Had a conversation with a person who shall not be named, who demanded that I admit that Tucker is a LIAR who showed all those LYING VIDEOS about January 6. And I said, "When you watched the videos, what did you see that made you conclude that he was misrepresenting what they showed?"
He was scheduled to be released in May, and they CLAIM that releasing him in March had nothing to do with the tapes, but it sure is a coincidence, isn't it?
Maybe that's why Tucker was "allowed" to play that tape in the first place. Still waiting on the rest of the video, as promised by the GOP.
Yet he was only "allowed" to play a few scenes--for 2 nights (with second night mostly repetition of first) and then the whole story was completely shut down. It parallels his involuntary departure. The production team and he were ready to keep showing clips that went against the narrative--even promo'd it--and then, nothing. Personally, I think that's when he started to push back against the Murdochs a bit more. They'd already muzzled him throughout the farcical Covid stories, election irregularities, etc. He started talking "deep state" in far more detail than ever, and they ousted him.
That's an interesting observation about their faith in top down manipulation - it really is their guiding star. A lot of people on our side of the fence fall for this too - "people will never wake up! The media manipulation machine is too strong! The indoctrination factories in the government schools and the woke universities have brainwashed too many people!"
Indeed, media manipulation is effective. The educational system captures the minds of many.
Good point. I do think people who buy the BS are people who want the comfort of a parent who is always right. It's not that they're manipulated, so much as that they want to be told what to do. Hiding information from people and actually deceiving them is one thing, but propaganda is another. Plenty of us see through it and eventually tune it out entirely.
...And yet 🙂 What does Asch's conformity research show us? It takes 1 confederate (one! among some dozen) to change tune, and the whole rickety enterprise tumbles down crumbling.
Peeps don't need much to regain courage(* to stand against social pressure, esp when the Polite Narrative™ is so utterly inane. We'll win. Reality has this habit, and a flawless scorecard to show for it. Just got somewhat sluggish in asserting itself this time.
--
(* and confidence in their lying eyes, and motivation, and resolve
Yes. Also worth mentioning is that even without confederates, the Asch experiments if I recall were well below 100% effectiveness. Quite a large fraction of the test subjects were not at all susceptible to the social perception pressure. That suggests a hard limit to the ability of symbol manipulators to distort reality.
I was sure I'd seen a higher number than that, so I double checked. According to this, 24% of test subjects didn't go along with it - I'd call 1/4 a pretty big chunk, though not a majority.
I suspect the number probably plummets once morality comes into play. It's one thing to stand your ground and say no, you're all stupid and wrong about how long those lines are, tf is wrong with you?
But when the group insists that you are not just heterodox but morally monstrous for disagreeing? With such a powerful emotional inducement to conformity many more will override their lying eyes. I don't know if that's ever been studied but I suspect the results would be dramatic, very likely reaching the low levels that you were thinking of.
Boychuk's Iron Law of Politics states: "Memory is short and therefore exploitable." I'm old enough to remember when they were blaming Ronald Reagan for undermining the people's faith in institutions. Then it was Rush Limbaugh. Then Newt Gingrich. Glenn Beck held the distinction for a time. I could go on. You get the picture. It doesn't require a media figure or a politician to delegitimize the institutions. The institutions are doing an excellent job of delegitimizing themselves.
Boy, will David French be surprised when the revolutionaries, having gained complete control and no longer in need of the services of toadies, toss him into the George Floyd Re-education and Vaccination Facility. I imagine that even monstrously evil people have nothing but contempt for such obsequious, principle-free individuals.
Thank you so much for posting that interview with the teen. Tucker was also the only Fox I watched. I used to get notifications but when he got canned I stopped that nonsense.
"I hear a person who’s talking about living well in a broken culture by placing your life on the foundation of faith, family, and healthy behavior; David French pretends to hear a monster who’s telling people to embrace cruelty. "
It occurs to me that the first is, to David French, the epitome of the second. To people like David French people who are "living well in a broken culture by placing your life on the foundation of faith, family, and healthy behavior" are monsters because they cannot be exploited and directed and *gasp* ask questions, have expectations, and entertain dangerous thoughts, like "isn't there a better way?"
David French has a particularly egregious case of TDS. I’m sure it has something to do with his wife being a victim of sexual assault as a child. Lots of female sexual assault victims project their pain onto Trump. But there are many that are actually Trump supporters. People have different ways of coping with their pain. My guess is he has to internalize all of the contradictions and lies he has perpetrated to keep his family together. It’s a sad case, really. I pity the man. But I won’t be reading any of his resultant repulsive dishonest drivel anymore.
I don't think globohomo cares what the peasants believe in or trust at this point. They are finishing the process of what they did to California but on a national level; i.e. demographic replacement to the point of establishing a one party state. Between fraudulent vote by mail, ballot harvesting, lawfare, demographic changes and mass censorship, globohomo believes they no longer have to answer to the people in any respect, that all elections moving forward will be rigged, and thus the purging of rightest figures in the media, and the upcoming imprisonment of Orange Man, will herald the destruction of their real target: the white middle class masses, which they want to murder, much as these same people destroyed and murdered the Russian "kulaks" (i.e. their middle class) after crushing the White uprising and then murdering the Romanov familly.
And that's why their civilization will collapse. It is the middle class, primarily, that has the capability and work ethic to make the infrastructure that provides goods and services, actually work.
And that includes their hoped-for control grid, which may be designed by the chosen professional class but it depends for execution on infrastructure that is maintained by the very middle/working class they are eliminating.
"...a ruling class or new elite who are defined by their uniformity of thought and ritual expression..."
Indeed, but why? We the right seem to argue and disagree on lots of issues. But the leftists always seem to suddenly coalesce into a block, not matter how untrue the new belief is. "Men can be women," suddenly all leftists agree absolutely and are willing testify before Congress that it is so.
The latest black person to be killed for or while committing crimes is a saint who never did a thing wrong? 100% of leftist will instantly call anyone who disagrees a racist monster.
J6 was an "armed insurrection"? Suddenly no leftist will allow that anything different could be true.
I could go on with many more examples. (Trans Genocide! All whites are racists!...) But my question is, why and how do the leftists instantly agree to one certain position on a complicated issue, usually a FALSE position, and then march in perfect lockstep to use that position to advance the cause of leftism.
Because leftists base their entire identity around their politics and viciously attack anybody who disagrees -- even if that includes former friends. People on the left understand this and what it would mean to their lives to break away from the group about ANYTHING.
If/when you break away as you call it, which can entail as little as looking up actual facts, you're attacked, villified, ostracised and mobbed - including physically in many instances.
I speak from experience here, even if it's been 3?-years.
Good answer. So the purpose of all of the positions taken by leftists on issues is to:
-SEPARATE themselves from the lower class(es)
-denigrate the people in those lower class(es) and so elevate themselves.
So leftist elites do not BELIEVE that those positions--on race, economics, healthcare, crime--are in any sense 'true'? Do they then internally hold a whole different set of beliefs on those issues, which they keep secret? Or do they convince themselves that the Emperor's new clothes are beautiful, and when he holds up two fingers they really do see three?
My guess at this has always been that what you pretend to be is what you become, at some point. The mask becomes the face. They internalize the posture, but it originates as a posture.
Yes, that would explain a lot. They come to believe their lies and rearrange their worldview so that the lies are true.
I personally also think that the origin of the leftist elites is, as you say in The Revolt of the Elites, around 1910, not the 1960s as a lot of people think. Great essay!
Joseph Sobran described it in his writing on “The Hive Mind”.
They are tired of striving for success, status and self-respect. For Leftists, life is easier as a slave. All decisions are taken away. There is no more striving. They yearn for slavery.
It is easier to coalesce when your stance is AGAINST everything traditionally taught, especially the behavioral limits imposed by God-respecting cultural values.
Once again, two interviews with Carlson that just shows you how genuine, and real he is. How can you not like him. On top of that he is incredibly smart and insightful about life.. I myself, for various reasons, did not marry young, and if I had, it would have been a disaster. I found my husband at 30, but I was forty before I had my first and only child. The most fulfilling moment of my life. Carlson is so right about that. I had a career in journalism. In 1975 I was the first female news anchor for the local television news in Northern Ontario, Then I spent time in the military, and went through basic training, which was a big challenge, kind of like an Officer and Gentleman kind of thing. Yet not of those accomplishments compared to becoming a mother. So Carlson, who has achieved so much, to say having a family is the highest accomplishment is right. He is so down to earth, and yet trolls like AOC thinks deplatforming was wonderful. Go figure.
In Europe by the way one of the biggest the boogie persons championing the supposed "ignorant poors" (i.e. everyone who is not a Kool-Aid glugging urban type) is German European Parliament MP Christiane Anderson. Supposedly she's a white supremecist, Nazi, etc, etc, etc, but if you actually listen to what she actually says... it's a whole 'nuther galaxy.
Readers who want to have a look and listen for themselves can easily do so-- much of what she offers is in English, and her English is perfectly fluent:
Christine Anderson's page on the European Parliament website:
She’s portrayed as an alt-right borderline Nazi, but whenever I’ve listened to her speak on issues, she’s articulate and reasonable. Now maybe I’ve missed something, but she doesn’t come across as anything but professional, and her opinions aren’t threatening to anybody but a Marxist, NWO stooge.
What would help resolve the situation is Carlson and French debating an issue, or just talking to each other publicly, in the same room. It's not that they'd come to agreement or understanding, but that the straw man and other fallacies and demagogic insinuations would lose their power.
No, that would not help resolve the situation. That view rests on a faulty assumption: that you have two people arguing in good faith, and both have stable, normal-range emotional reactions.
That is not true. French is not a good faith interlocutor.
The fallacy that "everyone means well, and will do well, if only we discuss it in a civilized way" is what's gotten us to this point.
The Adam Corolla interview is fantastic. I hadn’t seen that. I love that he takes on the Big Lie about medications in the first 15 minutes - which of course makes people sputter like, but are you a psychologist???
Been studying the life of Christ lately (you know, light reading, haha), and it’s amazing how people just do not change. Christ comes along and performs a miracle, and those whose power is threatened sputter and demand to know his credentials. David French maybe should take a hard look at what Biblical characters he’s actually channeling - because those aren’t the good guys in the end.
OMG Tom Nichols. He may have been the worst thing about Twitter, back when I was on it, many moons ago. When I was 16, I thought that people who had the same pro/con opinion I did on a few key issues were people I'd vote for. Nichols is a case in point of why I was wrong. I'm sure he and I would vote yes/no the same way on many of the things that mattered to me in high school (and even many that matter to me now), but he has completely the opposite conception of the world that I do. I think he may have been the first person I heard propounding the "trust the experts" doctrine, and I left Twitter in 2016. An expert is useful in a specific situation. I'd love the guys from Structure Tech to come and do my home inspection, for example. I don't need them designing a national housing code, much less cramming one down via executive fiat. Why is that such a tricky concept for a guy like Nichols to get? Someone who has never seen my medical records or taken my pulse should not give me medical advice. Full stop.
Here in the stunning & brave 21st century we always talk about all the things women get to do now that used to only be the purview of men—you know, things like being in the infantry or dressing like a slob in public or abandoning your family for hot sex—that we sometimes forget the reverse is true too.
David French is simply the male version of the scolding Church Ladies of yore, the moral police and etiquette experts who always feel the need to remind you that God is watching and that all Good People speak and sit and think a certain way.
Under French's dispensation all "Good Christians" (which only he gets to define) should always speak and act properly and obey all the rules of fair play. So even if Christians get demonized, their beliefs redefined as "harmful" hate crimes, even if their influence on American history is getting erased or rewritten, God demands you turn the other cheek.
Thus you may become a second-class citizen and a capon among cocks, but you will at least have the satisfaction of being holy and pure.
Their whole schtick is telling people what others said while not actually showing the videos.
"We watched so you didn't have to."
Had a conversation with a person who shall not be named, who demanded that I admit that Tucker is a LIAR who showed all those LYING VIDEOS about January 6. And I said, "When you watched the videos, what did you see that made you conclude that he was misrepresenting what they showed?"
The angry reply: "WELL I DIDN'T WATCH THAT SHIT."
I have had this exact same conversation.
For fun try out this:
Read an article about misinformation and replace it with racism...or vice versa.
It's actually astonishing. Misinformation is the new "racist".
Edit: substitute the word misinformation for racist
Another fun exercise: In gray lady piece the op quotes, substitute progressive for Christian, and for Tucker... idk, David French mayhaps? 😁
The closest thing to a lie was "tour guide" -- "armed escort" might have been a better phrase.
Yet Chansley's now out of prison........
Indeed. Funny how that works, isn’t it?
Chansley was always getting out of custody at the time he did, nothing changed. He is still completing three years of supervised release.
He was scheduled to be released in May, and they CLAIM that releasing him in March had nothing to do with the tapes, but it sure is a coincidence, isn't it?
Maybe that's why Tucker was "allowed" to play that tape in the first place. Still waiting on the rest of the video, as promised by the GOP.
Yet he was only "allowed" to play a few scenes--for 2 nights (with second night mostly repetition of first) and then the whole story was completely shut down. It parallels his involuntary departure. The production team and he were ready to keep showing clips that went against the narrative--even promo'd it--and then, nothing. Personally, I think that's when he started to push back against the Murdochs a bit more. They'd already muzzled him throughout the farcical Covid stories, election irregularities, etc. He started talking "deep state" in far more detail than ever, and they ousted him.
The bipartisan "SILENCE TUCKER" cry was deafening.
My favorite is, "That's been debunked.", without explaining how it's been debunked. Saying something has been debunked is enough these days...
Yep. AOC wasn't in a casting call because the organization that put on the event does these things all the time.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/aoc-actress-playing-lawmaker/
Or, workers didn't pull SUITCASES full of ballots from under the table, so that whole thing is fake.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/12/video-doesnt-show-suitcases-of-illegal-ballots-in-georgia/
Great examples of "nothing is ever what it seems"! Thank heavens they explain it to us idiots ~ 😹.
That's an interesting observation about their faith in top down manipulation - it really is their guiding star. A lot of people on our side of the fence fall for this too - "people will never wake up! The media manipulation machine is too strong! The indoctrination factories in the government schools and the woke universities have brainwashed too many people!"
Indeed, media manipulation is effective. The educational system captures the minds of many.
And yet.
Good point. I do think people who buy the BS are people who want the comfort of a parent who is always right. It's not that they're manipulated, so much as that they want to be told what to do. Hiding information from people and actually deceiving them is one thing, but propaganda is another. Plenty of us see through it and eventually tune it out entirely.
...And yet 🙂 What does Asch's conformity research show us? It takes 1 confederate (one! among some dozen) to change tune, and the whole rickety enterprise tumbles down crumbling.
Peeps don't need much to regain courage(* to stand against social pressure, esp when the Polite Narrative™ is so utterly inane. We'll win. Reality has this habit, and a flawless scorecard to show for it. Just got somewhat sluggish in asserting itself this time.
--
(* and confidence in their lying eyes, and motivation, and resolve
Yes. Also worth mentioning is that even without confederates, the Asch experiments if I recall were well below 100% effectiveness. Quite a large fraction of the test subjects were not at all susceptible to the social perception pressure. That suggests a hard limit to the ability of symbol manipulators to distort reality.
Afair, a single-digit percentage in classical set-up 😒 Wouln't call it 'quite a large fraction'. 'Well below 100% effectiveness' it's neither 🤷
But a hard limit there sure is! Hallelujah 🤸
I was sure I'd seen a higher number than that, so I double checked. According to this, 24% of test subjects didn't go along with it - I'd call 1/4 a pretty big chunk, though not a majority.
https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/line-between-conformity-and-resistance
Yay! I stand corrected, in utter d-lite 🤩 My retarded memory had smth like 7% filed, drat.
I suspect the number probably plummets once morality comes into play. It's one thing to stand your ground and say no, you're all stupid and wrong about how long those lines are, tf is wrong with you?
But when the group insists that you are not just heterodox but morally monstrous for disagreeing? With such a powerful emotional inducement to conformity many more will override their lying eyes. I don't know if that's ever been studied but I suspect the results would be dramatic, very likely reaching the low levels that you were thinking of.
Boychuk's Iron Law of Politics states: "Memory is short and therefore exploitable." I'm old enough to remember when they were blaming Ronald Reagan for undermining the people's faith in institutions. Then it was Rush Limbaugh. Then Newt Gingrich. Glenn Beck held the distinction for a time. I could go on. You get the picture. It doesn't require a media figure or a politician to delegitimize the institutions. The institutions are doing an excellent job of delegitimizing themselves.
Thank goodness the left didn't undermine anyone's faith in institutions in the 60's and 70's and left that for Reagan.
Remember when Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn fought so hard to uphold American institutions? It was a golden age.
I'm thinking, "BOOM!" but that might be considered in bad taste. Oh well...
BOOM!
It’s just this war and that son of a bitch Johnson!
Boy, will David French be surprised when the revolutionaries, having gained complete control and no longer in need of the services of toadies, toss him into the George Floyd Re-education and Vaccination Facility. I imagine that even monstrously evil people have nothing but contempt for such obsequious, principle-free individuals.
I hope he gets a bunk in the MAGA wing.
Thank you so much for posting that interview with the teen. Tucker was also the only Fox I watched. I used to get notifications but when he got canned I stopped that nonsense.
"I hear a person who’s talking about living well in a broken culture by placing your life on the foundation of faith, family, and healthy behavior; David French pretends to hear a monster who’s telling people to embrace cruelty. "
It occurs to me that the first is, to David French, the epitome of the second. To people like David French people who are "living well in a broken culture by placing your life on the foundation of faith, family, and healthy behavior" are monsters because they cannot be exploited and directed and *gasp* ask questions, have expectations, and entertain dangerous thoughts, like "isn't there a better way?"
David French has a particularly egregious case of TDS. I’m sure it has something to do with his wife being a victim of sexual assault as a child. Lots of female sexual assault victims project their pain onto Trump. But there are many that are actually Trump supporters. People have different ways of coping with their pain. My guess is he has to internalize all of the contradictions and lies he has perpetrated to keep his family together. It’s a sad case, really. I pity the man. But I won’t be reading any of his resultant repulsive dishonest drivel anymore.
I don't think globohomo cares what the peasants believe in or trust at this point. They are finishing the process of what they did to California but on a national level; i.e. demographic replacement to the point of establishing a one party state. Between fraudulent vote by mail, ballot harvesting, lawfare, demographic changes and mass censorship, globohomo believes they no longer have to answer to the people in any respect, that all elections moving forward will be rigged, and thus the purging of rightest figures in the media, and the upcoming imprisonment of Orange Man, will herald the destruction of their real target: the white middle class masses, which they want to murder, much as these same people destroyed and murdered the Russian "kulaks" (i.e. their middle class) after crushing the White uprising and then murdering the Romanov familly.
And that's why their civilization will collapse. It is the middle class, primarily, that has the capability and work ethic to make the infrastructure that provides goods and services, actually work.
And that includes their hoped-for control grid, which may be designed by the chosen professional class but it depends for execution on infrastructure that is maintained by the very middle/working class they are eliminating.
GREAT piece!
"...a ruling class or new elite who are defined by their uniformity of thought and ritual expression..."
Indeed, but why? We the right seem to argue and disagree on lots of issues. But the leftists always seem to suddenly coalesce into a block, not matter how untrue the new belief is. "Men can be women," suddenly all leftists agree absolutely and are willing testify before Congress that it is so.
The latest black person to be killed for or while committing crimes is a saint who never did a thing wrong? 100% of leftist will instantly call anyone who disagrees a racist monster.
J6 was an "armed insurrection"? Suddenly no leftist will allow that anything different could be true.
I could go on with many more examples. (Trans Genocide! All whites are racists!...) But my question is, why and how do the leftists instantly agree to one certain position on a complicated issue, usually a FALSE position, and then march in perfect lockstep to use that position to advance the cause of leftism.
Thoughts?
Because leftists base their entire identity around their politics and viciously attack anybody who disagrees -- even if that includes former friends. People on the left understand this and what it would mean to their lives to break away from the group about ANYTHING.
If/when you break away as you call it, which can entail as little as looking up actual facts, you're attacked, villified, ostracised and mobbed - including physically in many instances.
I speak from experience here, even if it's been 3?-years.
^^THIS^^
https://chrisbray.substack.com/p/the-revolt-of-the-elites
Good answer. So the purpose of all of the positions taken by leftists on issues is to:
-SEPARATE themselves from the lower class(es)
-denigrate the people in those lower class(es) and so elevate themselves.
So leftist elites do not BELIEVE that those positions--on race, economics, healthcare, crime--are in any sense 'true'? Do they then internally hold a whole different set of beliefs on those issues, which they keep secret? Or do they convince themselves that the Emperor's new clothes are beautiful, and when he holds up two fingers they really do see three?
My guess at this has always been that what you pretend to be is what you become, at some point. The mask becomes the face. They internalize the posture, but it originates as a posture.
Yes, that would explain a lot. They come to believe their lies and rearrange their worldview so that the lies are true.
I personally also think that the origin of the leftist elites is, as you say in The Revolt of the Elites, around 1910, not the 1960s as a lot of people think. Great essay!
Thanks!
Joseph Sobran described it in his writing on “The Hive Mind”.
They are tired of striving for success, status and self-respect. For Leftists, life is easier as a slave. All decisions are taken away. There is no more striving. They yearn for slavery.
It is easier to coalesce when your stance is AGAINST everything traditionally taught, especially the behavioral limits imposed by God-respecting cultural values.
Once again, two interviews with Carlson that just shows you how genuine, and real he is. How can you not like him. On top of that he is incredibly smart and insightful about life.. I myself, for various reasons, did not marry young, and if I had, it would have been a disaster. I found my husband at 30, but I was forty before I had my first and only child. The most fulfilling moment of my life. Carlson is so right about that. I had a career in journalism. In 1975 I was the first female news anchor for the local television news in Northern Ontario, Then I spent time in the military, and went through basic training, which was a big challenge, kind of like an Officer and Gentleman kind of thing. Yet not of those accomplishments compared to becoming a mother. So Carlson, who has achieved so much, to say having a family is the highest accomplishment is right. He is so down to earth, and yet trolls like AOC thinks deplatforming was wonderful. Go figure.
Thanks for this.
In Europe by the way one of the biggest the boogie persons championing the supposed "ignorant poors" (i.e. everyone who is not a Kool-Aid glugging urban type) is German European Parliament MP Christiane Anderson. Supposedly she's a white supremecist, Nazi, etc, etc, etc, but if you actually listen to what she actually says... it's a whole 'nuther galaxy.
Readers who want to have a look and listen for themselves can easily do so-- much of what she offers is in English, and her English is perfectly fluent:
Christine Anderson's page on the European Parliament website:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/197475/CHRISTINE_ANDERSON/home
Christine Anderson's Telegram channel is
https://t.me/s/christineanderson
She has a YouTube channel however apparently Google has shadow-banned it.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8D_tdzQxSVFY_kDEuEGOnQ
Christine Anderson's Twitter is:
https://twitter.com/AndersonAfDMdEP
I have transcribed a few brief videos of hers, including:
Christine Anderson, German MEP: "The cat is out of the bag"
https://rumble.com/v1otap3-mep-christine-anderson-i-will-not-inject-a-poisonous-substance-into-my-body.html
Posted Oct 19, 2022
Transcript at https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/30919.html
Have been watching her speak for a while, and the chasm between what she says and what media says about it is very familiar.
She’s portrayed as an alt-right borderline Nazi, but whenever I’ve listened to her speak on issues, she’s articulate and reasonable. Now maybe I’ve missed something, but she doesn’t come across as anything but professional, and her opinions aren’t threatening to anybody but a Marxist, NWO stooge.
....and a threat to Trudeau and apparently Poilievre, too.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYlBntQZB1k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zScSsWuqTFU
Yep.
What would help resolve the situation is Carlson and French debating an issue, or just talking to each other publicly, in the same room. It's not that they'd come to agreement or understanding, but that the straw man and other fallacies and demagogic insinuations would lose their power.
And that's why it'll never happen.
No, that would not help resolve the situation. That view rests on a faulty assumption: that you have two people arguing in good faith, and both have stable, normal-range emotional reactions.
That is not true. French is not a good faith interlocutor.
The fallacy that "everyone means well, and will do well, if only we discuss it in a civilized way" is what's gotten us to this point.
The Adam Corolla interview is fantastic. I hadn’t seen that. I love that he takes on the Big Lie about medications in the first 15 minutes - which of course makes people sputter like, but are you a psychologist???
Been studying the life of Christ lately (you know, light reading, haha), and it’s amazing how people just do not change. Christ comes along and performs a miracle, and those whose power is threatened sputter and demand to know his credentials. David French maybe should take a hard look at what Biblical characters he’s actually channeling - because those aren’t the good guys in the end.
Yes, as a speaker at a lent mission in my parish asked us several years ago: "Who are you in the (biblical NT) story?
OMG Tom Nichols. He may have been the worst thing about Twitter, back when I was on it, many moons ago. When I was 16, I thought that people who had the same pro/con opinion I did on a few key issues were people I'd vote for. Nichols is a case in point of why I was wrong. I'm sure he and I would vote yes/no the same way on many of the things that mattered to me in high school (and even many that matter to me now), but he has completely the opposite conception of the world that I do. I think he may have been the first person I heard propounding the "trust the experts" doctrine, and I left Twitter in 2016. An expert is useful in a specific situation. I'd love the guys from Structure Tech to come and do my home inspection, for example. I don't need them designing a national housing code, much less cramming one down via executive fiat. Why is that such a tricky concept for a guy like Nichols to get? Someone who has never seen my medical records or taken my pulse should not give me medical advice. Full stop.
French engages in linguistic gymnastics wrapped up in mental masturbation. A mental giant with a pea brain.
Yeah, he stands out in a world of tedious media figures. Really, really irritating seeing his dimwitted BS all the time.
"he abandoned necessary moral virtues..." LOL
Here in the stunning & brave 21st century we always talk about all the things women get to do now that used to only be the purview of men—you know, things like being in the infantry or dressing like a slob in public or abandoning your family for hot sex—that we sometimes forget the reverse is true too.
David French is simply the male version of the scolding Church Ladies of yore, the moral police and etiquette experts who always feel the need to remind you that God is watching and that all Good People speak and sit and think a certain way.
Under French's dispensation all "Good Christians" (which only he gets to define) should always speak and act properly and obey all the rules of fair play. So even if Christians get demonized, their beliefs redefined as "harmful" hate crimes, even if their influence on American history is getting erased or rewritten, God demands you turn the other cheek.
Thus you may become a second-class citizen and a capon among cocks, but you will at least have the satisfaction of being holy and pure.