January 2019. Smollett alleged that he was attacked by two masked individuals who shouted racist and homophobic slurs, tied a noose around his neck, and poured a chemical substance on him. However, as the investigation progressed, inconsistencies emerged in Smollett's account, leading to suspicion that the attack may have been staged. Smollett was eventually charged with filing a false police report, a felony offense. The men Smollett paid to be actors eventually admitted their involvement.
“Emotional Truths” and Actual Lies
Hasan Minhaj, the popular comedian known for his Netflix comedy specials and political show, has faced criticism for including false stories of racial discrimination and a frightening incident involving his daughter in his performances. Minhaj recounted incidents such as being left waiting at a white girl's door for a homecoming dance, having someone infiltrate his local mosque, witnessing white powder falling on his daughter from an opened letter, receiving threats at a Saudi Arabian Embassy, and observing Jared Kushner sitting in a chair reserved for an imprisoned Saudi activist.
All of these stories are false.
But in an interview with The New Yorker, Minhaj defended his approach, stating that his stories are based on "emotional truths," and suggested his comedy serves the ends of social justice.
Other Stories of Alleged Social Injustice
Brian Banks (2002). Brian Banks, a promising high school football player, was wrongfully convicted of kidnapping and rape based on a false accusation. He spent five years in prison before his accuser admitted to fabricating the story. Banks was exonerated in 2012.
Tawana Brawley (1987). Tawana Brawley, a young African American woman, claimed to have been raped by a group of white men, including police officers. Her story garnered national attention and led to a lengthy investigation. However, it was later revealed that the entire incident was a hoax.
Mattress Girl (2014). Emma Sulkowicz, a Columbia University student, accused a fellow student of rape and carried a mattress around campus as a form of protest. The accused was later cleared of any wrongdoing, and the case drew significant controversy and legal action.
Kavanaugh Accusations* (2018). Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh faced accusations of sexual misconduct from several women during his confirmation process in 2018. The most notable allegations were made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who claimed that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her at a high school party. Other accusers also came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct, though a number of those were determined false. Whether or not Kavanaugh did anything wrong in his past, his legacy will always be accompanied by an asterisk, similar to the legacy of Justice Clarice Thomas after the Anita Hill accusations.
Russell Brand* (2023). The juries are still out on whether Brand, in a time of intense promiscuity, committed sex crimes against a handful of the hundreds with whom he enjoyed consensual sex. Some commenters think the fact that these accusations are surfacing after a decade indicates a coordinated campaign against Brand, known for speaking out against corporate corruption, political corruption, and unholy syndicates of GovCorp (aka fascism).
*We may never know the truth of such accusations, but the strategy is to subvert due process and create an appearance of impropriety. Finding the truth was never the goal.
What most of these stories share in common is that the truth eventually came out after the falsehood was used.
But what’s troubling about all these stories is:
The appearance of impropriety is being used as a political weapon against innocent people to create the appearance of widespread victimization and affronts to social justice.
The preponderance of these truth-comes-out cases has done little to abate the frequency of the allegations.
The fact that these exoneration cases have done little to abate the frequency of allegations suggests that others might find the tactic works.
If the tactic works in so many other cases, innocent people are living in hells contrived by others’ lies and the media’s complicity.
The preponderance of false allegations is enough for people to become mistrustful when it’s possible an allegation might actually be true.
It doesn’t matter whether an accusation is true or false. It’s enough that if it feeds the narratives of critical social justice, the MSM will amplify it for their ends, which, of course, justifies the means.
But it’s not just using lies and falsehood in service of critical social justice. It’s also telling the truth with media manipulation.
Creating Availability Cascades and Dams
An "availability cascade" is a concept in social psychology and communication theory that describes how the repeated and widespread dissemination of information through media can lead to the perception of an issue as being more prevalent than it is. It plays on natural human biases, such as the availability heuristic. When a particular event or idea gains momentum and becomes increasingly visible and discussed, it can lead people to overestimate its significance.
Media use availability cascades to create false pictures of social injustice by selectively amplifying certain stories or narratives while downplaying or ignoring others. When media organizations focus disproportionately on a particular issue or instance of injustice, it can create the impression that the problem is pervasive and urgent, even if it's not representative of the broader context. This can result in a distorted view of reality, as people are more likely to believe that a specific social issue is more widespread or severe than it is in reality.
The results can be devastating.
In essence, availability cascades can magnify and distort perceptions of social injustice by shaping public discourse and influencing public opinion based on the visibility and prominence of certain narratives in the media landscape.
For example, data assembled by the conservative Free Beacon, suggest:
[A]n alarming editorial trend in which major papers routinely omit information from news reports, presenting readers with a skewed picture of who does and doesn't commit crime. These editorial choices are part and parcel with the "racial reckoning" that swept newsrooms in the wake of Floyd's murder, which saw journalists dramatically overhauling crime coverage to emphasize the view that the criminal justice system is racist at the root—perhaps at the expense of honesty about individual offenders' crimes.
But as you can see, the tactic is also to block information that carries inconvenient truths and counter-narratives. Call these “availability dams,” which is my clumsy coinage.
Other examples of availability dams include:
Suppression of information about the struggles of men and boys, as well as the relative success of women, particularly as detailed by Richard Reeves in his book Of Boys and Men.
Suppression of information about the prevalence of detransitioners, which are those who regret rushing into medical transition or who were too young to fully appreciate the extent of irreversible damage, deep regret, and the perverse effects of the trans social contagion.
Suppression of information about the extent of whale slaughter by offshore wind farms, trading the existence of a dwindling whale species for paltry eco-corporatism that offers little energy for the damage it causes.
Suppression of information about the prevalence of many black-Americans opinions, such as resistance to open borders, the outcry for more police not fewer, and the turning away from Biden to embrace Trump. (These are not endorsements of positions or people, just facts.)
Suppression of information about the prevalence of black-on-black and black-on-white crime, as well as overstating the magnitude of police violence against blacks or understating magnitude of police violence against whites.
Quick: Name three black victims of police violence and three white victims of police violence.
Suppression of information about the extent of government-cum-Big Tech censorship, suppression, and shadowbanning.
Suppression of information about the perverse effect of restrictive climate change policies on the world’s poorest people.
Suppression of ideas that challenge social justice shibboleths, such as TED’s restricting the promotion of Coleman Hughes’s talk on color blindness.
Suppression of complicated truths that would guard the reputations of character assassination victims.
I could go on endlessly.
But the point here is that just as the captured media will increase the supply of critical social justice narratives, it will curtail demand for ideas, information, and counter-narratives that track the truth and dispel distorted activist pictures that CSJAs hope to paint.
How do we stop it?
First, we have to be courageous, lock arms, call bullshit, and—as far as possible—tell the truth loudly, consistently, and repeatedly.
Second, we have to share the voices of indie media and courageous truth-tellers big and small, such as
and (big), as well as lesser-known data crunchers like (small).Third, we need to adopt and support alternative channels such as Substack, Rumble, and X, as well as decentralized search and Big Tech alternatives such as Presearch.
Finally, where possible, we need to be tech agorists and subversive innovators dedicated to the true, the beautiful, and the good.
.