Tag Archives: J.D. Vance

It really is a never ending battle for truth, justice and the American way

It shouldn’t be. The vast improvements in America since 1776 shouldn’t be up for dispute. Freedom of religion, equality for all (however poorly applied in practice), the end of slavery, effective treatments for countless diseases — these should be the baseline. Instead, there are right-wingers such as racist, misogynist preacher John MacArthur and Joel Webbon (who believes America belongs to white people) who would happily undo it all so they can feel being white with a penis makes them special (as I’ve said before, patriarchy makes you stupid and mean; so does racism). Plus anti-vax crackpots such as RFK (or this guy). As someone said many years ago, if slavery became legal again tomorrow there’d immediately be people driving around with chains in their trucks looking to make money.

Defending the gains humanity has made wastes a lot of energy we could be spending making things better. But it has to be done. The same is true of keeping Republicans out of power. The Felon has made it clear he’s done with democracy, freedom of speech, everything if he gets into office again; Republicans are there with him. Assuming we beat them Tuesday (and in whatever violence and court cases follow—though Cheryl Rofer thinks that’s overstated as a threat) we’ll have to keep doing it. Endless struggle to maintain a functioning democracy isn’t anything I look forward to. For the moment, it’s a necessity, so if you haven’t voted, do it tomorrow (assuming you’re not voting for Trump).

There’s no guarantee anyone now fawning on Trump, such as Kennedy or Musk, will get a post in his administration. Trump has no qualms about stabbing his toadies in the back. But it will be someone bad. They’re now advocating for the economy to crash and getting rid of vaccines. Not to mention ruining Obamacare (“Free market” seems to be a euphemism for letting insurers charge more for pre-existing conditions). And for networks that criticize Trump to lose their broadcast license.

While religious conservatives lie about Harris suppressing Christianity, they’ll happily do it to Christians who disagree with them. To say nothing of the increased calls for violence, including from Trump (which Newsmax thinks are awesome). To Republican fascists, everyone who disagrees with them is the enemy within.

Trump is definitely losing it mentally, but that just gives more of an opening for JD Vance, “the most unqualified man ever to run for vice president” to seize power. And Vance is one nasty piece of work.

I have no idea of the outcome Tuesday. And given all the factors, including just the work of counting ballots, it may be a while before we know for sure. But I agree with Jennifer Rubin, it’s not hopeless. Harris has run an amazing campaign; Trump has been incompetent. Between the electoral college and the voters who think Trump will be better for their wallet or actually want to persecute immigrants or establish a Christian state, that may not be enough … but maybe it will. Don’t give up, ever.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Alpha males are not that smart

Several years back, one libertarian argued that women aren’t libertarians because they’re sheeple who follow whatever political trend is popular and libertarians are always fringe (I blogged about it but can’t find the link). Elon Musk recently linked with approval to a version of the same idea: women and low testosterone men can’t defend themselves so they’ll sheepishly agree to whatever the consensus in their group is. “High T alpha males” and the neurodivergent are the only ones able to look at information objectively.

Evidence offered? None. Like so many undead sexist cliches, they’re going with “well it’s perfectly logical, isn’t it?” Which makes it a useful example of G.K. Chesterton’s line that “ten false theories will fit the universe.” For one thing wouldn’t the ones best able to defend themselves be mixed martial-arts fighters and street thugs, not bazillionaires like Elon Musk or Peter Thiel? For another, if Musk and other technocrats were that analytical and objective, he wouldn’t have turned X into a money pit. Musk wouldn’t traffic in gibberish conspiracy and antiSemitism theories or be arguing companies that don’t want to advertise on an increasingly far-right platform are violating his rights. I don’t think “self defense” in the context we’re talking about translates into “suing anyone who pisses me off.”

Plus the way in which every batshit lie flows through right-wing Twitter/X almost instantly doesn’t indicate much resistance to the consensus. Benny Johnson lies Haitian immigrants are eating pets and suddenly everyone on the right is parroting it.

And if they’re going to hold up Trump as an alpha male — lots of right-wingers do — well, we all know his thoughts are mush (no matter how much some media outlets “sanewash” them). Even given that what he says is a lie, the lies are getting stupider. Photos he doesn’t like are AI-generated. The conflict at Arlington was a lie. Ivanka found jobs for millions of people. And his repeated claims schools provide nonconsensual gender realignment surgery to students.

As for women being sheeple, the very concept of equality is a radical one that went against the consensus. There was nothing sheepish about the suffragettes, the second-wave feminists of the 1950s and 1960s or all the women (and some men) who’ve continued fighting the good fight. They’re way more edgy and clear-sighted than techbros struck by what Paul Krugman calls brain-rotting contrarianism.

I coined the phrase undead sexist cliches to reflect that no matter how often the cliches — men are smarter than women, men are naturally made to lead, men like sex and women don’t — get disproven, they rise again with a new rationale. The idea Musk passed on is just another version of women are stupid and they need men to boss them around.

Or consider J.D. Vance, who went from describing Trump as a threat to democracy to worshipping him as our white male messiah, which is why he’s vice president. Like so many Republicans he saw the party consensus was Trump for President and went with it. Though to be fair, when he says he despises women without children I don’t doubt he’s standing up for what he believes in. Especially despising women immigrants.

As I’ve said before, believing in patriarchy forces you to turn off your brain. It has to be partly turned off to believe crap like Musk was spouting.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

JD Vance and other political links

J.D. Vance’s standard response when he’s caught taking the side of, say, abusive husbands, is to whine about unfair media treatment. i.e., how dare they report his statements accurately! Likewise, blowback after Trump accused Kamala Harris of cosplaying as a black woman is just hysterical over-reaction from the media. No, it isn’t. Nor is Trump making a relatively subtle point about Harris’ “chameleon-like nature,” as Vance claims. He’s lying that the woman who attended an HBCU and pledged a black sorority didn’t acknowledge her black side until there was political advantage. Much the same way some Republicans said Obama wasn’t really black.

As for chameleonic, he’s shifted his positions a lot over the years as it suited him (which makes me wonder how deep his conversion to Catholicism goes). Case in point, “Vance tells us repeatedly that he often did things in law school just because they were expected of him” or “He wants to hold fast to the his wounded Scots-Irish machismo while simultaneously rising to heights of both American capitalism and cultural success.”

Ever wonder what Vance’s mixed-race children think of him trashing Harris’ mixed-race heritage? Well, apparently Vance isn’t willing to risk offending Republican white-supremacist voters even when they attack his wife: “Obviously, she’s not a white person, and we’ve been accused, attacked by some white supremacists over that. But I just, I love Usha.” Which is good. But you’ll notice he’s not criticizing the racists or telling them to back off.

One thing where he’s consistent is his horrible views on women in general. More here. Childless women, according to Vance are pathetic and miserable. More than that, they’re “psychotic sociopaths.” He’s marching in lockstep with the massive misogyny of the right wing. That’s where the advantage for his career lies. And while Republicans are keen on forcing women into motherhood, they won’t do crap to help them afford it. Vance did, however, lie about Harris opposing the tax-credit vote he skipped out on.

In other political news, Rep. Jim Jordan has decided to investigate the daughter of the judge in one of Trump’s trials. Astonishingly he feels no need to investigate Ginni Thomas, SCOTUS wife and 1/6 supporter. Funny, that.

Trump’s birtherist attack on Harris’ ethnicity doesn’t play well outside the base. Within the Republican camp they’re all piling on. I think Harris can take it. At this point in her life, she’s probably used to it.

Our whiny wannabe dictator is pissed that nobody from Google called after his shooting: “Google, nobody called from Google. Google has been very bad. They’ve been very irresponsible. And I have a feeling that Google’s going to be close to shut down,”

If law enforcement prosecutes a corrupt Republican elections official they’ll face “piano wire and a blowtorch” according to Trump toady Patrick Byrne. Expect more of this if we deny them their white supremacist dictatorship in November.

“Trumpism’s potential destruction of liberal democracy in a wave of reactionary authoritarianism with fascist highlights, has at bottom just been another of Donald Trump’s endless stream of grifts.”

3 Comments

Filed under Politics

JD Vance revives an undead sexist cliche

As I blogged about a couple of years ago, Republican vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance claims parents of children should get more votes as childless people don’t have as much stake in the future. Which as I note at the link is nonsense: someone childless my niece’s age (around 30) has a lot of stake in the future as she’s (hopefully) going to spend 50 years living in it. More than say, someone Trump’s age or Rupert Murdoch’s — they’ll be dead of something long before the consequences of their policies kill them.

After Biden stepped down in favor of Kamala Harris, Vance’s response was to dismiss her and all women without kids as “childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives” and don’t have a stake in America a parent like himself does. Blake Masters — another protege of billionaire Peter Thiel — immediately agreed, as does vapid right-wing talking head Michael Knowles. Vance has since asserted that Of Course he’s not criticizing women without children, he’s attacking Democrats for being “anti-family and anti-child.” Nah, he’s going after the childless.

This is a sibling undead sexist cliche to “feminists are irrationally angry” Rather than feminists being pissed off because they’re too unfeminine to find a man, feminists are miserable because they can’t find a man. Sure, they have college degrees and cool jobs but then they go home and cry while they feed their cats in their sad, lonely apartment. Where they’re alone. With no man. Did I mention they’re pathetic and lonely?

This cliche goes back even before modern feminism got going. In the 1959 film Best of Everything, Hope Lange’s boss (Joan Crawford) is a cautionary tale: she’s spend so long doing unfeminine things like climbing the career ladder, she’s killed her womanly feelings and is incapable of love. After the feminist movement got going, it would be a standard right-wing trope — ignoring that many feminists were happily married and had kids (I know several). Harris, for instance, does have kids, albeit step-kids (worth noting, even though there’s no reason a childless cat lady wouldn’t be better fit for federal office than, say, JD Vance).

It also ties in with the right-wing conviction that women are babymakers first and foremost; if they aren’t willing to assume that role, by golly they should be pushed into it anyway! They are simply means to an end, whether that end is their husband’s wishes or society’s (hence Vance also supporting higher tax rates on the childless — as if parents don’t already get a number of tax breaks).

No surprise that Republicans such as Rep. Glen Grothman want us back in 1960 — before the landmark civil rights legislation of the 1960s, before women got the crazy idea they were ends in themselves and should be treated accordingly.

In other misogynist news:

In discussing the need for the feds to ban interstate travel by women who want abortions, Vance suggests George Soros will help black women get abortions!

Anti-vax, anti-gay attorney Mat Staver says Kamala Harris has a Jezebel spirit. In religious circles, that’s another undead sexist cliche.

One Republican makes it clear that the Republican platform not calling for a national abortion ban won’t stop them banning it.

No, Roe v. Wade did not give women the right to abort any time for any reason. Republicans lie about this.

A woman in Georgia went to a health center with a miscarriage, then left the fetus in the trash (which is legal in that state). Authorities say they’re looking for laws they can use to prosecute her.

In Oklahoma, some prosecutors say a pregnant woman licensed for medical marijuana needs a separate license for the fetus. One woman’s pushing back.

From the perspective of the men running the Southern Baptist Conference, dominating women is more important than defending them from harassment. Former SBC leader Paige Patterson saw shielding churches from harassment lawsuits as perfectly compatible with good Christian behavior.

Independent investigations into sexual abuse cases are good …unless they’re part of the coverup.

Christian-dictator wannabe Joel Webbon says women having influence in society is bad because “it’s going to be really hard for us to get friends hired, enemies fired, those kinds of things because those are things that men do.” This seems like a good argument for Kamala Harris, frankly because Webbon’s idea of a good society sounds horrible.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

When JD Vance (and others) dream of tyranny, they expect to be holding the whip.

Sen. JD Vance is an enthusiastic Trump toady who thinks if Trump wins he should fire everyone in government who isn’t loyal to him, a standard lots of conservatives embrace. When one reporter asked Vance if he wasn’t calling for dictatorship, he didn’t deny it, just whined how unfair the question was. It’s unsurprising that like many conservatives, Vance thinks Hungarian dictator Viktor Orban’s tyranny has a lot to recommend it.

Republican officials are ducking and weaving when asked if they’ll support a Biden win in November. Which I translate as “if we can get away with a successful coup, we’ll support it but we’re not sure it’ll work.”

Meanwhile, Joel Webbon, conservative pastor is one of the right-wing Christians demanding a theocratic takeover: “Men must be governed. Now, ideally, men would govern themselves … but when you don’t have a populace that is capable of self-governance—when the fruit of the Spirit that is self-control has left the building for decades and nobody seems to have it—then men must be governed. And if they will not govern themselves, then someone else needs to govern them.”

What’s implicit in all these arguments (and those of other tyranny-supporters such as Curtis Yarvin) is that Vance and Webbon will be wielding the whip and laying down the law or least loyal acolytes to whatever modern day Fuhrer gets the power. They don’t believe in dictatorship per se; to paraphrase Matt Bai, they want dictatorship as long as it’s their side that lays down the rules or in their interest in the case of Webbon, his church or view of God that spells out the law. If Trump won and Kamala Harris refused to certify the election — something plenty of Republicans argued in 2020 was within Mike Pence’s power — Vance would spend the rest of his career whining about it. If the fascists got their dream dictatorship and wound up on the wrong side of their master (“You got your kid a measles shot. Don’t you know the Supreme Leader just declared vaccines the instruments of Satan?”) they’d be horrified the leopards ate their face. I doubt they’d ever feel bad about letting the leopards eat other people’s faces.

For the religious right, as I’ve mentioned before, there’s also a horror at the thought of people having the freedom to choose for themselves. Webbon’s convinced people are scum who must be kept in line by enlightened rulers like himself; otherwise they won’t live in what he considers a Christian way. Particularly women it seems: Webbon’s freely admitted he doesn’t allow his wife to read books without his permission. And dictates things like what time his four children go to the bathroom, “when we eat, what we eat, what we wear.”

And quite simply he, like Vance, likes the idea of whipping the lower orders into shape. Imposing order and discipline. Why waste time trying to evangelize or reason with people? Why set a Christian example by your loving behavior.

Which puts me in mind of a quote by Isaiah Berlin: “Men may be divided into those who are in favour of life and those who are against it. Among those who are against it there are sensitive and wise and penetrating people who are too offended and discouraged by the shapelessness of spontaneity, by the lack of order among human beings who wish to live their own lives, not in obedience to any common pattern”

I don’t think Vance or Webbon are at all sensitive, wise or penetrating. Otherwise, Berlin’s spot on.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Sen. JD Vance shoves his head even further up Trump’s ass

Looks like the senator really, really, really hopes to be Trump’s right-hand lickspittle — er vice-president.

Vance, , if you remember, is the raging misogynist who think being able to divorce an abusive spouse is a bad thing. And that people should get extra votes based on the number of children they have. I presume both are pitches to religious conservatives who think it’s a man’s right to beat his wife and that breeding huge Duggar-like families is a godly thing. His recent statements on Trump likewise seem to be toadying to the former president.

The recent $83 million defamation verdict against Trump? Joe Biden made it happen and the jurors were liberal so it isn’t a valid decision (as Philip Bump puts it, “suggesting that New York is one of several “extremely left-wing jurisdictions” where Trump is facing charges, implying that this was a stacking of the deck against Trump instead of a result of his alleged crimes while he lived in those jurisdictions.”)! And this isn’t something 2024 voters care about so stop mentioning Trump’s a rapist! And Congress should have refused to certify the 2020 results until the states submitted some pro-Trump electors because there were serious problems like social media covering up the evidence against Hunter Biden (Rep. Elise Stefanik, who’s competing with Vance for the Most Loyal Trump Toadie Award, is likewise anti-certification). Of course, even if that swayed the election results (it didn’t) that doesn’t justify not certifying the electors, any more than James Comey’s bullshit about Clinton in 2016 (which probably did tip the scales) invalidated Trump’s win.

Keep in mind, Vance has already called for Trump to fire anyone in government not loyal to him and ignore any Supreme Court decisions he considers invalid. And parroted right-wing lies about how J6 rioters are being locked up without trial. But as LGM says, his views (to the extent he believes any of it) shows again Republicans are all in on their lord and master, Trump. And for the attempted coup: Charlie Kirk, for instance, claims the rioters wouldn’t have been arrested if they’d made a gay sex tape. He seems to think this makes sense.

As Jennifer Rubin says, faced with tyranny, people can resist, accommodate or collaborate. “Republicans did not face imprisonment or death for standing up to Trump. It wasn’t that hard to put up a fight” but very few joined the Dems in resisting. Instead they accommodated, providing examples of “how a reasonable person can dismiss Trump’s astounding disregard for the law and even for basic decency and yet still vote for him and other GOP candidates in the name of some greater good” or they collaborated, whole-heartedly supporting Trump’s agenda and, if he wins, dictatorship. Vance has chosen option 3.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Birthing babies should not be a condition for voting rights

The first time I heard the right-wing argument that political participation and voting should be tied to parenthood was more than fifteen years ago. The argument was that the only ones we can trust with our country are those who have kids because parents have a vested interest in making a better future for their children. Childless couples don’t. The subtext was that conservatives have more kids so they truly care about the future.

Two years ago, J.D. Vance made the same argument: if you don’t have kids, you don’t have a stake in the future. And the more kids you have, the more votes you should get (at the link, the writer points out why this isn’t the huge edge for conservatives Vance may think)! We need to get the population up and we can’t do it with immigrants (see more here). Just recently, someone on Twitter argued that we can’t have democracy without “limiting suffrage to parents.” Evidence offered? None. Though Elon Musk, the ever idiotic, chimed in to agree.

In the first place, I think this is as ridiculous as most proposals to restrict the franchise. Everyone has a stake in how this country is run; restrictions need to have a damn good rationale and they never do. The idea a single twentysomething doesn’t have the same stake in the future as a fortysomething with a teenage kid is nonsense. Heck, I’m 65 and I have a stake in the future. If I live to 105, that’s forty years of future; I’d rather not spend it in a global warming nightmare.

And that brings up another point: Vance and the others who make this argument are either wrong or lying (with Vance I’d guess the latter). Global warming will create a nightmare future if it’s not averted but plenty of people with kids are adamant we shouldn’t do anything to stave it off. Republicans are fans of doing nothing to stop mass shootings or epidemics; they’ll make the next pandemic even worse. None of this suggests a concern for their children’s future.

I’m curious, also, how this will work in practice. I suspect rather than “parents with kids” it’ll be “two-parent families with kids.” And if they could find a way to give all the votes to the husband, they’d do it. But even if not, it’s still a bad idea.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches

Republicans say they’re protecting children. But they lie a lot

“The consequences are already playing out in Columbus, Ohio, where a child with measles was able to wander around a mall before showing symptoms in November, potentially spreading the highly contagious disease. The state legislature in 2021 had stripped the city health commissioner’s ability to order someone suspected of having an infectious disease to quarantine.” — from a WaPo story about how Republicans, shrieking FREEDOM, have justified gutting public health powers. It’s an unholy alliance of sincere anti-vax sentiment, blind loyalty to God-King Trump, and greed (right-wing attorney Mat Staver begging for money to fight evil vaccine mandates). Or Ron DeSantis wanting anti-vax votes.

For years Republicans have insisted that they’re the party that cares about children. Protects children. They have more children that liberals so they care about the future more; J.D. Vance has suggested parents should get extra votes for their children because having children means you’re invested in this country. They’re banning drag shows to protect children from groomers! Purging school libraries to protect children’s innocence!

It’s the logic by which Oklahoma State Rep. Warren Hamilton thinks aborting ectopic pregnancies is bad: it doesn’t matter if the fetus can’t survive and the mother has serious health risks, it’s a baby — you can’t kill it!

Yet somehow, when it comes to protect them from serious illness, they’re on the side of Plague.

Or consider Lauren Boebert. Her son is about to become an unwed father at 17, but according to her, that proves conservative values are awesome: “‘Teen moms’ rates are higher in rural conservative areas, because they understand the preciousness of a life that it’s about to be born,” and don’t get abortions. Birth control and better sex ed would cut the teen birth rate and the abortion rate but they hate those things. Of course, this is the party that resists any attempt to ban child marriages so what do I expect?

Having kids grow up in a healthy environment is good for them too, but Republicans don’t support that.

And unsurprisingly, Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a bill making it easier to use child labor. Teaching poor kids their place and reducing the pressure to pay workers more — a win-win (if you’re a shitty human being). She’s part of a trend (supported, the article notes by some Democrats) and in at least one state they’re considering immunizing employers from liability, even in cases of negligence.

They protect kids the same way they support cops and the military — when it advances their political agenda. Otherwise, children (other than their own) are just lumps of flesh to them.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Democracy didn’t die last Tuesday. I’ll count that as a win.

In a just world the Republican pro-fascist, anti-woman Party would have been crushed under a blue wave. But given gerrymandering, voter suppression efforts and the norman trend of midterm elections to work against the party in the White House, holding Republicans to such modest gains is remarkable.

I’m particularly please by Cortez Masto’s win. Not only does her win give us control of the Senate (counting Vice President Harris’s tie-breaker vote), but I wrote GOTV postcards via Activate Blue on her behalf. It’s good to feel I contributed. It’s great to know that things like that help make a difference, that it really was a better choice than sitting on my butt. Not that success is guaranteed — I GOTVed for Cheri Beasley in NC and she lost — but it’s worth trying.

The clear message is don’t treat women like crap but I doubt Republicans will accept it. As witness Gab CEO Andrew Torba declaring women are a threat to civilization (heard that one before, asshat). Jesse Waters suggests we get single women married to make them turn Republican (spoiler: won’t work). Then again, Republicans lost every demographic but older white voters. Which explains why Florida went so red, I guess.

I am getting plenty of schadenfreude watching them go from “red wave!” to sputtering indignantly. It’s the fault of celebrity candidates with no political savvy. Marjorie Taylor Greene is shocked and appalled that anyone would blame Trump (guess she really does hope to be his VP pick). Tucker Carlson, talking head on America’s most-watched news network, blames the media. Kayleigh McEnany worries if Trump announces before the Georgia runoff, it’ll hurt Walker. From your lying lips to God’s ears, my dear. Paul Campos has a fantasy of 2024 that’s more implausible but it would be fun.

More likely the mistake was their choice of battleground.  Culture war stuff didn’t trigger a red wave. White supremacism and fascism turned voters off. No wonder white supremacist Nick Fuentes

That Walker still has a shot tempers my delight. So does JD Vance winning in Ohio. But we have multiple gubernatorial wins, multiple election deniers — not all of them — going down to defeat. More gays and women in high office. Abortion rights measures won in multiple states. It looks like Sarah Palin’s political comeback ain’t happening. While Cheri Beasley lost as NC senator to a Republican, NC forced-birther Bo Hines went down in flames.

Newt Gingrich, a man who built his brief political career on smearing Democrats now pretends outrage that Biden has demonized Republicans. Of course the stuff Biden says about their misogyny, theocracy and opposition to democracy is absolutely true, which is not something anyone can say about any view Gingrich ever expressed.

While I’ve only seen Gingrich mouthing off on Fox News it’s depressing that he does occasionally do op-eds or interviews for reasonably sane media outlets. He’s been outside the halls of power for years, he never had any deep insights when he was in them, who cares what he thinks? The same with Trump. Yes, it was amusing to know he was freaking out but there’s no need to report every furious accusation he flings on Truth Social or track who he’s mad at for failing him. He’s an ex-president and he won’t say anything we haven’t heard before so why not just ignore him?

In the last analysis Superman was right: fighting for truth and justice is a never ending battle. I’m looking around for ways to keep contributing to the fight, whether it’s donations, writing Please Vote postcards (I’ve signed up to write postcards for potential Warnock voters) or whatever. Victory is not assured, but Tuesday showed us that neither is defeat. And contrary to some pre-election takes, victory without compromising our principles.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Does Curtis Yarvin really want everyone to have a sparkly pony, or is he lying?

Curtis “Mencius Goldbug” Yarvin’s calls to destroy American democracy  have become an inspiration for dictatorship loving right-wingers such as J.D. Vance. (yes, the guy who thinks it’s wrong women can divorce abusive husbands). This detailed interview in Vox has me wondering what’s really going on in his head.

Yarvin makes the stunningly novel argument that democracy has failed, therefore what’s needed is a dictatorship. But a good dictatorship, an absolute monarch who looks out for all the people, not just a given political faction (I’m reminded of Vincent Price declaring in Scream and Scream Again that his creation will be “Yes, a master race, but not an evil master race!”). Such dictators is few and far between. The probability of finding one is even more remote when you consider Yarvin wants a right-wing dictatorship to break free of the left’s supposed control of culture, education and government. The Republican right wing has no interest in setting up a government that works for everyone. Their dreams of a new constitutional convention are specifically so they can impose their minority will on the rest of the country, not to form a united government where everyone has buy in. So his ideas are bullshit and snake-oil from the get-go.

One possibility is that Yarvin is lying to himself about what will happen after his fantasy revolution. The history of naive revolutionaries who thought they were bringing on a golden age is legion. The Russian Revolution. The French Revolution. Castro in Cuba. Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. All of them fought against bad regimes that deserved overthrowing, all of them fell into dictatorship. The United States didn’t, but we still founded a new nation where millions of Americans lived and died in slavery.

Another possibility is that he’s lying to us. Like the right-to-lifers who insisted women would not be prosecuted if abortion became illegal again or that Dobbs won’t be the basis for overturning the right to contraception, Yarvin’ll tell us anything he wants to to keep us from resisting (he admits he was upset the Dobbs decision mobilized the left because if we’re not meek and cowed, a smooth takeover will be impossible).

A third alternative is that his definition of a dictatorship that’s good for everyone is the lie. A lot of the misogynists covered in Jesus and John Wayne and Undead Sexist Cliches claim that male supremacy is good for women, honestly! They’ll be so much happier when they stay home, popping out babies and obeying the man who does the thinking for them. Or the ever-reliable argument we just can’t disrupt society for a few malcontents. The square pegs just gotta fit in those round holes.

As for the left’s supposed control, to the extent that it’s true it’s because we are (as one Bush II official put it), the “reality based community.” Our positions (speaking generally) are right: equality under the law is desirable, women and POC, have equal ability to white men, gay rights and gay marriage don’t destroy or hurt society, religious equality is the best approach, evolution (and more generally science) works, Christian morality is not essential to society, etc. Many of the things the right pretends it’s oppressed by, such as safe spaces, conservatives are actually fine with them — provided it’s a safe space for, say, sexual harassers, not for victims.

On top of which his proposals for Year One — replace all federal workers not loyal to Emperor Trump or whoever, nationalize all police and National Guard operations under the Executive Branch — are seriously dumbass. It doesn’t matter whether the president has absolute power, that’s simply too massive an organization to run smoothly or even keep track of what it does. Does Yarvin think for a minute that replacing all those workers with anyone competent will be that simple or not result in massive disruptions? Certainly not in a gloriously efficient, smooth-running machine.

So my guess is he’s lying to us. But liar or not, his views are just as horrible. It’s depressing we live in a country where “we should be a dictatorship” is now within the Overton Window.

6 Comments

Filed under Politics