Good old 1975

There are several major inflection points in the history of Deepstate.

1913 was the birth of modern Deepstate, as Wilson brought the existing corporate Deepstate into government, funded it, and endowed it with lethal force.

In 1921 Harding paused the growth but didn’t break the power structure.

In 1933 FDR broke all three pillars of Deepstate.

After FDR died, Deepstate instantly rose from its grave and expanded exponentially, building the mechanisms to take over all cultural and educational and scientific and corporate aspects of culture. No more sane rulers. NEVER AGAIN.

1975 marked the maturity of those mechanisms. Deepstate took over all media using the fake threat of Watergate. Deepstate took over physical science using the fake threat of “climate”.

Another inflection happened in 2015. It was evident at the time that something was turning, but the size and exact nature of the change wasn’t really clear until it was implemented in 2020.

= = = = =

Sailer has just noted and linked an interesting study of language by Dutch researchers. They traced the increase and decrease of ‘rational’ language, words of causation like because and implies.

They found a linear increase of causative language from the start of the Googlebooks corpus until 1975. After 1975 causation declined sharply, then paused or perhaps started to increase in the last few years. The latter change is still too fresh to pin down.

From their abstract:
The surge of post-truth political argumentation suggests that we are living in a special historical period when it comes to the balance between emotion and reasoning. To explore if this is indeed the case, we analyze language in millions of books covering the period from 1850 to 2019 represented in Google nGram data. We show that the use of words associated with rationality, such as “determine” and “conclusion,” rose systematically after 1850, while words related to human experience such as “feel” and “believe” declined. This pattern reversed over the past decades, paralleled by a shift from a collectivistic to an individualistic focus as reflected, among other things, by the ratio of singular to plural pronouns such as “I”/”we” and “he”/”they.” Interpreting this synchronous sea change in book language remains challenging. However, as we show, the nature of this reversal occurs in fiction as well as nonfiction. Moreover, the pattern of change in the ratio between sentiment and rationality flag words since 1850 also occurs in New York Times articles, suggesting that it is not an artifact of the book corpora we analyzed. Finally, we show that word trends in books parallel trends in corresponding Google search terms, supporting the idea that changes in book language do in part reflect changes in interest. All in all, our results suggest that over the past decades, there has been a marked shift in public interest from the collective to the individual, and from rationality toward emotion.

= = = = =

Here’s their main graph. I’ve added a vertical line at 1975 because the graph doesn’t have a grid. Fiction caught the switch with sharp resonance, and non-fiction made a more broadly tuned switch.

= = = = =

Why did fiction steer through the switchback without skidding? Not clear. The switch had been brewing in academia and NGOs since 1968. The Mao-flavored identitarian language now called Woke was universal in the ‘humanities’ of academia and in NGOs like YMCA/YWCA and Red Cross.

A similar study looking at broadcast media would show that Watergate was literally a gate diverting the Mao canal into radio and TV. It showed up first in NPR, then spread quickly into commercial radio and TV as NPR’s newly popular announcers moved up and out. Everybody wanted a piece of the Watergate ratings, and hiring NPR people was the quickest way to get there.

It’s especially interesting that the inflection AWAY from rationality was a direct result of ACADEMIC infection. …. And now we’re back in Batya’s territory again.