Latinx is stupid. To say this, in fact, is more Latino than saying “Latinx.” To understand the term’s stupidity, we must refer to what the language is, what it produces, the consequences that radical alterations and political reality around the specific term would generate.
Language is born to express reality, what is seen and thought. By communicating what we see, think and is around us, we can make our own judgments about the objects and phenomena that occur.
The Hispanic, for example, is defined by the Hispanic culture, and the Hispanic culture has been defined by the Spanish language for more than a millennium. All of that produces a Hispanic way of seeing the world, and no one can change that -not even your closest normie who considers Oye Cómo Va the apotheosis of Hispanity-.
Olavo de Carvalho explains that in post-modern tribalism: “as between dogs and wolves, the smell of their genitals or the residue of their urine on the ground” is what will now define the subject. The sound signals remain the same as those of human language, but the immanent semantic rule is that of animal communication.”
The animalization of language degrades the dignity of the person – in the sense that Maritain defined it – and forces him to behave like an animal, suppressing himself in favor of the will of the herd. But not only this, but, just as the appeal to “gender neutrality”-whatever that means-is intended by the use of Latinx, the “uniform code” that replaces the authentic expression of reality is usually “the direct and ostensive expression of sexual impulses.”
“Latinx,” far from generating the effect that Punk produced, is a childish craving that the newer generations accept and use to feel special and make more noise – noise that the powerful take advantage of. However, they are left with desire. According to Pew Research, only 3% of Latinos in America use the term and are primarily young people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine. This means that the term’s use is not even a flag considered by Latinos, but who uses it then?
«Latinx» is just another expression of white guilt
Hysterical young people are the perfect bait for wokesters like tragic former presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, who has used “Latinx” before, pandering hysterical millennials and zoomers. Warren’s attitude confirmed that “Latinx” is another manifestation of white guilt, as pathetic as the fantasy of white privilege.
In the Munk Debate on Political Correctness, Jordan B. Peterson asked Michael Eric Dyson that, if he accepted the premise of white privilege, to what extent is his – Peterson’s – white privilege responsible for his own success? 5%? 25%?
Dyson answers the psychologist that “white privilege does not act according to quantifiable segments. Instead, white privilege is a moral mandate for “a society that faces the ideals of freedom, justice, and equality.” Mark Bauerlein in American Greatness reveals the nature of this mind trap: “Do you understand? White privilege does not describe a reality. It tells people how to behave.”
Thus, white guilt, a consequence of that pseudo-privilege, imposes people innocent of their own skin color a certain way to behave on a pure whim. Latinx is an expression of white people’s masochism, who in their spiritual neuroses need to please all those who make claims on them -however absurd they may be.
This Gnostic vision of original sin imposed on whites and their sickly sycophantic obedience reveals a breakdown of the social fabric, reveals a stripping away of spiritual life – as Solzhenitsyn stated in his Harvard commencement speech -and an extreme politicization of life in general. The loss of identity and the need for it, the past of nations, feelings, shamelessness and prudence, stupidity and wisdom, all pass through the lens of politics.
But when the facts are relegated and branded as fanaticism and supremacism, stupidity reigns -as in these cases.