L’Affaire Dickinson

by Frost on September 10, 2013

Pax Dickinson has resigned as Chief Technology Officer of Business Insider, after a Gawker hit piece cum Twitter brigade took notice of his consistently hilarious, insightful, and reactionary internet presence. I’m taking the news very personally, because Pax is my best (possibly best-est) friend in the whole entire world, at least among friends with whom I have only ever interacted via Twitter.

Hold your tears though, gentle reader. One finds few ex-CTOs begging for change on street corners. Sure, his job search will be complicated by his anti-feminist, anti-democratic, anti-pretty lies predilections, but he’ll figure something out.

Besides, this had to be part of the plan. As cool as it would have been for Henry Blodget to get behind his homeslice CTO and flip off the Cathedral, the truth is that Pax effectively quit Business Insider years ago, the day he decided to create an honest and un-PC Twitter presence rather than the usual name-dropping, circle-jerking PR-authored pap. Here are a few from the past month or so:

Heavens to Betsy, my virgin eyes!

As I said, I’m not worried about Pax. Bitcoins to dollars, the man has savings and a game plan. If he really wants to avoid the dreaded resume gap, I hereby officially hire Pax as CTO of Thumotic. Responsibilities will be limited to figuring out how to make my embedded tweets look all professional-like, and the salary is a pint any time he’s in my neighbourhood.

You’ve really got to admire his courage. Here was a man at the top of his career, CTO of one of the most popular and fastest-growing news websites in the world. It would have been so easy for Pax Dickinson to have avoided this fate. He could have:

  1. Not had a Twitter account.
  2. Wrote under an alias, like 90% of the un-PC blogosphere.
  3. Dialed back just a few of his tweets, and stayed within the bounds of ‘offensive and reactionary, but not aggressively so.’
  4. Apologized for those he had offended, and explained that the most offensive Tweet of all, the one that rendered him an unredeemable Nigger Guy, was actually mocking Mel Gibson’s use of the word.

Instead, Pax threw it all away – his BI job, and likely any chance of ever working for a ‘respectable’ public-facing firm again. That’s a lot to lose over the right to occasionally say mean things in 160-character increments.

On the subject of apologies: Will Pax be the one the prophecies spoke of? The rogue truthsayer who refuses to assume a cringe of submission in the styles of Summers, Watson, Miller, Saletan, and many forgettable others? I’m optimistic. Pax knows the score. He is not the meek, clueless tube of cookie dough who begged for Adria Richards forgiveness after accidentally being overheard making a dongle joke. He chose this fate, Ben Kenobi style.


So what can the rest of us learn from this situation? I note two trends:

  1. The boundaries dictating the outer limits of acceptable speech are contracting. This is happening in a legal sense via hate speech restrictions, and the keen observer of Cathedral tactics will note the groundwork being laid for an even more ambitious future. (But that’s an upcoming novel of a blog post all by itself.)
  2. Privacy is disappearing. Unless you are extremely diligent, all of your un-PC blog posts, tweets, comments, and (if not now, soon) private emails can be easily mined and connected to your real-life identity. The US Government and its cooperative friends in Silicon Valley are currently developing the capability to end the ability of Americans to communicate freely with each other outside of channels that can be observed by them.

Taken together, the modern reactionary is left to conclude that we are all getting Pax Dickinsoned, sooner or later. Perhaps the smart move is to make like Bryce Laliberte and just come clean – although Mssr. Laliberte is at least protected by the fact that anyone who would be offended by an “Anarcho-Papist” is probably too ignorant to to parse the hip-sounding moniker.

Me, I’m not stepping up to the plate any time soon. But I confess a great respect for men like Pax who risk it all for literally no earthly reason. Whether it be God, self-respect, or the simple appreciation of the beauty of truth as an end in itself, it takes a strong faith in a higher power to attach your real name to a community like ours.

So, friends: What Is To Be Done?

Specifically, how should reactionaries cope with a society in which we are increasingly persecuted for our beliefs? I propose the following protocols:

Stay Off The Grid

The Cathedral owns your ass. But the more you deprive it of your dollars, attention, page views, and tacit silent support, the less it eats. Which may just make it get hungry, but at least you’ll feel better about yourself.

Go Out In A Blaze Of Glory

If you’re in any sort of enviable position in your career, and you’re outed for the thought-criminal that you are, do not trade your dignity for a slim chance at forgiveness. Showing your belly in the face of confrontation is as deplorable as it is ineffective. Be firm, be confident, and be the best ambassador for your ideas as you can be.

Alternatively, if you’re too ignorant to be regularly winning arguments against progressives, just keep your mouth shut. The world already has far too many conservatives, well-meaning but half-educated in both theory and rhetoric, making asses of themselves and discrediting the Right. Remember: You need a fully armed and operational understanding of reactionary philosophy and history before you can step into the ring with even the laziest of liberal half-wits, as your opponent can coast on his ability to regurgitate New York Times talking points to a sympathetic audience.

Fight Back

The author of the Valley Rag hit piece, one Nitasha Tiku, is almost certainly unbangable, not even in the darkest depths of loneliness and last call. As someone on Twitter pointed out, “Bro” is fem-speak for “Guy Who Probably Wouldn’t Have Sex With Me.”

She is also now un-hireable, un-promoteable, un-referenceable, un-LinkedIn-endorseable, by any self-respecting man. Reactionaries and conservatives, but also normal cool men who appreciate a joke and have the emotional stability to stand in the same room with a man who has unorthodox political views – this Nitasha chick has marked you as an enemy. She will do anything in her limited to make your life difficult and impede your success in life. Why not return the favour?

The tech industry is run by smart, independent-minded, somewhat nerdy White and Asian guys – in other words, the official public enemies of hyper-sensitive grievance-mongers like Nitasha. Crime-thinking men, public or not, be not above the petty joy of causing trouble for any members of the volunteer thought police who make their way into your life. Feel no guilt over a principled refusal to hire, work for, or award contracts to members of the volunteer thought police.

Oh, and if you ever happen to see one of the aging and single Nitasha Tiku’s cats scampering around on the road, remember: In the event of a possible collision with an animal smaller than a moose, experts at the DMV advise not swerving.

  • Apollo

    Despite working in tech Id never heard of this guy before, but Im reading through old tweets now. That first tweet you quoted was great too, and focuses on a personal bugbear of mine too. Its incredibly refreshing to see a guy in tech who doesnt slavishly fall in line with feminist and PC dogma, because pretty much every guy in tech who has anything public to say on the subject is a total kissass. For obvious reasons I suppose, but it certainly makes me feel as if my field is largely populated by geldings.

    “We desperately need more women in tech!!!” they screech. But what for exactly? What do all these women who are currently somehow being “prevented” from working in tech have to offer that makes them worth all the overhead involved in getting them involved in the first place and guarding their delicate sensibilies once they arrive?

    I, mean, I dont really care if women do want to work in the space, its a meritocracy as far as Im concerned and if any women have the skills and the interest they are as welcome as anyone else. I really object to the overall feminist attitude that hes referring to though. Namely, that we in the tech world, even and maybe especially those of us who are not treating the women we work with any different than we do the men, have an obligation to change the environment to make it feel safe for women so they will then grace us with their presence. That we need to police the guys who make sexist comments or who act creepy, that we need to promote tech to girls to make them get interested, and deemphasise the technical elements so it becomes less intimidating.

    But how exactly does the industry benefit from any of this? The unspoken reasoning behind this seems to be that its good, because equality. As has happened with many other industries though, I only see bad things ahead from trying to change tech in order to make it more appealing to girls. There are a few women in tech (barely any, but they exist) who do make really significant input, but they are here already, they dont need things to be changed to make them more comfortable in order to contribute. The ones who do however, judging by present performance their main contributions to the field seem to be in creating sexual harassment policies and in making guys who do real work concerned about their job security. (So not just volunteer thought police, in some cases they are professional ones). Trying to attract those whose main skill seems to be in making everyone around them less productive doesnt sound beneficial to me.

    Anyway, sorry to rant, keep up the posting, youre one of my favorite manosphere authors!

  • Bullitt315

    One of these days, someone is going to go Dorner on the feminists who are out to ruin their lives.

    • ‘Reality’ Doug

      Interesting possibility, Bullitt315. I don’t think it is likely to be a white guy, or a ‘generic’ guy defending individual freedom as the straightforward interpretation of your comment would suggest. If it happens, big if, it is more likely to be a black or Hispanic guy defending/advancing his culture and/or orthodox multiculturalism over white feminists who will have outlasted their usefulness, once white men and whites overall are a sufficiently feckless demographic group. What is telling, and I mean this as amoral observation only, is how OJ never suffered retribution at the hands of a white man taking the law into his own hands after OJ was acquitted of criminal wrongdoing. White (or culturally white/Western) men smart enough to see feminism for what it is will do nothing until lawless conditions occur, fighting not against feminists per se. Dorner was black, and if any demographic group has suffered motivational sufferances at the hands of feminism, it is guys from the welfare-mom ghetto. But feminism will simply fade or die away as racial lines deepen, as necessity puts women in their place. I see an economic collapse of some sort, a shortage of resources, and struggling men leaving depreciated women to fend for themselves (and die on natural merits). I don’t see feminists getting their just desserts in an orderly society in a targeted way. Women at large lack the mental capacity to be held accountable with respect to justice, which is a civilized concept. Men lack the material ability to deal with feminists that way as well, until and unless patriarchy is established, and men are instinctively programmed to physically defeat men to get women, not to kill women. Evolution will simply slough off feminists as a failed experiment useful only for creative destruction. There could be specific retribution before SHTF, but seems like long odds to me that it will be anything substantial. After SHTF, there will not be much surviving feminism to deal with. In a sense, people are protected by their stupidity. They either win or lose, no abstract realizations. Useful idiots are to be treated as an environmental factor.

      To the point of the post, yah, I’m screwed. Structural unemployment is political as much as it is economic. As long as the structure holds, we are screwed. Cheers to Pax Dickinson! May there be many more Pax’s in the managerial mid-level ranks who can’t take any more. The sooner, the better.

  • Pingback: Remember Pax Dickinson

  • Rob

    I’ve been telling people for years that if a person wasn’t mature enough to understand what life was like pre-9/11, they are overly susceptible to what you’ve spoken about.

    Brief description of my trip to Montreal in July of 2001. No need to show passport to cross border. I didn’t own a cell phone.

    Fact: privacy, while once a virtue, is now something people are suspicious of.

Previous post:

Next post: