Image Credit: Screenshot, YouTube/NBC

PoliZette

Dinesh D’Souza Renews Criticism of Michelle Obama’s ‘Illiterate’ and ‘Incoherent’ Thesis

Her college paper gets a fresh look after the former first lady's own recent remarks

Conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza doubled down on criticisms of former First Lady Michelle Obama’s college thesis, describing the Princeton University academic paper as “illiterate and incoherent” in a Facebook post on Sunday.

“Anyone who has read Michelle’s college thesis — a document so illiterate and incoherent that it was written, as Christopher Hitchens put it, in ‘no known language’ — will chuckle heartily at this one,” he wrote in his post.

In a tweet on Sunday, D’Souza called the senior thesis “a complete intellectual embarrassment not just to her but also Princeton.”

He appended a link to Politico’s four-part PDF of the 66-page document for readers to assess it for themselves.

D’Souza’s Facebook post included a link to an article in Newsweek in which Mrs. Obama discussed her struggles with self-doubt and challenged the intelligence of power players in the nonprofit, corporate, and government sectors — including the United Nations — with whom she had worked.

The piece in Newsweek covered a talk Obama gave in London alongside Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

In offering a “secret” to young girls at the talk, the article quotes Obama as saying, “I have been at probably every powerful table that you can think of, I have worked at nonprofits, I have been at foundations, I have worked in corporations, served on corporate boards, I have been at G-summits, I have sat in at the U.N.: They are not that smart.”

D’Souza’s assessment of Obama’s undergraduate thesis mirrors that of Christopher Hitchens.

Anyone who has read Michelle's college thesis—a document so illiterate and incoherent that it was written, as Christopher Hitchens put it, in "no known language"—will chuckle heartily at this one.

Posted by Dinesh D'Souza on Sunday, December 16, 2018

Hitchens, in a scathing rebuke written for the liberal outlet Slate in 2008, said of the paper, “To describe it as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.”

This weekend’s Facebook post was not D’Souza’s first criticism of Obama’s thesis.

In January of 2017, he tweeted bluntly, “Michelle Obama’s thesis illustrates the risible crap that passed for scholarship in the heyday of affirmative action.”

PJ Media’s David P. Goldman described Obama’s 1985 thesis, titled “Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community,” as “remarkable for its rancor as well as for its orthographical dysfunction.”

Orthography, per Merriam-Webster, is “the art of writing words with the proper letters according to standard usage.”

A sample from page 50 of the paper, concluding a section entitled “Associations between Ideologies and the Dependent Variables,” is below.

“My speculation for this finding is based on the possibility that a separationist is more likely to have a realistic impression of the plight of the Black lower class because of the likelihood that a separationist is more closely associated with the Black lower class than are integrationist. By actually working with the Black lower class or within their communities as a result of their ideologies, a separationist may better understand the desparation [sic] of their situation and feel more hopeless about a resolution as opposed to an integrationist who is ignorant to their plight.”

See these tweets — then see the video right underneath them.

Check out this video:

Michele Blood is a Flemington, New Jersey-based freelance writer and regular contributor to LifeZette.