Making Devils

The story about Bob Smith usually isn’t about Bob Smith. I say often, when I write about people, that you should look beyond them to see what their behavior or the response to their behavior represents: what’s going on in society that leads to this? So in the strongest possible terms, I urge you now to see that the contretemps over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News isn’t about Tucker Carlson.

Start with a double-bylined piece in the Washington Post that explains the departure. (Read it here to get around the paywall.) Rupert Murdoch liked Carlson when he was conservative, the story explains, but stopped liking him when he swung too hard to the extreme right: “….the 92-year-old billionaire founder of Fox News had grown weary of some of Carlson’s increasingly far-right commentary.” Next two paragraphs:

At that particular moment, he was disturbed by Carlson’s stance on Ukraine. A graphic on Carlson’s show had referred to Volodymyr Zelensky, president of the besieged nation, as a “Ukrainian pimp,” and the host had repeatedly excoriated the U.S. government for providing aid to its defense against Russian attacks.

These stances had made Carlson a star on Russian state-controlled TV. But they had drawn furious blowback from powerful Republicans who see U.S. support for Ukraine as a bulwark in a fight for freedom and democracy — some of whom had Murdoch’s ear.

He had become dangerously extreme; for example, he was skeptical about a war.

Note disturbing commitment to peace

Without offering an example of what Carlson might have gotten factually wrong about that war, the Post pivots to the laziest, sleaziest, McCarthyism-redux guilt-by-association non-argument: “These stances had made Carlson a star on Russian state-controlled TV.” And then the story depicts the other side of the conflict, support for Ukraine, as “a fight for freedom and democracy.” Like when Zelensky banned a bunch of opposition parties, right? Freedom and democracy, like the government-controlled news media? Here’s what the far-right New York Times said about that last part:

So the spigot is open, tens of billions of dollars in free money flows to Ukraine and the arms industry without accounting, American military stockpiles are being rapidly and dangerously depleted, Ukrainian government officials are suddenly awash in luxury goods, and it’s dangerous extremism to question any of it. Stay on the side of freedom and democracy, good people, and accept government narratives in disciplined silence and the traditional submission so characteristic of true liberty.

Hmm, who will replace all of those carelessly depleted weapons?

Extremist rhetoric, illustrated: “Where is all the money going?”

(Correct response: WHY ARE YOU BEING A NAZI!?!?!?)

Related, an absolutely remarkable opinion piece in the Guardian — stop laughing! — depicts Tucker Carlson as “slack-jawed” and “spitting rage,” a sort of trailer park Father Coughlin broadcasting grunted content in a stained wifebeater. Typically a columnist watches a few minutes of a television show before he tries to describe it, but whatever. Here are the nut grafs about Tucker and his fellow extremists, in their full slobbering glory:

Yes, imagine what kind of lunatic extremists offered skeptical statements about Covid vaccines. It’s been eight days, by the way, since the FDA released a letter from the director of vaccine regulation acknowledging that the Covid vaccines don’t prevent infection or transmission, and were never tested for those functions. And imagine throwing a snit over claims about Islamism in Paris after the shootings at Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan. The point isn’t to describe anything in the world as it is, or to analyze any of the reality that can be found by looking out the window; the point is to build narrative walls, declaring not what is true but what may be discussed as true. The point is power, rice bowls, scapegoats and folk devils. “The crops failed because this woman is a witch.” The point is anti-discussion in the format of a discussion, preventing understanding by pretending to explain.

• He is a dangerous extremist;

• For example, he is skeptical about [insert specific use of power].

If they can do it to him, they can do it to you.