Category Archives: Critique

UPDATE III (1/09/020): Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller DOES AXE Dissident Voices

Conservatism, Critique, Ethics, Neoconservatism, Political Correctness

Here, Tucker Carlson loudly protests the habit of expunging dissent voices, right and left.

OK, but Tucker Carlson is affiliated with Daily Caller, right? And Daily Caller axed my very dissident column because a hate-group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, persists in telling nasty lies about me and my views. (Along the lines outlined in my refutation of “Slate’s Resident Idiot” when he “Slandered this Jewish Woman — Me.”)

How is that resisting the status quo? Daily Caller also removed op-ed editor Robert Mariani and replaced him with indistinguishable neocons.

I think they all swim in very polluted waters.

UPDATE I (12/30/019):

Tucker markets a syndicated column with a buddy, Patel, who is editor-in-chief of Daily Caller. As its founder, Tucker has plenty sway. Other dissident columns have been removed, too. Love Tucker, but can we stop making excuses for our idols?

https://twitter.com/jesse31522/status/1211568797141762049

UPDATE II (12/31/019): 

Regarding this comment on Twitter: Then Tucker must NOT wax fat against dissidents being expunged, when his pride-and-joy site, the one he founded, does that very thing to those of us who were Old, Hard Right before Tucker was. And there are other thinkers who’ve been purged from Daily Caller. Mencken warned about this kind of mindless mindset among Americans. Find a hero, usually a celeb or a politico–and worship, worship the idol, excuse his every incongruous stance. You can be sure Tucker HAS PLENTY INFLUENCE @DailyCaller. It’s likely a choice.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), arguably America’s foremost hate group, had maligned me, a hard-right, Jewish individualist (daughter of a rabbi), who is frequently and mercilessly attacked by anti-Semites (a taste in the Comments to my column, at the Unz Review). So, at the same time that Tucker Carlson was doing magnificent exposes about the SPLC—his website, Daily Caller, was expunging my column because the SPLC demands it.

Intelligent, honest sorts will admit there is a contradiction here. The rest are, as Mencken would have said, part of the “commonwealth of morons”—mindless followers, who refuse to recognize  that the object of their worship (Tucker) might be in violation of his own principles.

UPDATE III (1/09/020):

An interesting postscript to the above debate. Correlation is not causation, but Tucker Carlson seems to have untangled himself from the syndicated column he wrote with Daily Caller editor, Neil Patel. More accurately, the Patel column appears sans Tucker.  Patel worked for Vice President Dick Cheney. Say no more.

NEW COLUMN Updated (1/21): Dissident Deplorables Refuse To Be Dittoheads

Critique, Donald Trump, Elections, English, Family, Journalism, Media, Political Correctness

NEW COLUMN is “Dissident Deplorables Refuse To Be Dittoheads.”

In its attenuated form, the column appeared on Townhall.com. If you prefer lukewarm, milquetoast, bland fare (as much as this writer can do those), adapted for conservative tastes, then stick with this version: “Dissident Deplorables Deserve Decent Coverage.”

Otherwise, read the piece in full on The Unz Review.  Or, look-away, FAST (as did others. Yes, the piece was spiked elsewhere).  The more I read Mencken, the more I know this: If he were alive today, Unz Review woudl be the only place that would dare publish him.

Excerpt:

The happening featured beefcake Donald Trump Jr. and bimbo Kimberly Guilfoyle.

The couple was on stage at UCLA to promote the president’s son’s “book,” when they were jeered by dissident Deplorables for shutting down the Question-and-Answer segment.

“Book” here is in quotations to denote “so-called,” because the staple, ghost-written political pablum, penned by ambitious political flotsam, relates to literacy as H. L. Mencken relates to conformity—not at all.

Predictably, Guilfoyle opted out of the conversational give-and-take demanded by her man’s hecklers, and went straight for the groin:

“I bet you engage in online dating, because you’re impressing no one here to get a date in person.”

Why “predictably”? Well, a supple mind may not be one of Guilfoyle’s assets.

Kimberley’s cerebral alacrity was seldom showcased when seated in Fox News’ legs chair. During one of her last televised appearances on “The Five,” a Fox News daytime show, Guilfoyle protested that, “the U.S. has already reduced its [toxic] ‘admissions’ enough.”

I give you Guilfoyle, verbatim, in her own words: “So, we can keep doing what we’re doing. We can keep reducing our admissions. …”

To Make English Great Again, you reduce emissions, not “admissions.”

For a while, it even seemed that Trump, looking for curve appeal in a press secretary, was going for Guilfoyle. She certainly thought so and said as much, implying, at the time, that she herself is “a great communicator … with deep knowledge.”

And no; I do not digress. This all goes to the Guilfoyle’s knee-jerk, flirty, aim-for-the-groin reaction to her hombre’s hecklers.

Tellingly, the taunting of Donald Jr. by dissident Deplorables was covered very differently by the American Daily Beast and the British Guardian.

Descriptions of political positions and personalities were prefaced by the Daily Beast with “edifying” editorializing. The hecklers the Beast described as “fringe-right.” Their alleged instigator and inspiration was said to be “a white nationalist.” Perfectly legitimate demands from this disgruntled audience for a “Q&A” and for “America First,” the Daily Beast deemed tantamount to a right-wing insurrection or civil war.

Discrediting dissent is all in a day’s work for the American press.

What do you know? The hecklers at Trump Jr.’s book-flogging were also known, to the Daily Beast at least, as “Holocaust deniers.” As far as this reader can tell, the group taunting the empty suits on stage for refusing to answer questions had said not a word about the Holocaust. Nor had the disrupters been interviewed by the Daily Beast about their views on the Holocaust.

More to the point: Why is participation in our democracy predicated on one’s views on the Holocaust? What the hell does an individual’s opinion about that topic have to do with his right to solicit answers from members of Donald Trump’s politically active dynasty? I say this as a Jew whose family tree was truncated by the industrial-scale mass murder of millions of Jews that was the Holocaust. …

… READS THE REST.  NEW COLUMN is “Dissident Deplorables Refuse To Be Dittoheads.” Or, “Dissident Deplorables Deserve Decent Coverage,” if you can’t take the heat. 

UPDATE (11/21): 

On WND: “Is political participation predicated on views about the Holocaust?” “Discrediting dissent is all in a day’s work for the American press,” says this Jew, whose family tree was truncated by the industrial-scale mass murder that was the Holocaust. MORE …

NEW COLUMN: Update II (12/20/019): Conservative Kids Must Learn Before They Lead

Capitalism, China, Conservatism, Critique, Culture, Education, Intelligence, Kids, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Reason

NEW COLUMN: “Conservative Kids Must Learn Before They Lead.” Read it on The Unz Review or WND.COM.

An excerpt:

To judge by their writing, the youngsters who’ve been given the run of the conservative op-ed pages, pixelated and printed, know little about how socialism differs from capitalism.

To their credit, they’ve chosen a side—the right side—but are incapable of arguing the morality of capitalism and its efficacy (which stems from its morality).

Discredited are their employers for failing to demand that their young, conservative charges methodically and creatively motivate for the right—and the Right—side.

Endeavoring to explain the oft-repeated banality that, “Colleges are turning young people [into] socialists,” one such prototypical writer says this in her dog’s breakfast of a column, for the Washington Examiner:

“Students are gullible and moldable because they have little conviction and no foundation. Too often, public universities teach students to accept basic, shallow ‘knowledge’ at face value. They are not trained to ask why this knowledge matters or how it influences the rest of their education or how it relates to higher principles.”

The writer at once, and incoherently, condemns “shallow knowledge” (whatever that is), yet laments that students are not taught to relate “shallow knowledge” to higher principles. What does this even mean?!

Such bafflegab is published absent the telltale signs of editorial oversight. Or, perhaps the editors of the Examiner and publications like it think that voicing an opinion is the same as advancing an argument.

However, meandering assertions, circular arguments, non sequiturs and assorted banal utterances don’t belong on editorial pages. Agile argument does.

The piece continues in this puerile vain, conjuring the catchphrase that currently precedes every sentence spoken by a millennial: “I feel like.”

“I feel like” columns and essays are a dime a dozen; their purveyors having procured plum positions in the conservative press.

That “students are not learning” in schools and are thus gravitating to socialism is beyond trite—it’s also a non sequitur. For one would have to argue that lack of learning leads to socialism, and not merely assert it.

In showcasing amateurish, intern-quality material in national forums, conservatives are letting the liberal credo guide them. …

… READ THE REST.  NEW COLUMN: “Conservative Kids Must Learn Before They Lead.” Read it on The Unz Review or WND.COM.

Updated I (11/28/019):

You can’t think critically when there is nothing between your ears: On Critical Thinking: We can only think critically about things about which we have knowledge.”

Update II (12/20/019):

‘Identity Politics’: A Term Conservatives Use To MASK Anti-Whiteness

Ann Coulter, Argument, Conservatism, Critique, Race, Racism, Republicans

Stephen W. Carson asks an interesting question on Twitter (would that intellectual curiosity abounded), relating to the column, “It’s Not ‘Identity Politics,’ It’s Anti-White Politics”:

I would appreciate your perspective though.
Do you agree that “identity politics” is a thing?
If so, what patterns have you seen in “identity politics”?

9:44 AM – 22 May 2019

Hi, @RadicalLib: I believe the term “identity politics, which originated in academia, has become a cliche, and is also now nonsensical. It is used mainly by humdrum conservatives. Why do they use it? Probably because they, consciously or unconsciously, do not want to come to terms with the fact that our politics are almost exclusively anti-white, not anti-Other more exotic identities.

It’s also considered politically incorrect or “racist” to argue that there is a dangerous, anti-white sentiment among the cohort Ann Coulter has termed “our cultural overlords.” (“It might be of some concern to the rapidly diminishing white population,” she wrote, “that our cultural overlords are so tormented by ‘whiteness.'”)

Media conservatives refuse to cop to “anti-white politics,” for fear of being called racist.

Also, most Cons are mere maze rats. Not smart, they adopt Party positions without much thought; align along the positional grooves.

But “anti-white politics” it is. Here’s what Cons do as a method:

They to pretend that it’s all about Democratic politics. Dems are dividing us, the Cons screech. Thus do the Cons virtue-signal their position as seekers of national unity. We’re all in this together.  No we’re not. As I wrote in the above column,

It’s not Identity Politics; it’s anti-white politics. For, blacks are not being pitted against Hispanics. Hispanics aren’t being sicced on Asians & Ameri-Indians aren’t being urged to attack the groups just mentioned. Rather, they’re all piling on honky.

A similar tack, taken, incidentally, by both radio talker Tammy Bruce and author J.  D. Vance on the Tucker Carlson Show, is to pivot away from race and anti-white hatred. To those who cleave closely to the contour of an argument, the pivot will seem inorganic. But to the Republican maze rat it’s rote.

To wit, Bruce was quizzed about Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke’s apology over “whiteness.” Tammy B. was expected to answer as to why men like Beto keep apologizing. (She ought to have begun by pointing out that Black men don’t apologize for existing.) Instead, Tammy pivoted from whiteness (the thing that informed O’Rourke’s apology) to … wait for this: “Humanity.”

It’s a Democrat thing, asserted Bruce, to apologize for the sins of humanity. Climate change, for instance. (At that point in the show, I scratched my head and wondered how she got from A to B.)

Incidentally, the questions posed to Beto by Republican Meghan McCain (the great philosopher) and her Republican sisters, were indistinguishable from the questions with which any black, lady Democrat would harangue the meek Beto: “Atone for your privilege, your sexism … if you were a woman, you’d not get away with being so audaciously Beto, blah, blah.”)

No. Our politics are brutally anti-white. I Wrote a book about what will come of this—and the perils of not naming the Beast. 

A RECENT RELATED ARTICLE is:  “The Demonization Of Whites By Mrs. Bill Gates & Other Dangerous Idiots.